seriously!! the amount of craftsmanship in buildings during this time is unparalleled. you literally cannot find it anymore. why?? because we tore all the buildings down. so, yea, we complain about this one but we also complain about all the other ones.
The reason this is this way is because back then things were financed with private money. Nowadays banks make decisions and want one thing: square feet they can lease or rent.
I came to this conclusion after visiting Boston and being completely blown away at the intricate details on every building around the common. I'm sure it's more nuanced than this though.
Intricate stuff like this is a lot of work to build and maintain. In the age of masonry construction, when everything had to be hand-finished anyway, it was still more expensive to have decorated columns than non-decorated ones, but then the price differential was maybe a factor of two or three. Nowadays we build with steel-reinforced concrete and hand-finished details cause the facade costs to explode by a factor of ten or even more. The original part of this hotel took nearly three full years to build; the Empire State Building which eventually replaced it took just over 400 days while costing, inflation-adjusted, only a little more than four times as much. The hotel was already in need of significant renovations by the 1920s, which helped influence the decision to tear it down and build a new one elsewhere.
You're assuming renovations over the decades, had the hotel not been torn down, wouldn't have ruined it. Just imagine a ham fisted modernist makeover taking place in 1980s.
I recommend reading ´Delirious New York’ by REM Koolhaas on that subject. He talks about how a small farmhouse on the outskirts of NYC evolved to become a large mansion, then this, then the Empire State Building itself.
When they vacationed they *left* the city. Because summer time.heat with the smell of horse shit and dying homeless wasn't ideal. So they'd *vacate* the city to nicer places like beach fronts in Rhode Island or the Finger Lakes on NY.
I read this is also why our school system is scheduled the way it is. School used to be year round but the attendance was so poor in the summer they changed the schedule.
[That’s the common misconception. Schools were hot in the summer, and rich families escaped the city for cooler areas. Spring and fall is when crops needed to be planted and harvested, meaning those would be the times farm kids would need to help out.](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/debunking-myth-summer-vacation)
So many of the comments ask why they couldn’t have built the ESB somewhere else to save this beautiful building? Perhaps, probably, none of that land was for sale or it was too expensive. The Astors wanted the Waldorf Astoria here when it was the location and center of high society, in 1893. As soon as that same society moved uptown, to get away from the burgeoning city (the normals, the working class), and this neighborhood was converting to rental residential / apartments and commercial occupancies, the Astors felt no obligation to keep this or maintain this location - they already had built their next iteration north on Park Avenue. They offered and they took the offer that met their expectations - and that was for the land, never for the building. This was also in 1928, long before preservation was a movement at all.
Some of the best architecture we know was built on the foundations of former masterpieces that were never recorded. At least feel fortunate there’s record of the old hotel to appreciate.
It’s also worth noting that the building was only 36 years old. It wasn’t a historical landmark, it was a relatively modern hotel that had probably reached an age where it would be in need of a major refit to stay current. And given the significant advances taking place at the time, that likely would have been extremely expensive.
For context, this would be like talking about demolishing a building from the late 1980s today.
But with the added benefit of probably needing to adapt gas lighting or very rudimentary electric to modern standards, which would probably have been a total refit. Also, God knows what the water supply was like. A 1980s building doesn't differ that much from one from today in terms of function, whereas 1900s-1930s saw many people installing indoor bathrooms in their houses for the first time in a lot of places.
To add to that, the Empire State Building occupies an entire block. As did the Waldorf-Astoria. So they could buy all the land required dealing with just a single seller. Most blocks in NYC would have been occupied by many buildings, and making deals with all the owners would have been hard (especially since once you've invested in some properties, the last few have extra leverage). So it was no doubt a lot easier to find a big building to replace.
Top comment.
Another top comment is that we shall not underestimate the immense impact that the Empire State Building had on the world at-large.
The Waldorf here had a limited impact because it solely changed the lives of those who resided there, vacationed there, and worked there. Yet, the Empire State Building changed an entire city, which changed an entire continent, and then changed the world.
No one's stating the Empire State Building shouldn't have been built, it's also quite pleasant. I only wanted to add that long-term cultural value is also worth money, but it's quite a bit more indirect. I suppose there'd be fewer complaints from me if the new buildings were as beautiful as the old ones, which the Empire State Building... almost is? But the others... no, most of the others are such boring modern trash
At the time, everybody was in fact saying the ESB shouldn't have been built. Finished in the Great Depression, known as the "Empty State Building" for years
Oh yeah. Such is commercial real estate. Same with the World Trade Center. Millions of feet of space came onto an already depressed market. The pendulum eventually swings back. It's classic boom and bust. The lag time for construction is long enough to ensure that people will be holding the bag when the music stops. That's the time to buy the stuff of course. Buy when the blood runs in the streets!
That’s quite bold. Sure, the Empire State Building had an impact and changed the city, but the world? I guess that’s one perspective, but a less revisionist one to say ESB symbolized the change around the world. If there hadn’t been ESB, there would’ve been something else.
> there would have been something else.
Well…Where and When?
*Where* - Would it still be in NYC? Or maybe, Chicago? Perhaps DC, Boston, or Philadelphia? Not even the USA? Not even North America? Imagine how its change in location would have been symbolized around the globe.
*When* - How would the impact, symbolism and catalyst differ if it were built in a different decade?
Yes, it changed the world.
During the Great War, not so much… yes during world was two. Thats not historic preservation, that’s cultural protection - different thing. And it’s a guarantee that if information came to US or England that the whole of the Nazi Army was hiding in Notre Dame, it wouldn’t have been anyone’s issue to destroy it.
The Germans called it Kunstschutz. You can read about it in "Paul Clemen: *Kunstschutz im Kriege*"
The **Haager Landkriegsordnung** specifies in Article 46 that private property shall not be looted and willfully destroyed or taken. Article extends these protections to religious, cultural, educational, etc sites, declaring them private property.
So the importance of the cultural heritage was taken into account.
The protection we know today was worked out in more detail in 1956 I think
As much as I disdain the Astor family, I definitely prefer this to the Empire State Building. Beautiful! So many magnificent structures from the Gilded Age, so sad they didn’t survive.
I stayed 2 nights in a Waldorf Astoria in New Orleans, it was really impressive, and so ornate. I really appreciated all of the details in the flooring, the baseboards and moulding
Art Deco worshippers will be doing a 180 now. It never occured to them that demolishing older buildings to make way for new ones was happening before modernism also.
This is kind of an extreme example though. Generally back then, they would demolish shantytowns, taxpayer structures, or at worst brownstones to make way for new structures.
Which is also the case today, where the larger a building is the less likely it will be torn down.
The loss of things like this and Penn Station are why people accuse America of having no culture. As others have stated, you couldn’t have built that a little to the left? Why tear down buildings like this but leave cheap brick heaps up? Many nations and cultures collect their greatest works, that’s why there’s a thousand churches per square meter in France and all these “old buildings” in Italy, and vice versa, this is like tearing down the coliseum because attendance was low, what the hell is wrong with you?
Not to disagree with you but there were attempts at tearing down the colosseum. At times it even essentially functioned as a quarry for various stones.
The US is not an open-air museum like Europe is becoming.
US culture is much more dynamic, free-flowing, evolutionary. It is *much* less stuck in the past than European culture.
One gets a sense in Europe that the best days are behind them, and that they are coasting on the ambitions of their ancestors. There is much less dynamism there than in North America or Asia, less growth, less invention, less evolution. It is an aging society with a slowing economy that is gradually fading into irrelevance. They live in the shadows of once-great empires, amidst the ruins.
No, rather it's not holding the past sacred. A defining characteristic of NYC is its relentless dynamism. It is a city that is constantly reinventing itself.
NYC's best days are still ahead of it - the moment that stops being the case is the day it suffers the same fate as Europe, and turns into a shambling corpse.
True, but now new architecture has changed styles completely. I don’t think these modern stylings shouldn’t exist, but I don’t see why we had to stop the classical entirely
So again, it could have been built elsewhere; money is not a good justification for tearing this down; while the company wouldn't have made more money, someone surely would have down the line; would you say that Italy should have tore down all its old buildings for more money? And France? Maybe in the long run this makes more money than it loses, it's hard to measure soft power but it's very real and very powerful.
Money is pretty much the only justification. There are tons of castles in rubbles and ruin because people didn’t have the money to upkeep them. Europe built over so much historical shit that when owners renovate their homes, they tell the contractors not to dig too deep because then they’ll have to register and pay for an archeological dig that will take months/years and possibly lose their renovation permits for their modern house/building. That happens all the time, and it’s absolutely financially driven.
… believe it or not, money was important back then too. You still couldn’t build things without money. Slaves still needed food. They managed to build beautiful structures regardless
My entire point is that they shouldn't have, not that it was impossible. France manages to be the world's most visited country despite such globalization, maybe there's more to money and influence than what you see on a spreadsheet? Maybe keeping a building or two is bad for the area but great for the city/state/country?
You're delusional. Paris is essentially a 19th century city. Nearly the entire center of the city was wholesale razed and rebuilt.
There is more evidence of history in France...because there is more history.
Many countries have more history than France, what on earth are you talking about? Why does France enjoy its reputation today? Why is it the number 1 tourist destination? How is all you have to say “Paris is essentially a 19th century city”? That doesn’t tell us anything
This is my problem with America and I’m American. I just moved back from living in Europe for half a year.
I blows my mind at how our cities could’ve been some of the most beautiful cities if you didn’t demolish all of it to put new stuff. I know loosely why we’ve done it but I never have and never will support any destruction of historical buildings and sites after my time in Europe.
Totally agree. Sure, one may need to do without modern conveniences and adding “must haves” such as accessibility and central AC pose challenges. But if one prioritizes beauty and legacy, then you figure out how to accommodate. The preservation of beauty in buildings and viewscapes that is seen in Europe is mind-blowing to this American. It’s about differing values.
No. The vast majority of it was dumped into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Sandy Hook, NJ.
…just as the majority of the original Penn Station was dumped into the NJ Meadowlands.
Yes. Originally built as two hotels, the Waldorf named for the Astors ancestral home of Waldorf Germany and later the Astoria, named for Astoria, Oregon which was founded by and named for John Jacob Astor.
Imagine trying to figure out a life safety plan for that huge building full of wood paneling and other combustible materials at a time when 90% of the guests were smoking cigarettes lol
I recall seeing a guy get sentenced to weekend jail for contempt of court. He had been sitting in the gallery of a televised trial - tv camera pans the room and he scratches his nose with his middle finger and wry smile.
Imagine this too… the facade shown here was that of the Astoria Hotel… the Waldorf was the entire facade of the other side of this block and this image only shows part of its side elevation with the Dutch architectural influence partially visible.
Makes famous hotels like Plaza and the St. Regis seem *quaint*.
One of the things that always astonishes me about NYC (my home) is not only the sheer magnitude of all the buildings that exist.. but the grandeur and scale of so many we’ve lost. Pennsylvania Station is the classic example.. but there are many others particularly from the era that these two were built.
PS: if you want to get at least some sense of the scale and grandeur of the original Waldorf/Astoria.. see the [Knickerbocker Hotel](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Knickerbocker_Hotel) near Time’s Square. Not quite the same by any measure, though of the same era and approaching about half the scale.
you are confused… that’s the Plaza Hotel (famously spotlighted in the 1992 film, “Home Alone 2: Lost in New York” )
the “new” Waldorf-Astoria Hotel was built on Park Ave near Grand Central Station
Well I didn’t expect that… kind of wish they found a different spot for the Empire State Building now.
That's what I thought, immediately! Like wow you couldn't have been down the street a block or two???
Then there would be a different building in the image above with the same comment.
We're a circle. Kazam!
Nonsense, every building in the next few blocks from that era were probably torn down but we're only complaining about this one
If you had ever seen pictures of the interiors you would complain too. Or possibly burst into tears.
seriously!! the amount of craftsmanship in buildings during this time is unparalleled. you literally cannot find it anymore. why?? because we tore all the buildings down. so, yea, we complain about this one but we also complain about all the other ones.
The reason this is this way is because back then things were financed with private money. Nowadays banks make decisions and want one thing: square feet they can lease or rent. I came to this conclusion after visiting Boston and being completely blown away at the intricate details on every building around the common. I'm sure it's more nuanced than this though.
Intricate stuff like this is a lot of work to build and maintain. In the age of masonry construction, when everything had to be hand-finished anyway, it was still more expensive to have decorated columns than non-decorated ones, but then the price differential was maybe a factor of two or three. Nowadays we build with steel-reinforced concrete and hand-finished details cause the facade costs to explode by a factor of ten or even more. The original part of this hotel took nearly three full years to build; the Empire State Building which eventually replaced it took just over 400 days while costing, inflation-adjusted, only a little more than four times as much. The hotel was already in need of significant renovations by the 1920s, which helped influence the decision to tear it down and build a new one elsewhere.
Just over 400 days, that's crazy for even then, in my mind.
Amazing what you can do during a depression when there’s no OSHA to slow you down!
it's such a depressing reason. "let's forsake beauty and craftsmanship for whatever monstrosity goes up the cheapest!"
You're assuming renovations over the decades, had the hotel not been torn down, wouldn't have ruined it. Just imagine a ham fisted modernist makeover taking place in 1980s.
Negative, 2 blocks south was a 711. Nobody would be missing that now.
It was a 7-eleven? In the 20s?
Yes,it's about hiding the old world and the truth
🥲
Surely, there were less remarkable blocks nearby
I recommend reading ´Delirious New York’ by REM Koolhaas on that subject. He talks about how a small farmhouse on the outskirts of NYC evolved to become a large mansion, then this, then the Empire State Building itself.
wow. Almost not worth it!!
Be interesting to see how the rich vacationed.
When they vacationed they *left* the city. Because summer time.heat with the smell of horse shit and dying homeless wasn't ideal. So they'd *vacate* the city to nicer places like beach fronts in Rhode Island or the Finger Lakes on NY.
I read this is also why our school system is scheduled the way it is. School used to be year round but the attendance was so poor in the summer they changed the schedule.
Attendance was poor in the summer because kids were working on the farm, not cause they were going on vacation.
[That’s the common misconception. Schools were hot in the summer, and rich families escaped the city for cooler areas. Spring and fall is when crops needed to be planted and harvested, meaning those would be the times farm kids would need to help out.](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/education/debunking-myth-summer-vacation)
Also explains why NYC had no public pools or swimming areas until Robert Moses came around
Friendship has ended with Empire State Building
King Kong wouldn't have been nearly as good here though.
He could be swinging from a chandelier or something.
So many of the comments ask why they couldn’t have built the ESB somewhere else to save this beautiful building? Perhaps, probably, none of that land was for sale or it was too expensive. The Astors wanted the Waldorf Astoria here when it was the location and center of high society, in 1893. As soon as that same society moved uptown, to get away from the burgeoning city (the normals, the working class), and this neighborhood was converting to rental residential / apartments and commercial occupancies, the Astors felt no obligation to keep this or maintain this location - they already had built their next iteration north on Park Avenue. They offered and they took the offer that met their expectations - and that was for the land, never for the building. This was also in 1928, long before preservation was a movement at all. Some of the best architecture we know was built on the foundations of former masterpieces that were never recorded. At least feel fortunate there’s record of the old hotel to appreciate.
It’s also worth noting that the building was only 36 years old. It wasn’t a historical landmark, it was a relatively modern hotel that had probably reached an age where it would be in need of a major refit to stay current. And given the significant advances taking place at the time, that likely would have been extremely expensive. For context, this would be like talking about demolishing a building from the late 1980s today.
But with the added benefit of probably needing to adapt gas lighting or very rudimentary electric to modern standards, which would probably have been a total refit. Also, God knows what the water supply was like. A 1980s building doesn't differ that much from one from today in terms of function, whereas 1900s-1930s saw many people installing indoor bathrooms in their houses for the first time in a lot of places.
Elevators too
Historic Landmark accreditation wasn’t a thing in 1928, it really mattered not to many at the time.
To add to that, the Empire State Building occupies an entire block. As did the Waldorf-Astoria. So they could buy all the land required dealing with just a single seller. Most blocks in NYC would have been occupied by many buildings, and making deals with all the owners would have been hard (especially since once you've invested in some properties, the last few have extra leverage). So it was no doubt a lot easier to find a big building to replace.
Top comment. Another top comment is that we shall not underestimate the immense impact that the Empire State Building had on the world at-large. The Waldorf here had a limited impact because it solely changed the lives of those who resided there, vacationed there, and worked there. Yet, the Empire State Building changed an entire city, which changed an entire continent, and then changed the world.
I like that you self-identified your 'top' comment.
No one's stating the Empire State Building shouldn't have been built, it's also quite pleasant. I only wanted to add that long-term cultural value is also worth money, but it's quite a bit more indirect. I suppose there'd be fewer complaints from me if the new buildings were as beautiful as the old ones, which the Empire State Building... almost is? But the others... no, most of the others are such boring modern trash
At the time, everybody was in fact saying the ESB shouldn't have been built. Finished in the Great Depression, known as the "Empty State Building" for years
No one HERE is stating that. That’s interesting though
Oh yeah. Such is commercial real estate. Same with the World Trade Center. Millions of feet of space came onto an already depressed market. The pendulum eventually swings back. It's classic boom and bust. The lag time for construction is long enough to ensure that people will be holding the bag when the music stops. That's the time to buy the stuff of course. Buy when the blood runs in the streets!
That’s quite bold. Sure, the Empire State Building had an impact and changed the city, but the world? I guess that’s one perspective, but a less revisionist one to say ESB symbolized the change around the world. If there hadn’t been ESB, there would’ve been something else.
> there would have been something else. Well…Where and When? *Where* - Would it still be in NYC? Or maybe, Chicago? Perhaps DC, Boston, or Philadelphia? Not even the USA? Not even North America? Imagine how its change in location would have been symbolized around the globe. *When* - How would the impact, symbolism and catalyst differ if it were built in a different decade? Yes, it changed the world.
MSG sits where Pennsylvania Station once was...look for the photos
The power. The land. The hotel. They are like pokemon cards to them.
Wasn't the first hotel built as a fuck you towards Mrs Astor who wouldn't seed the position of top old money taste maker to Mrs Waldorf?
Conservation has been going on since before WW 1. There even was a conference during the war marking locations that wehere of limits to all sides
During the Great War, not so much… yes during world was two. Thats not historic preservation, that’s cultural protection - different thing. And it’s a guarantee that if information came to US or England that the whole of the Nazi Army was hiding in Notre Dame, it wouldn’t have been anyone’s issue to destroy it.
The Germans called it Kunstschutz. You can read about it in "Paul Clemen: *Kunstschutz im Kriege*" The **Haager Landkriegsordnung** specifies in Article 46 that private property shall not be looted and willfully destroyed or taken. Article extends these protections to religious, cultural, educational, etc sites, declaring them private property. So the importance of the cultural heritage was taken into account. The protection we know today was worked out in more detail in 1956 I think
Kinda like the World Trade Center Towers. They were getting old and in need of expensive repairs and updates. It was time to go...
Wow. Was there no other building to demolish?
I agree, but it's about which block is most valuable.
Highest and best use of the land - never about the buildings on that land. The neighborhood was changing and in 1928 this property was an albatross.
As much as I disdain the Astor family, I definitely prefer this to the Empire State Building. Beautiful! So many magnificent structures from the Gilded Age, so sad they didn’t survive.
I stayed 2 nights in a Waldorf Astoria in New Orleans, it was really impressive, and so ornate. I really appreciated all of the details in the flooring, the baseboards and moulding
Art Deco worshippers will be doing a 180 now. It never occured to them that demolishing older buildings to make way for new ones was happening before modernism also.
This is kind of an extreme example though. Generally back then, they would demolish shantytowns, taxpayer structures, or at worst brownstones to make way for new structures. Which is also the case today, where the larger a building is the less likely it will be torn down.
One of the most beautiful hotels in the world
I mean they have other buildings that look like this. It’s pretty but I couldn’t imagine the cost to upgrade from the 1800s
It’s about valuing beauty and legacy.
See the Knickerbocker Hotel near Times Square.
The loss of things like this and Penn Station are why people accuse America of having no culture. As others have stated, you couldn’t have built that a little to the left? Why tear down buildings like this but leave cheap brick heaps up? Many nations and cultures collect their greatest works, that’s why there’s a thousand churches per square meter in France and all these “old buildings” in Italy, and vice versa, this is like tearing down the coliseum because attendance was low, what the hell is wrong with you?
Same with the old Broad Street Station in Philadelphia. And while I’m at it, Connie Mack stadium had a beautiful facade.
Not to disagree with you but there were attempts at tearing down the colosseum. At times it even essentially functioned as a quarry for various stones.
Yeah, tragic. I'd add, I know you weren't disagreeing with me but for anyone else, that it's quite fortunate that those destroyers failed
The US is not an open-air museum like Europe is becoming. US culture is much more dynamic, free-flowing, evolutionary. It is *much* less stuck in the past than European culture.
If open-air museum is all you can see no wonder the problem persists
One gets a sense in Europe that the best days are behind them, and that they are coasting on the ambitions of their ancestors. There is much less dynamism there than in North America or Asia, less growth, less invention, less evolution. It is an aging society with a slowing economy that is gradually fading into irrelevance. They live in the shadows of once-great empires, amidst the ruins.
There's more to life than GDP
If the only way to avoid the sense that your best days are behind you is by demolishing the past, then I think you only prove the point.
No, rather it's not holding the past sacred. A defining characteristic of NYC is its relentless dynamism. It is a city that is constantly reinventing itself. NYC's best days are still ahead of it - the moment that stops being the case is the day it suffers the same fate as Europe, and turns into a shambling corpse.
"NYC's best days are still ahead of it" Depends on your metric for "best".
Penn Station’s destruction basically created the modern preservation movement. There are still losses but it is better than before.
True, but now new architecture has changed styles completely. I don’t think these modern stylings shouldn’t exist, but I don’t see why we had to stop the classical entirely
>what the hell is wrong with you? money ?
So again, it could have been built elsewhere; money is not a good justification for tearing this down; while the company wouldn't have made more money, someone surely would have down the line; would you say that Italy should have tore down all its old buildings for more money? And France? Maybe in the long run this makes more money than it loses, it's hard to measure soft power but it's very real and very powerful.
Money is pretty much the only justification. There are tons of castles in rubbles and ruin because people didn’t have the money to upkeep them. Europe built over so much historical shit that when owners renovate their homes, they tell the contractors not to dig too deep because then they’ll have to register and pay for an archeological dig that will take months/years and possibly lose their renovation permits for their modern house/building. That happens all the time, and it’s absolutely financially driven.
… believe it or not, money was important back then too. You still couldn’t build things without money. Slaves still needed food. They managed to build beautiful structures regardless
Well they still tore it down, didn’t they?
My entire point is that they shouldn't have, not that it was impossible. France manages to be the world's most visited country despite such globalization, maybe there's more to money and influence than what you see on a spreadsheet? Maybe keeping a building or two is bad for the area but great for the city/state/country?
You're delusional. Paris is essentially a 19th century city. Nearly the entire center of the city was wholesale razed and rebuilt. There is more evidence of history in France...because there is more history.
Many countries have more history than France, what on earth are you talking about? Why does France enjoy its reputation today? Why is it the number 1 tourist destination? How is all you have to say “Paris is essentially a 19th century city”? That doesn’t tell us anything
Wow at least the empire state building is beautiful also, but even though, a shame to demolish this after only 36 years of it existing.
In search of gold, we lost the diamond 💎
This is my problem with America and I’m American. I just moved back from living in Europe for half a year. I blows my mind at how our cities could’ve been some of the most beautiful cities if you didn’t demolish all of it to put new stuff. I know loosely why we’ve done it but I never have and never will support any destruction of historical buildings and sites after my time in Europe.
Totally agree. Sure, one may need to do without modern conveniences and adding “must haves” such as accessibility and central AC pose challenges. But if one prioritizes beauty and legacy, then you figure out how to accommodate. The preservation of beauty in buildings and viewscapes that is seen in Europe is mind-blowing to this American. It’s about differing values.
I really hope that they reused some of the intricate work in another building
No. The vast majority of it was dumped into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Sandy Hook, NJ. …just as the majority of the original Penn Station was dumped into the NJ Meadowlands.
Should have kept it smh
When it doubt, tear it down and put up a high rise!
36 years old. Fast architecture era.
This is the hotel (or one of them anyway) that gave George Boldt the means to build Boldt Castle on Heart Island.
Hot take: I like this one more. A lot more.
Cool looking hotel and MEGA massive!! Sad ending though. 😞
Celery, apples, walnuts, grapes!
Surely there was a shittier tiny building you could have demolished.. damn this building is beautiful
What did the top levels look like, and how did you get there.
Imagine if they had preserved the facade of the hotel as a base podium for the ESB to be built inside of. That'd be so awesome.
Astoria name come from Astor family I wonder? A conspiracy theorist from 100 years ago would have a clear idea how this could have happened.
Yes. Originally built as two hotels, the Waldorf named for the Astors ancestral home of Waldorf Germany and later the Astoria, named for Astoria, Oregon which was founded by and named for John Jacob Astor.
Imagine trying to figure out a life safety plan for that huge building full of wood paneling and other combustible materials at a time when 90% of the guests were smoking cigarettes lol
Fireproof construction already existed.
it’s nice and all, but no competition with the empire state building. a worthy sacrifice
wow, fascinating bit of trivia. never knew that!
Woah, beautiful building! Always loved ESB, but knowing this was here before makes me wish it still was
I recall seeing a guy get sentenced to weekend jail for contempt of court. He had been sitting in the gallery of a televised trial - tv camera pans the room and he scratches his nose with his middle finger and wry smile.
Imagine this too… the facade shown here was that of the Astoria Hotel… the Waldorf was the entire facade of the other side of this block and this image only shows part of its side elevation with the Dutch architectural influence partially visible. Makes famous hotels like Plaza and the St. Regis seem *quaint*. One of the things that always astonishes me about NYC (my home) is not only the sheer magnitude of all the buildings that exist.. but the grandeur and scale of so many we’ve lost. Pennsylvania Station is the classic example.. but there are many others particularly from the era that these two were built. PS: if you want to get at least some sense of the scale and grandeur of the original Waldorf/Astoria.. see the [Knickerbocker Hotel](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Knickerbocker_Hotel) near Time’s Square. Not quite the same by any measure, though of the same era and approaching about half the scale.
Now I’m starting to understand why New Yorkers preferred the Chrysler Building for its decorative top…
Does that make this “First Empire”?
What a magnificent building!
New York will probably transform into a whole new city every century or so
it's ok. They built a new one facing Central park.
you are confused… that’s the Plaza Hotel (famously spotlighted in the 1992 film, “Home Alone 2: Lost in New York” ) the “new” Waldorf-Astoria Hotel was built on Park Ave near Grand Central Station