200 West -- just a boxy, tedious mass
January 07, 2010 11:30AM By James Gardner
200 West, at 200 West 72nd Street
There are few corners of Manhattan as ill-served by architecture as the northwest and southwest corners of Broadway and 72nd Street.
In the 1990s it saw the emergence of the Alexandria, a well-intentioned exercise in classical contextualism which, through a combination of weak design and poor construction values, resulted in a pallid eyesore at what should have been the focal point of the Upper West Side.
As for 200 West which has just sprung up across the street at 200 West 72nd Street (with an alternate address of 2075 Broadway), the best that can be said is that, if anything, it makes the Alexandria look almost good by comparison. Its mongrelized aesthetic, devised by Handel Architects, is basically art deco in the heavily geometric and vaguely Chrysler-esque flanges that make up the staggered set-backs, starting around the 14th floor. But such adornments do little to enliven or relieve the sense of value engineering and general tedium of this 19-story development, undertaken by the Gotham Organization. The rest is a boxy mass that rises out of nowhere, curving, in true art deco fashion, round the corner where Broadway turns into 72nd Street.
Other than that, it appears from its renderings and from its mostly completed exterior to be marked by bay divisions, two-windows wide, which stretch from the roof down to the 48,000-square-foot retail area that will take up the first few floors of the building. At the point where the setbacks open out, the facade becomes a sequence of ribbon windows that looks to be at best, drably functional.
For more than 100 years, this corner had been occupied by a modest four-story structure built to house the Colonial Club. When that organization went belly-up in 1903, the building was turned into offices and shops. Now, like much of Manhattan after the recent real estate boom, it has become a mix of residences and retail. Architecturally, however, it adds nothing to the cityscape. Indeed, it diminishes it. This is especially regrettable given that, as I wrote in a previous article, Upper Broadway is experiencing a renaissance, with the reopening of the Harmony Atrium, the reconception of Alice Tully Hall, and the new Apple Store, only a few blocks to the south.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of 200 West is that it will soon welcome the upscale supermarket, Trader Joe's, to its first two floors. That establishment's coexistence with Fairway, Citarella, Zabar's and a number of other such businesses, ensures that this part of Manhattan will become an even greater mecca for foodies than it already is.
James Gardner, formerly the architecture critic of the New York Sun, writes on the visual arts for several publications.
The Real Deal reserves the right to delete any comment it finds to be rude, obscene, racist, sexist, bigoted, irrelevant or repetitive, as well as inappropriate comments about anyone's personal appearance or advertisements. The Real Deal does not endorse any comments posted on its Web site nor does it verify the veracity of comments or the identity of posters.
Comments
Anonymous
I don't get it. How did the UWS let the prior building - which while in bad shape - was a classical beauty. Everything around it is part of the historic district. Even Grey's Papaya is LANDMARKED! What is wrong with this City?
Comment #1 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Nicole
James...you need to write more article like this one...it is great and you are right.
Comment #2 Posted By: Nicole 01/07/10
Anonymous
Right on. The skin is also hideous. It is terribly bleak and depressing.
Comment #3 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Anonymous
What is wrong with YOU, #1? Do you propose to landmark everything over 20 years old? Do you understand the difference between old and landmark?
Comment #4 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Anonymous
How do you really feel?
Comment #5 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Anonymous
this is #1. no - i do not think they should save buildings because they are old. happy to see the NY Coliseum and the red cross on amsterdam go. the prior building was really very nice - go look at pictures. it could have been renovated or used as part of the new building. clearly this is an important corner and if Gotham is going to tear down old buildings - at least spend some money on quality design and construction. The used Petak A/C units - how cheap is that?
Comment #6 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Anonymous
I think #1 meant that the building was beautiful, but just needed renovation, and therefore, should be landmarked. Where do you conclude that landmarking every 20+ year old building was proposed? Are you one one of those who think that developers should be able to knock down anything despite the value destruction for the entire community. Anyone with a long-term interest in the success of New York real estate would support rational landmarking as it preserves value for all buildings. Otherwise, one developer makes money building a train wreck while everyone around it (property owners included) lose in aggregate much more.
Comment #7 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Blayze
I used to work around this area during the summer. On the one side of the historic 72nd Street headhouse on Amsterdam, you see an almost uninterrupted row of Beaux Arts, Victorian, Renaissance Revivals, and every style really under the sun rolling further uptown. It is all anchored by the Dorilton which happily overlooks the area. To the other side of the headhouse on Broadway, we see monsterous modern glass bores, Communist bloc inspired apartments, and other eyesores from the Moses era of urban renewal. I paid almost little to no attention to these buildings when I made my trek from 72nd to 69th during the summer, and I barely recall ever looking at this mediocre glass mass of hulking erupting skyward.
Comment #8 Posted By: Blayze 01/07/10
To state that the design of 200 West 72nd Street "almost makes the Alexandria look good by comparison" is silly. The Alexandria is a very handsome design with a good use of color, a superb rooftop watertank enclosure, interesting duplex apartments and lovely balcony railings where as 200 West looks like autopsy in progress and is graceless. Furthermore, to imply that "the reconception of Alice Tully Hall" is contributing to a "renaissance" of Upper Broadway is preposterous as it is an egregious destruction of important modern architecture.
Comment #9 Posted By: 01/07/10
Anonymous
Upper Broadway is a suburb, it's riddled with chain stores, a handful of mentionable local haunts (Vince and Eddie's, a few okay pizza places, a bodega here and there, and Gray's to an extent despite it being a local chain) and bank branches lit up like Christmas displays with nobody to use them at all hours of the night. Seriously, Upper Broadway never needed a revitalization. It's all residential. It's not supposed to be Times Square North. Stop building crap architecture in it.
Comment #10 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Anonymous
I watched that building go up from the start. Would have been impossible to keep the existing buildings as they went down multiple stories for the retail space and those buildings were in horrible condition. Also, that area is NOT landmarked and they can therefore do anything they want. Though the modern look is a bit much for the area.
Comment #11 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Anonymous
This building holds nothing to basically an identical lot a few blocks away where 535 West end ave was put up. The difference there is a similarly shaped and sized build that is very elegant and fits perfectly with its historic surroundings. This building meanwhile is and always will be an eyesore. I'm all for new developments sprucing up the city but this building is just horrendous, what kind of developer in their right mind would spend millions on this monstrosity.
Comment #12 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Anonymous
its fine. i live two blocks away and walk past every day, multiple times per day. get over it. not evry new building is going to be a modern classic. i personally kinda dig the mixed context of the Dorilton, Alexandra, Coronado, and the rest of the dreck (like my lego bloc looking mammoth apt house) from different eras in the neigborhood's development. i can appreciate the differences... 200 WEA looks like a shrinky dink put in the toaster oven the wrong way with all that wavy cheap glass, but they had no problem selling out. if priced right, 200 West will fill up. fast. Anyways, I'm a regular reader and I cant remember a single building Gardner likes. He gets paid to critique, which he seems to do very well.
Comment #13 Posted By: Anonymous 01/07/10
Anonymous
You are an idiot Gardner. The building is stunning and revolutionary. It makes the square dynamic. What are your credentials outside of being another mis-guided blowhard? Are you an architect? Manufacturer? Or just another man with an opinion? Hoping you actually have some credentials. What are they?
Comment #14 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
15, the man is entitled to his opinion, as are you. And at least he is bringing the conversation to the forefront. The question remains, why does New York - the self proclaimed greatest city in the world - end up with such mediocre architecture? I wish the used the Burj Dubai design rather then the Freedom Tower blandness
Comment #15 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
In today's world, someone who can build a building like this, open it, pay his bills, be a contractor in good standing and bring a marvel such as this to our City as well as a higher level of housing, should have a parade down 5th Ave, not have to be castigated with some idiot's opinon. Would you rather they have built another Brick/block double hung bland mess in what should be a high profile square in our City? You also don't realize the high thermal values, insulating properties of the window walls of glass, the water intgetrity of the system, there were much cheaper, uglier alternatives like panel walls (see gavensport) that do not stand the test of time both weather wise and looks--- I ask again, what are this man's credentials or is he just another guy with an opinion and a keyboard>?
Comment #16 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
I have a suggestion - instead of TRD showing the rendering above (which looks good), show the actual real building that is unfortunately there now. then lets discuss
Comment #17 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
Architecture's been dead for decades now. This is just another glass box that uses a minor variation on some geometric shape to compensate for blank featureless walls. Why do we even need non-historic architectural critics these days? As #17 implied, the only factors to judge a building on these days are all objective: how expensive the materials, how high the ceilings, how shiny the glass. ALL artistry has been value-engineered out in the US. At least the ruler of Dubai can indulge in building funny-shaped skyscrapers. We cannot.
Comment #18 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
200 WEST IS UGLY. UPW FEELS LIKE STRIP MALL HELL
Comment #19 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
looks like it belongs in Jersey City, not in the middle of UWS. It makes the Alexandria look like the Taj Mahal.
Comment #20 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
I agrre with #19 I lived in the area in the late 70's, oh, it was fabulous before the strollers and disneyfication and strip mallers when Colombus Avenue just started it's gentrification oh what a time we had
Comment #21 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
By the way, if you do google this numbnuts, there are about 20 James Gardners who come up in front of him including the guy who wrote the Official Guide to Pylons (yes Pylons).
Comment #22 Posted By: Anonymous 01/08/10
Anonymous
More carping after the fact. Why isn't anyone paying attention to the monstrous 3million square foot fortress Fordham is proposing to build on its imprenable plateau which will turn Lincoln Center into a dark footnote before it happens? Take part in in protecting your neighbood rather than biching after it's ruined.
Comment #23 Posted By: Anonymous 01/09/10
Anonymous
Yea #21 boy how pine for those days -- burnt out blocks, garbage on the street, homeless people assaulting my wife and kid for money, violent crime -- good times
Comment #24 Posted By: Anonymous 01/09/10
Anonymous
The glimmer of design intelligence that shines through the mess is the saddest thing about this ugly building. Happy for the Trader Joe's though!
Comment #25 Posted By: Anonymous 01/10/10
Anonymous
I'm taking up a collection to buy Mr. Gardner a new sweater, one from this century.
Comment #26 Posted By: Anonymous 01/13/10
Anonymous
I've been looking for the Official Guide to Pylons, can you point me in the right direction #22?
Comment #27 Posted By: Anonymous 01/13/10
Anonymous
this building is probablly the ugliest pile of steel i have ever seen! what a waste of materials. Handel has a way of producing some real crap. The designer of this building should be banned from ever touching a pencil again....This is the type of building you get when the architect doesnt care about anything except getting paid. Lets hope the developer has this building set for a 30 yr life cycle..
Comment #28 Posted By: Anonymous 01/20/10
Anonymous
I live on West 70th/B'way for 15+ yrs. This new bldg. replaces a bunch of garbage & for my money clean and shiny and new is better than garbage anytime. Hey, if any of you out there so full of hate for this bldg., your delicate sensibilities for architectural purity unhinged despite the derelict sh*tholes it replaces, why didn't you buy them and fix them up or do something rather than nothing for the past decades as those bldgs. got more and more decayed????
Comment #29 Posted By: Anonymous 01/25/10
Anonymous
Talk about a bunch of whiny johnny come lately's. Everything beautiful doesn't have to have a friggin' gargoyle and look like its out of the 1930's. Do any of you remember how wretched the NY Coliseum had become, how truly deplorable its condition had become before the Time Warner Ctr. was built? Well, of course I'm sure you remember as you were probably part of the parade of hating morons decrying and denouncing the destrucution of a NYC landmark by an impersonal glass and steel monolith of no architectural consequence. Well, good for you. Let me suggest you have dinner in TWC's Mandarin Oriental Hotel's restaurant and then get back to me about how terrible it is. You don't like change and that's that. TOUGH!! I say to this new bldg., a TWC jr @ 72nd Street/B'way, welcome to the neighborhood!
Comment #30 Posted By: Anonymous 01/25/10