The Bowery's Next Hotel Is Looking Pretty Ugly

The next big thing on the Bowery? (via curbed).

The Bowery in its latest, absurdly hip, incarnation is no stranger to ugly architecture. Just look at the Cooper Square Hotel, the Sculpture for Living (technically not on the Bowery), or the finger coming out of the middle of Fourth Street. And yet each time a new piece of hideous design is introduced we're dismayed once again. Which is to say, remember how the old Salvation Army on Third Street is going to become a boutique hotel? Well, Curbed got its paws on the rendering you see above.

It doesn't help that the mockup of the Gene Kaufman-designed building is a poorly executed one, of course, but that isn't our fault. This bizarre, not-little number seems to have picked up the worst traits of its Bowery brethren: while the bottom appears to mimic the curvy metal exterior of the new Cooper Union (without any of the grace or wit) the top looks sort of like a boxy white combination of the Cooper Square Hotel and the neighboring finger building, with extra boxy white balconies as a bonus.

What is infuriating about cheap looking designs like this—and to be fair, this is just a rendering and the final product may in fact look nothing like it—is that it isn't like everyone is building ugly stuff on the Bowery. On the contrary the new Cooper Union building has turned out to be a lovely addition to the area and shows real promise of aging better than its predecessor. And the New Museum ain't bad either! Even the brick-skinned Bowery Hotel and the similar-looking new 2 Cooper Square have managed to move onto the strip without offending the eyes of every passerby. We just wish the ratio was a little more in favor of good taste.

We'll admit that the old Salvation Army building wasn't a whole lot to look at, but this rendering is a whole lot less. Of course, that's our quick take. Your mileage may vary.

As the corner looks now (via Michelle Rick's flickr).

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Garth Johnston in News on January 18, 2011 3:40 PM

Comments [rss]

bulbglo

this is the worst architect in nyc - he's done all those crappy budget hotels that are everywhere - what do you expect?!

bulbglo

this guy is arguably the worst architect in nyc - he does all the crappy budget hotels that have been sprouting up - so what do you expect!?

citylion

Making New York into Miami one shitty new building at a time.

Newhce

Holy crap. What is this, "New Brutalism"

krinklecutfires

no, this is not "new brutalism" as brutalism comes from the french term "beton brut" which is a fancy way of describing a concrete buildings. This rendering shows steel and glass in what I lovingly call the "Another Shitty Condo" style.

meeneecat

What is this the architecture police? He did say NEW brutalism, which is to say, different than "brutalism"...and I believe there is a revival (unfortunately, imo) going on as far the general aesthetic, while incorporating other materials besides concrete. According to one reference, New Brutalism probably came into use due to the influence of the architect, P. Smithson, and a building he designed described as "brutalist" yet not made of concrete (Smithdon High School).

From Dictionary of Architecture and Landscape: "The Smithson's Smithdon High (formerly Secondary Modern) School, Hunstanton, Norfolk (1949–53), was described (somewhat curiously) as ‘Brutalist’, even though it clearly owed more to Mies van der Rohe than to Le Corbusier, and its construction was exposed steelwork with panels of glass and yellow brick: Pevsner described the building as ‘ruthlessly perfect and ruthlessly symmetrical’, so the use of that term for a building not made of concrete would appear in this case to refer to supposed rigour, the exposure of structure and services, and work by or influenced by the Smithsons (who portentously described New Brutalism as an ‘ethic, not an aesthetic’, which conjures up associations with the ‘moral’ arguments put forward by Pugin and Ruskin). Critics pointed out that this ‘ethical’ approach overlooked potential maintenance problems as the exposed steel frame was subject to warping and the classrooms suffered from solar heat gain. The term New Brutalism probably came into use as a result of the ideas of the Smithsons..."

Interestingly, Smithson's nickname was apparently "Brutus", apparently not unrelated to the style of the day.

krinklecutfires

Nice copy and post job, ftw!

meeneecat

It's called making a reference to back up my point...But apparently the point went right over your head if all you can do is make a shallow swipe at how I posted my comment, rather than the points made in my comment. (which, for the record consists of a 3 sentence quote, and another 5 sentences that I "copied & pasted" from my head)

mmheidelberger

Prince Charles referred to modern architecture at the time of Brutalism as a 'great carbuncle', how would he describe this? Perhaps a chancre?

Peanut_Butter

I like the idea that people who are into these new designs will be guinea pigs for the rest of us since these designs and their construction haven't been tested by time or experience (against high winds; soaking rain; minor quakes and rumbles).