Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

aMonkeyRidingABadger t1_jcz0yg5 wrote

To be clear, I agree that being able to let a landmarked property fall into disrepair so you can demolish it is a loophole that should be fixed. It's a tricky problem to solve without creating unintended incentives in the process, but I would certainly like to see something done about it.

As for mandating aesthetics, landmark designated buildings aside, I just disagree with you here. Property owners should be free to build according to their own preference, even if that means we end up with ugly buildings sometimes. Do I like that midtown will soon to be home to this grotesque monstrosity? Not at all. This thing will be a blight on the city's skyline for many decades, but the freedom that allows this is the same freedom that has allowed such a wide variety of architectural styles to find a place in New York, and is one thing that makes it such a joy to walk around in this city.

7

The_Lone_Apple t1_jcz5fhm wrote

When it comes to private homes in a neighborhood, there's a certain calming factor of not having something stand out like the owner is screaming, "Look at me," 24/7.

1

JordanRulz t1_jdcy0qm wrote

You bought your piece of land, not your neighbour’s

1

The_Lone_Apple t1_jdczbd5 wrote

True. There's sometimes no stopping people with horrendous taste from vomiting all over everything.

1