HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


    56 Leonard Street in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 12:18 AM
CHAPINM1's Avatar
CHAPINM1 CHAPINM1 is offline
JoeCooper
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Guam
Posts: 1,414
I normally am not negative toward and like any design I've seen; however, this has to be by far one of the ugliest things I've ever seen!
__________________
A voice for the fallen.
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 12:53 AM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,506
Damn. The tower's profile on the skyline looks kind of meh, but I love the close up details.
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 1:18 AM
Jularc's Avatar
Jularc Jularc is offline
Time/Space
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,363
Here are more wonderful renderings!









http://www.dezeen.com/2008/09/14/56-...zog-de-meuron/
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 1:23 AM
lakegz's Avatar
lakegz lakegz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Beijing
Posts: 7,712
i like it, i think its fresh and something that New York doesn't really have on a large scale.
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 1:51 AM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,506
Interesting relationship between the tower and the sculpture-like the tower was dropped on top of the sculpture and it is ooxing out from underneath.

On a different note, imagine my surprise when I see the AP article featuring the tower in my local paper.
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 2:02 AM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
You mean this story made it up there to your town?
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 2:09 AM
NYC2ATX's Avatar
NYC2ATX NYC2ATX is offline
Everywhere all at once
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SI NYC
Posts: 2,450
It looks like a building I would notice in a computer image of New York in 2100 that was made for a movie.
__________________
BUILD IT. BUILD EVERYTHING. BUILD IT ALL.
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 3:16 AM
HyperPower's Avatar
HyperPower HyperPower is offline
"Think about the Future"
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New York City/ NH
Posts: 225
It reminds me of Jenga...

__________________
'One entered the city like a god; one scuttles in now like a rat' (On Penn Station) Vincent Skully
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 12:23 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,918
http://nymag.com/arts/architecture/reviews/50212/

One’s Huge, the Other’s Crazy
A pair of showcase skyscrapers, ready to rise, give us a taste of the architectural delirium we crave.




By Justin Davidson
Sep 14, 2008

Normally this city frowns on building shapes that do anything more daring than go up and down or side to side. Sure, we have a venerable corkscrew in the Guggenheim, but we don’t have much truck with blobs, birds’ nests, leaning towers, or glass pretzels. A pair of soon-to-be-built condos nudge at that resistance to foreign forms, though, and suggest that even a weakened housing market still has some architectural kick. These two projects—one by the Swiss wizards of the Beijing stadium, Herzog & de Meuron, the other by the Dutch swashbuckler Rem Koolhaas and his Office for Metropolitan Architecture—keep their radicalism quiet, and both spring from the city’s heart as well as its turf.

The more dramatic tower, if only because of its size, is Herzog & de Meuron’s 56 Leonard Street, which, at 821 feet, will be a gangly outlier in the low-slung skyline north of the financial district.

It wears its solitude well. Any single floor evokes Mies van der Rohe’s masterpiece of almost-nothingness, the 1951 Farnsworth House, in Plano, Illinois—a transparent slice of space sandwiched between slender white slabs. Here, the architects offer a hectic revision of Miesian asceticism, adapted for a site where the Manhattan grid slackens into Tribeca’s loose weave of streets. They churn out dozens of variations on the Farnsworth idea, then take all those horizontal nests and pile them giddily toward the clouds. The shaft bristles with irregularly arranged balconies. Floor heights vary and the corners keep cutting away. The tower appears to get simultaneously narrower and wider toward the top, where the blocks are fewer but bigger and set more askew. It has a purposefully haphazard look, like a stack of books of different sizes that haven’t been aligned.

There’s a canny intelligence behind the mess. From far away, the building looks like a pointillist notion of a skyscraper, with smudgelike windows and decks threatening to flee the lines. Zoom in on it, though, and the details snap into focus. Volumes interlock with satisfying precision, deep balconies create a painterly contest of highlights and shadows, and the tower appears to be resting nonchalantly on a shiny steel pillow sculpted by Anish Kapoor. As a gentle jab at Mies’s obsessions with rectilinear smoothness, Herzog & de Meuron have scattered soft convexities in every custom detail: The steel balcony railing has a fleshy curve, as do the voluptuous bathtubs and the window frames. (It’s all on view at 56leonardtribeca.com.) Even the concrete slab edge between floors will get dressed up in precast curves. And who could resist the textured walls around the pool, a continuous mosaic of coin-size metal tiles with a mix of tiny mounds and little depressions, like so many shiny navels?

In modifying Mies with a touch of the baroque, the architects have also adapted the suburban home to a vertical habitat without losing its uniqueness. The tower’s shape broadcasts an anti-cookie-cutter aesthetic; no two floor plans are identical, which will complicate the lives of construction workers and real-estate brokers but act as a potent tonic to New York’s standardize-or-die commandment. Rem Koolhaas’s 25-story condo in the Flatiron district commits a similar act of affectionate subversion.

In 1978, the same year that Herzog & de Meuron hung up their shingle, Koolhaas published his rhapsodic and epoch-making ode Delirious New York. In that book, he argued that this was a city of extremes, formed by constructive chaos and a fertile “culture of congestion.” But while Koolhaas has since dotted the globe with hallucinatory structures, here his extravagant designs—for a hotel at Astor Place, for the Whitney, and for MoMA—never progressed beyond the seductive scale model. Perhaps he has learned something about the limits of lunacy: His first freestanding building in New York, a mid-rise condo at 23 East 22nd Street that will shortly go into construction, is more sober but not more timid. Rather than impose an auteur’s vision on a recalcitrant town, he riffs imaginatively on the city’s vocabulary—specifically the classic New York setback, which was devised to safeguard light and air. Rather than moving toward each other as they go up, the two sides of the building lean eastward in a dance of setback and cantilever, like partners doing a tango dip. The move produces some minor showstoppers, such as a glass-bottomed bedroom and some similarly vertiginous balconies. But for the most part, the effect is admirably restrained. Koolhaas’s building acts as the mid-rise entry to a much taller tower on 23rd Street, an unremarkable glass pillar by Cetra, and it peeks around behind its oversize partner with a silent reproach: Couldn’t you do anything more interesting with New York’s nifty constraints?

Half a block from the Flatiron Building, hard by Madison Square Park, and within spitting distance of the Met Life Building, 23 East 22nd Street occupies an architecturally sensitive node. Koolhaas has looked around with a panoramic eye and saluted much of what he saw. Partly for structural reasons, he opted for a solid skin with punched windows, giving the tower a feeling of old-fashioned thickness. The double-height windows on the penthouse floors, for instance, echo the arcade in Met Life’s crown. And the façade of concrete panels embedded in polished steel frames lends a little Chryslerite twinkle to the gabardine-gray exterior. Only the building’s upper and lower ends are unsatisfying. The top cuts off without ceremony or embellishment, like a joke without a punch line; the bottom meets the street with the same old glass wall. This is where Koolhaas might have indulged in another wild stroke or two.

These two buildings won’t open Manhattan up to a generation of rococo skyscrapers. This isn’t Dubai. But they are hardy, quirky, and local enough to help future architects negotiate the relationship between their fancy and the strictures of New York. We’ll take our delirium a little bit at a time.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 3:53 PM
Jularc's Avatar
Jularc Jularc is offline
Time/Space
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,363
I knew it would be about 800 feet, but I will gladly take those extra 21 feet.
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 3:58 PM
aliendroid aliendroid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 56
So that's 250.2 meters
__________________
If you visit Texas go to San Antonio, Austin and Fort Worth. Dallas and Houston are ok but do not ever, under any circumstances visit lubbock or el paso.
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 4:12 PM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,506
Quote:
Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
You mean this story made it up there to your town?
Yup. Page A6 of the Sunday Waterbury Republican-American. I didn't bother posting the article because it was basically the same as one already posted.
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 4:12 PM
Fabb's Avatar
Fabb Fabb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 9,019
250 m of pure beauty without cheating.
I can live with that.
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 7:22 PM
Alliance's Avatar
Alliance Alliance is offline
NEW YORK | CHICAGO
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 3,532
This tower is karking sex. Awesome concept.

Coincidentally, its the same height as Aqua in Chicago. Must be the perfect height for architectual cojones
__________________
My: Skyscraper Art - Diagrams - Diagram Thread
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Sep 15, 2008, 11:14 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,918
Somebody get 30 Park Place and Beekman Tower into that first rendering:

http://dvice.com/archives/2008/09/odd_56story_sky.php












More from curbed.com











__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 12:54 AM
spyguy's Avatar
spyguy spyguy is offline
THAT Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 5,949
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 2:24 AM
JACKinBeantown's Avatar
JACKinBeantown JACKinBeantown is offline
JACKinBeantown
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 8,849
It'll be considered interesting for a few years, then the novelty will wear off and it will be regarded as an unfortunate piece of crap.
__________________
Hi.
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 3:28 AM
aaron38's Avatar
aaron38 aaron38 is offline
312
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Palatine
Posts: 4,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Are you kidding me? I see that a lot of people love this, but I don't get it. All I see is a jumbled mess that has no cohesive energy as a skyscraper. That the architectural line of thought was simply to be "not boring", as if that's enough.
I throw this in the pile of "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should". It looks like it's going to fall over - gimicky as hell.
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 3:45 AM
philvia's Avatar
philvia philvia is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 452
i like it... i can imagine myself staring at it for a long time
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Sep 16, 2008, 4:02 AM
Lecom's Avatar
Lecom Lecom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: the Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 12,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron38 View Post
Are you kidding me? I see that a lot of people love this, but I don't get it. All I see is a jumbled mess that has no cohesive energy as a skyscraper. That the architectural line of thought was simply to be "not boring", as if that's enough.
I throw this in the pile of "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should". It looks like it's going to fall over - gimicky as hell.
Well, sure it is gimmicky as hell. Many skyscrapers are, in fact. Some are horrible, while others are actually great. Tell me that Chrysler isn't gimmicky, for instance. A gimmick in a skyscraper, just like a gimmick in architecture, isn't always problematic. Problems often come from poor execution, choice of materials, location, magnitude or appropriateness of the gimmick, etc. If a gimmick can actually make the urban fabric a more enjoyable place without being overbearing, then I say go for it.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:26 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.