NEW YORK | New York by Gehry | 870 FT / 265 M | 76 FLOORS | T/O

[sterlippo1]

the building is amazing, as a frequent visitor i have also seen it grow. i especially love having lunch in city hall park having it right there to gaze at in admiration. :tup:

[Ordo_]

This building's isolation from the main Downtown core makes it all more grandeur. The architecture alone speaks for itself with no other tower to obscure the view.

Building towers in total isolation, with little gardens and lakes around them is something that should be reserved for other places, not true, developed cities like New York. Context is a tremendous part of architecture, as is contribution to an urban environment. I'd give this tower a big "F" in both categories.

[YSL]

Building towers in total isolation, with little gardens and lakes around them is something that should be reserved for other places, not true, developed cities like New York. Context is a tremendous part of architecture, as is contribution to an urban environment. I'd give this tower a big "F" in both categories.

:rolleyes:

....and if that were true...the Empire State Building never world have been built. It was in as total isolation as Beekman when it was built.

New York City's skies weren't pierced with skyscrapers when the land was discovered in 1524 . They had to start somewhere.

Hopefully this will spur development in that area. Lots of low rise crap in that area that needs to be razed, and many crappy blocks around there waiting for development.

And I give this building an A. I would have given it an A+ if it weren't for the flat side, but It's still a stunner. There has been nothing built in NYC (and in the United States in general) as stunning as Beekman in decades.

[wrab]

Building towers in total isolation, with little gardens and lakes around them is something that should be reserved for other places, not true, developed cities like New York. Context is a tremendous part of architecture, as is contribution to an urban environment. I'd give this tower a big "F" in both categories.

LOL This isn't a tower in the park and it isn't "isolated" in any sense other than that it is taller than its immediate nieghbors, which is what NYC4LIFE was pointing out in his post.

[Ordo_]

:rolleyes:

....and if that were true...the Empire State Building never world have been built. It was in as total isolation as Beekman when it was built.

New York City's skies weren't pierced with skyscrapers when the land was discovered in 1524 . They had to start somewhere.

Hopefully this will spur development in that area. Lots of low rise crap in that area that needs to be razed, and many crappy blocks around there waiting for development.

ESB is generally still in isolation and more often then not, I find that unfortunate. I was trying to say that tower's shouldn't be coddled off from one another and exist in isolation. I certainly hope the area fills in, because I generally find this part of downtown fairly dull. That being said, having 900 foot towers every block doesn't create a successful urban environment either.

I dislike the Beekman building, but I'm not saying "its too tall" or other junk like that. I'm not opposed to building a building here. I'm saying the architecture and the development doesn't relate to its environment (or create one) and many of the beautiful buildings around it. You could generally pick it up and plop it down in another neighborhood, even in another city and it would fit in just as well (which to me, I am saying it doesn't). This was my earlier comment about Ghery's personal style being the main director of this development, not its specific location. Thus I feel the building lacks context, which is a key component of architecture.

[JSsocal]

I think you're giving the building less credit then it deserves, and simply dismissing it as "Gehry." Sure the tower relates to the area and New York.
Most notably its shape and setbacks.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4114/4908799282_3420cdd49e_o.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4135/4867997986_9862a88c52_o.jpgnycdagreatest

I guess what I'm asking is what is a building that would work here, and why doesn;t this one relate to its surroundings well? The buildings around here are either banal 60's housing, or the historic South Street Seaport, and then the financial district.

[NYguy]

I think you're giving the building less credit then it deserves, and simply dismissing it as "Gehry." Sure the tower relates to the area and New York. Most notably its shape and setbacks.

This tower relates more to New York than many of the office towers Downtown. It's a modern classic. Like the proposed Tower Verre, its seems like the skyscraper that exists in the New York or our minds, meaning it should/could have been built by now.

[alex1]

ESB is generally still in isolation and more often then not, I find that unfortunate. I was trying to say that tower's shouldn't be coddled off from one another and exist in isolation...

I dislike the Beekman building, but I'm not saying "its too tall" or other junk like that. I'm not opposed to building a building here. I'm saying the architecture and the development doesn't relate to its environment (or create one) and many of the beautiful buildings around it. ...

I think that we both arrive at the same conclusion regarding this building, that we both dislike this one. But for different reasons.

Why does this building need to relate to it's environment? Why does it even matter?

I understand that great architects understand environment and use it as a source of a projects conceptual underpinnings (i.e. Calatrava in Milwaukee, Jeanne Gang in Chicago (Aqua), Frank Lloyd Wright in America), but architecture can be great despite an architects decision to forgo environment sensitivity. I'm actually really glad that plenty of European cities and towns have eschewed this paradigm.

[alex1]

This tower relates more to New York than many of the office towers Downtown. It's a modern classic. Like the proposed Tower Verre, its seems like the skyscraper that exists in the New York or our minds, meaning it should/could have been built by now.

not sure how this tower "relates more to NY than many of the office towers downtown". Not saying you're wrong, but you could make the argument both ways.

[NYguy]

not sure how this tower "relates more to NY than many of the office towers downtown".

It's simple. Many of the office towers that have grown Downtown (and Midtown as well) are basically just big buildings with no sense of being a "New York" skyscraper (other than being big). This one is classic New York, so much so that it plays well with the Woolworth many were so worried it would block.



http://beta.wnyc.org/articles/wnyc-news/2010/aug/19/beekman-tower/
Beekman Tower: Now Glistening to the Very Top

August 19, 2010
By Matthew Schuerman

Frank Gehry's design for the Beekman Tower in Lower Manhattan elicited a wide range of responses when its designs were circulated two years ago. Among them: Just how will the shiny steel surface fit in among lower Manhattan's stone towers?

While the building is still several months away from completion, the stainless steel siding appeared to have reached the top of the 76 floors this week, giving passersby a chance to assess it.

The building, at 8 Spruce Street, was planned during the real estate boom...and, against all odds, went up during the bust. Construction did stall last year while the developer, Forest City Ratner, renegotiated costs lower -- but work resumed within a few months. The steel structure topped off last November, and shortly afterwards, workers began installing the undulating stainless steel curtain wall.

While the top floors appear to have been covered, there are pieces of some floors that are still bare. The developer says the exterior won't be completely finished for several months.

The 900 apartments in the building are expected to open next spring. The developer abandoned his plan years ago to offer a mix of rentals and condos. Now the building will consist of 100 percent market-rate rentals. The developer won't divulge the asking rents, but Corcoran broker Eric Fleming, who represents similar signature buildings in the financial district, says the one-bedrooms there could fetch $5,000 a month.


http://parmenides.wnyc.org/media/photologue/photos/cache/Beekman%20Horizontal_max_enlarge.jpg

[NYguy]

http://culture.wnyc.org/articles/features/2010/aug/20/beekman-tower-and-nyc-skyline/

The Beekman Tower and the NYC Skyline

August 20, 2010
By WNYC Newsroom


The dramatic steel of Frank Gehry's new Beekman Tower makes it one of the flashiest skyscrapers on the Lower Manhattan skyline. Paul Goldberg, the architecture critic for The New Yorker and a professor of design at the New School, joins WNYC's Richard Hake to talk about the building.


Frank Gehry's best-known work is with museums, concert halls, private residences -- but he's not known for skyscrapers. Was he successful at turning his design aesthetic into a skyscraper?

I think he was actually. You're right, it's a new world for him. He's tried it a couple of times, but a couple of designs have not been built. This one has. He's managed to do something, as Frank Gehry usually does -- a little bit different and rethinking the form. But in a way that feels comfortable and not so weird that you don't want to go into it.

Now if anyone has seen this building, it's huge. This is actually real close to where WNYC used to be located, and there are a lot of historic buildings. There's the South Street Seaport there, you have City Hall. Talk about the building a little bit. Is it out of context there?

Well, it is very tall. But in fact, there are a lot of tall things nearby, too. In fact, it looks across from City Hall park at the Woolworth building, which was the tallest building in the world for a number of years. And it's relatively slender. And one of the key things about skyscrapers is in terms of the skyline at least, they can be really tall if they're thin. It doesn't have that sort of ugly impact on your eye and on the skyline. So I don't actually think it's out of context even if some of the other buildings are lower. That just allows the tower itself to be seen more clearly.

Do you know how many apartments will be in there? Now we know that it is completely rental -- these will not be condos or co-ops, but complete rental buildings. But how many are in there?

I don't know, actually. I do know the building has a million square feet, which is the kind of size that is usually associated with an office building. I don't know the actual number of apartments, no.

Now Gehry has yet to design an iconic building for New York, like his Guggenheim Museum in Spain, his Walt Disney Concert Hall in Lose Angeles, or even his Bard College performing arts center in the Hudson Valley. Will the Beekman become a signature piece for the New York City skyline?

Well, I think it will be, because it's downtown, because it's the tallest residential building in the city, and it's one of the first tall residential towers, apartment buildings, that's tried to make an impact on the skyline. That was once the case years ago. If you look at Central Park West, the buildings like the San Remo and the Majestic, which were once the tallest buildings, tallest residential buildings, they're kind of quaint now. They're only 30 stories tall, but they have beautiful tops and they really made a contribution to the skyline in a general way. They weren't just for the people who lived in them. They provided something for everybody.

I'm kind of thinking in that neighborhood, you have the Woolworth building, which obviously was once the tallest building in New York, and it is kind of a quaint building. Do you think it will take away from the Woolworth?

I don't think it will take away from the Woolworth at all. I think it will, in fact, communicate nicely with the Woolworth. You have two different generations talking to each other, which is good. And it's not right up against the Woolworth; it's actually a little distance away, so they can really communicate with each other, but also stand alone in a certain way.

A critic called the Beekman building “an ordinary structure in a shiny dress.” How would you react to that characterization?

It's true that the most interesting thing about it is the skin. That sort of metallic skin that looks wavy as it goes up, a whole different sense on how a skyscraper can look. I think the interior of the apartments themselves are relatively conventional. Then again, on the other hand, I think in terms of the market, I think that's what people want. I don't think people want strange space inside. I think they just like the idea of regular space inside an unusual and beautiful building. By the way, I've checked while we've been talking -- thanks to Google -- I can tell you there are 903 apartment buildings.

Brooklynites, what do you think? Is this going to block your view or brighten the skyline? Let us know, please post your comments below.

[599GTO]

Man, what a beauty!

[Razqal]

that's a really cool building. but that brown brick base really does not match the tower.

[alex1]

It's simple. Many of the office towers that have grown Downtown (and Midtown as well) are basically just big buildings with no sense of being a "New York" skyscraper (other than being big). This one is classic New York, so much so that it plays well with the Woolworth many were so worried it would block.


This position ignores too much and doesn't explain a thing. What I like about your post though is there seems to be a paradox to what you think a nY building is and what may generally typify the city's urban form.

In any regard, specifically what is a "New York skyscraper"? I'm not sure the answer is simple, but I'm curious to your definition of it.

[RoldanTTLB]

Generally, office towers of the gothic revival (neo-gothic if you prefer) ala Woolworth, American International (City Services), etc OR deco such as Rockefeller or ESB or Chrysler are most strongly associated with NYC. When one thinks International style, most people seem to think of Houston more than any of the buildings in NYC (either the sublime - Lever House, or the simple - One Chase Manhattan Plaza). To your credit, NYC is famous just for having skyscrapers in general, but most people are unable to distinguish the Chrysler building from the Empire State building, and an incredibly high percentage of New Yorkers are unable to identify the very buildings they are standing next to when shown a photo of the building on the skyline (and really, isn't time warner center pretty distinctive?). Gehry's tower, much like his IAC HQ is refreshingly unique for the city. Hopefully, in an effort to keep the building stock diverse, Tower Verre gets built. I am also looking forward to Carnegie 57. In much the same way that One and Two Liberty place (Philadelphia) are a modern interpretation (glass) version of the art deco skyscraper, I actually think Carnegie 57 could do the same in NY.

On how the building melds with the neighborhood: it's fine. It meets the street cleanly on all three sides, it adds a new through block by way of the courtyard (Jane Jacobs is smiling), and it is not of a scale unmatched to the other buildings on the street. Please keep in mind that this building is across the street from an abandoned lot and the ugliest garage in the neighborhood (the old ugliest garage, on Washington, was torn down a few years ago).

[Onn]

Just wait, I think Beekman will look even better with the WTC towers looming in the background! Amazing building! :slob:

[youngregina]

it looks quite off. Almost like its falling apart from afar. It look stunning up close. But from a distance it just doesn't cut it for me.

[wrab]

The setbacks might be a big part of why this building has a New York feel to it for a lot of people. Back in the day, setbacks for light & air were required to build above a certain height, so you'd get this big base and then a more slender, tapering tower with additional setbacks.

[Bucktown718]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4082/4911961148_9826fbf1ac_b.jpg
Quan Nguyen (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mr_quan_nguyen/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4101/4911359422_19b0e072e7_b.jpg
jg2477 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jg2477/)

[CSABA8]

Someon got some inside pictures ?...at least lobby would be nice

[wrab]

BillSchintler @ wirednewyork.com

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10466&d=1282103374
http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4305&p=334603&viewfull=1#post334603



BillSchintler @ wirednewyork.com

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10468&d=1282103696
http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4305&p=334603&viewfull=1#post334603

Derek2K3 @ wirednewyork.com

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4117/4911588965_28a4ce275a_b.jpg

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4305&p=334939&viewfull=1#post334939

Sherpa @ wirednewyork.com

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10500&d=1282393487
http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4305&p=334968&viewfull=1#post334968

zippythechimp @ wirednewyork.com

http://a.imageshack.us/img7/6687/beekman132c.jpg
http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4305&p=334375&viewfull=1#post334375

[RoldanTTLB]

The lobby is one of the last things done in a building. Additionally, this building will have 3 different lobbies. The lower apartment floors are nearly done, though, with appliances sitting packed in many of them. On the right dy and or with good zoom, you can see all this from the brooklyn bridge (or presumably if you live next door).

[View2saintmartin]

Gehry pulled it off!

[NYguy]

This position ignores too much and doesn't explain a thing.

It doesn't have to explain a thing. Either you know New York skyscrapers, or you don't. You'll just have to be in the "don't" category. There's nothing wrong with that, not everyone gets it.


mbell1975 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mbell1975/4912690253/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4079/4912690253_50b3363e69_b.jpg


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4096/4912690879_5cef938102_b.jpg


zippythechimp @ wirednewyork.com

http://a.imageshack.us/img7/6687/beekman132c.jpg
http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4305&p=334375&viewfull=1#post334375

Love it...:yes:


Chris Hamby (http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrishamby/4910542807/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4136/4910542807_ac860072ca_b.jpg

[alex1]

It doesn't have to explain a thing. Either you know New York skyscrapers, or you don't. You'll just have to be in the "don't" category. There's nothing wrong with that, not everyone gets it.


Another none answer. You don't know what you're talking about, do you? There's no other explanation to someone who responds to a perfectly sensible question with the answer "either you know or you don't know".

I think the issue you're having is that you can't realistically pigeonhole NY skyscraper architecture to fit your original claim. You can try, but it's a daunting task, especially considering that this particular building is soaking in SoCal formalism. And there's nothing wrong with that.

[wrab]

^ Like I said above, the setbacks, though minimal, are a nod to NYC's 1916 Zoning Resolution.

[wrab]

http://www.archdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/1281148647-img-6314-1000x750.jpg
David Assael – Arch Daily David Assael – Arch Daily (http://www.archdaily.com/72406/in-progress-beekman-tower-frank-gehry-2/img_6314/)

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Another none answer. You don't know what you're talking about, do you? There's no other explanation to someone who responds to a perfectly sensible question with the answer "either you know or you don't know".

I think the issue you're having is that you can't realistically pigeonhole NY skyscraper architecture to fit your original claim. You can try, but it's a daunting task, especially considering that this particular building is soaking in SoCal formalism. And there's nothing wrong with that.

i understand exactly what NYguy means some buildings are just "New York" really it lies in the buildings character rather than design,its mostly something that New Yorkers understand that i dont think most outsiders can.

[evanmack]

i understand exactly what NYguy means some buildings are just "New York" really it lies in the buildings character rather than design,its mostly something that New Yorkers understand that i dont think most outsiders can.

As a New York I agree.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

yesterday

http://images5b.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp6327%3B%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3B58534%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5a.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63397%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B63%3B938634%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5b.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp6325%3B%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3B58634%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5a.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63398%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B63%3B938734%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5b.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63276%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3B58834%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5b.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp6326%3B%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3B58934%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5a.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63386%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3B58%3A34%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5b.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63274%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3C93834%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5a.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp6338%3B%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3C93934%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5a.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63396%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3C93%3B34%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5b.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp6326%3B%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3C94%3B34%3Bnu0mrj

http://images5b.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63268%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3C95234%3Bnu0mrj

[alex1]

i understand exactly what NYguy means some buildings are just "New York" really it lies in the buildings character rather than design,its mostly something that New Yorkers understand that i dont think most outsiders can.

someone should verbalize that feeling. It's a simple request. The reason I ask is because the idea that this particular building is a "New York skyscraper" more so than "the office buildings in downtown and midtown" is utterly ridiculous. The paradox I alluded to earlier is his insistence that this one structure is more New York then the many other office boxes that make up this city. Other buildings may not be beautiful or significant, but in my opinion, that's a very nYc trait. And add the fact that this structure's facade is very rooted in soCal formalism.

regarding character: you might be right, but can you define that character you speak of without being myopic to the diverse nature of architecture here? I promise you it's not just a "feeling" someone gets, but a tangible response to certain aspects of design.

In any regard, thanks for jumping into the conversation. I would disagree with your assessment that outsiders don't "get it". I assure you that many of us who come from design backgrounds and have studied architecture to some capacity understand it quite well.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

someone should verbalize that feeling. It's a simple request. The reason I ask is because the idea that this particular building is a "New York skyscraper" more so than "the office buildings in downtown and midtown" is utterly ridiculous. The paradox I alluded to earlier is his insistence that this one structure is more New York then the many other office boxes that make up this city. Other buildings may not be beautiful or significant, but in my opinion, that's a very nYc trait. And add the fact that this structure's facade is very rooted in soCal formalism.

regarding character: you might be right, but can you define that character you speak of without being myopic to the diverse nature of architecture here? I promise you it's not just a "feeling" someone gets, but a tangible response to certain aspects of design.

In any regard, thanks for jumping into the conversation. I would disagree with your assessment that outsiders don't "get it". I assure you that many of us who come from design backgrounds and have studied architecture to some capacity understand it quite well.

like i said its all character,the same glamorous character that comes with New York. when you hear names like Broadway,Wall street,Times square, Rockefeller Center, etc. these a certain kind of energy and thought that accompanies them. thinking of ESB and SWFC generate a totally opposite feeling.

[alex1]

like i said its all character,the same glamorous character that comes with New York. when you hear names like Broadway,Wall street,Times square, Rockefeller Center, etc. these a certain kind of energy and thought that accompanies them. thinking of ESB and SWFC generate a totally opposite feeling.

This is obviously a dead-end topic. It's never a good idea to debate people who base their opinions on feelings/faith (think religion).

Thankfully, I've had some pretty great professors from nYc who were able to verbalize their opinions of the city in more diverse and concrete manner. It's actually helped me "see" the city in a more vivid light.

Anyhow, this tower is much like an Angelino who picks up and moves to New York or any other city. They may adapt and like their new home, but you'll be damned to ever take the California out of them. And that's okay. This kind of thing has been happening for an extremely long time now.

[rich_200]

Those views from the top are really cool

[BStyles]

Beekman from those last pictures suddenly reminds me of the Bank Of America tower in Los Angeles.

[evanmack]

That's some of the biggest bullshit I've ever heard :haha:. A building's character relies totally on its design and context with other buildings. It doesn't take much to "understand" that. Special to new york? This would fit in with Chicago and just about any other city, because although the facade is unique, the design is truly far from it. A lot of cities have their own "brand" of architecture. New York doesn't anymore. The buildings going up in new york could fit nearly anywhere else now.

No,no,no,no,no. This would definitely NOT fit in any other city. Every building/skyscraper would only fit in New York because of the limited space. How does New York not have it's own brand of architecture???? Have you seen the buildings that have been built recently? They are built in every crook and nanny. The only reasonable amount of space is WTC site and I guess LIC. Your right every building relies totally on its design and context. If the Beekman is SoCal Formalism or some type of it. It doesn't matter because New York is the capital of the world and the world makes New York. Plus, you think Gehry just wanted to leave his footprint on New York. You think he designed Beekman without any inspiration from New York? I don't think so. As a New Yorker who visits friends in New Jersey, California, and Conn. who have low tolerance of anything I say that has to do with New York and think that I am egotistical. You think all the New Yorkers on this forum think they are special? There are over 8 million people in New York and I certainly do not feel special to be a New Yorker. I feel lucky. Especially when I get to see all the great architecture around me and when I've been to Philly, Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco to know that is different.

[hunser]

it's so pleasing to visit this particular thread and watch the cladding being finished! great pics everyone.

[Ottawade]

This building is so fantastic and turned out as amazing as the renderings depicted it. Can't wait to walk across the Brooklyn Bridge towards it next time I visit NYC.

[Bucktown718]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4114/4914774463_280b3ff171_o.jpg
andrew mace (http://www.flickr.com/photos/acmace/)

[alex1]

No,no,no,no,no. This would definitely NOT fit in any other city. Every building/skyscraper would only fit in New York because of the limited space. How does New York not have it's own brand of architecture???? Have you seen the buildings that have been built recently? They are built in every crook and nanny. The only reasonable amount of space is WTC site and I guess LIC. Your right every building relies totally on its design and context. If the Beekman is SoCal Formalism or some type of it. It doesn't matter because New York is the capital of the world and the world makes New York. Plus, you think Gehry just wanted to leave his footprint on New York. You think he designed Beekman without any inspiration from New York? I don't think so. As a New Yorker who visits friends in New Jersey, California, and Conn. who have low tolerance of anything I say that has to do with New York and think that I am egotistical. You think all the New Yorkers on this forum think they are special? There are over 8 million people in New York and I certainly do not feel special to be a New Yorker. I feel lucky. Especially when I get to see all the great architecture around me and when I've been to Philly, Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco to know that is different.

Is this supposed to be tongue-in-cheak?

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

yesterday

http://i810.photobucket.com/albums/zz27/skyscrapersofnewyork/DSCN3910.jpg?t=1282507327

[patriotizzy]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4114/4914774463_280b3ff171_o.jpg
andrew mace (http://www.flickr.com/photos/acmace/)

Do you have a 1080p version of that picture? I'd love to use it as my wallpaper. Send me a message if you do :D

[nycdagreatest]

roccocell (http://www.flickr.com/photos/roccocell/4917817752/) http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4917817752_d5942122c8_o.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/4917816962_dfbd831186_o.jpg

[Bucktown718]

Do you have a 1080p version of that picture? I'd love to use it as my wallpaper. Send me a message if you do :D

Well i didn't take that picture. It was shot by Andrew Mace as you could see i credited him below the pic and if you check his Flickr account he has (2048 x 1359) version

To make things easier just click HERE (http://www.flickr.com/photos/acmace/4914774463/sizes/o/) for the (2048 x 1359) version

[Ordo_]

http://images5a.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63398%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B63%3B938734%3Bnu0mrj
~SkyscrapersOfNewYork (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=4955220&postcount=3030)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2053/2134152409_1796d860f8_z.jpg?zz=1 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sp8254/2134152409/)
LA Icon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sp8254/2134152409/) by SP8254 (http://www.flickr.com/people/sp8254/), on Flickr



http://images5b.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63274%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B643%3C93834%3Bnu0mrj
~SkyscrapersOfNewYork (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=4955220&postcount=3030)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2124/2038455876_e2f457698e_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/danferrara/2038455876/)
DSC_0636 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/danferrara/2038455876/) by Dan10956 (http://www.flickr.com/people/danferrara/), on Flickr

[wrab]

^ Good eye - I noticed that too.

[NYguy]

http://images5a.snapfish.com/232323232%7Ffp63398%3Enu%3D65%3B%3A%3E74%3B%3E25%3A%3EWSNRCG%3D32%3B63%3B938734%3Bnu0mrj
~SkyscrapersOfNewYork (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=4955220&postcount=3030)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2053/2134152409_1796d860f8_z.jpg?zz=1 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sp8254/2134152409/)
LA Icon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/sp8254/2134152409/) by SP8254 (http://www.flickr.com/people/sp8254/), on Flickr


Doesn't really do it for me...:hahano:


But if you want to compare, the GE/RCA comes to mind...old New York classic meets new New York classic.

GE photo from FromTheNorth (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fromthenorth/3578578648/sizes/z/in/photostream/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3561/3578578648_82f406efa6_z.jpg__http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756055-T800600.jpg

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Doesn't really do it for me...:hahano:


But if you want to compare, the GE/RCA comes to mind...old New York classic meets new New York classic.

GE photo from FromTheNorth (http://www.flickr.com/photos/fromthenorth/3578578648/sizes/z/in/photostream/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3561/3578578648_82f406efa6_z.jpg__http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756055-T800600.jpg

holy shit it is the GE building!!! i guess now we know where the inspiration came from.

[NYguy]

^ LOL, they could be twins from some angles...

More photos from AUGUST 21, 2010

1.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756044-T800600.jpg

2.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756045-T800600.jpg

3.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756046-T800600.jpg

4.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756047-T800600.jpg

5.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756048-T800600.jpg


http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756048.jpg

6.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756049-T800600.jpg

7.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756050-T800600.jpg


http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756050.jpg

8.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756051-T800600.jpg


http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756051.jpg

9.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756052-T800600.jpg

10.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756053-T800600.jpg

11.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756054-T800600.jpg

12.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756055-T800600.jpg

13.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756056-T800600.jpg

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

why does one part of the glass look darker?

[NYguy]

why does one part of the glass look darker?

If you mean at the top, I believe there's mechanical space behind the darker screens.

[Ordo_]

Doesn't really do it for me...:hahano:

Everyone else seems to see it...oh wait, I must be one of those "fake" New Yorkers. There is so much similar...the setbacks, the vertical window panes, columns of multi-pane windows mixed with columns of single pane, the texture of the facade, the banding on the crown of each setback, and the pleating on the crown. They are both distinctly post-modern.

But if you want to compare, the GE/RCA comes to mind...old New York classic meets new New York classic.

Except for the whole symmetry issue, both wholistically as a on on the detail level. The only thing to me that is similar are strong vertical lines, which is more of a characteristic than a style. It seems to me to be a superficial comparison.

[Roaming]

Everyone else seems to see it...oh wait, I must be one of those "fake" New Yorkers. There is so much similar...the setbacks, the vertical window panes, columns of multi-pane windows mixed with columns of single pane, the texture of the facade, the banding on the crown of each setback, and the pleating on the crown. They are both distinctly post-modern.



Except for the whole symmetry issue, both wholistically as a on on the detail level. The only thing to me that is similar are strong vertical lines, which is more of a characteristic than a style. It seems to me to be a superficial comparison.


I don't see it either. To me it looks like a modern inspiration of the GE building in NYC with those set backs. Maybe some of the windows are similar but the setbacks are not all similar either with the Library tower. I really don't think anyone will get an inspiration of such 'boring' LA tower to create a masterpiece like the Beekman. :frog:

[QuarterMileSidewalk]

Oh, my gosh, you NY vs. LA people are so funny!

Guys... Ghery is from LA... and he designed a skyscraper for New York...

Is it not readily apparent that the building has been heavily influenced by both places? ...And it's completely awesome on its own, too! I'm just dying here, reading the back-and-forth!

Yes! It looks a lot like 30 Rock!
(If you don't see that, maybe it's because you're not from New York, so you wouldn't understand, because it's a New York thing. :rolleyes:)

Yes! It looks a lot like Library Tower!
(If you don't see that, maybe it's because you're not from LA, so you wouldn't understand, because it's an LA thing. :rolleyes:)

C'mon!

(besides, in terms of massing, I think it is more similar to Library Tower than Rockefeller, because 30 Rock's setbacks only occur, for the most part, from the front of the building towards the back. The sides don't step in until the very top, and the very bottom, unlike Library Tower and Beekman Place, where the setbacks occur on all four sides, and three sides, respectively, and at varied heights. Also, stylistically, the Beekman is WAY more postmodern than Art Deco. But, I'm a biased Californian, and I'm just causing trouble, which is really fun! :D)

[Upward]

I love this tower. I can't believe I haven't managed to see it up close yet, having been to NYC 5 times in the past year (yes, I now live in the Hudson Valley). It doesn't really remind me of the Library Tower; I guess you can find angles where, as a silhouette, it's similar, but that's not saying much as it's easy to make something resemble something else generally unlike it by squashing 3 dimensions to 2.

One thing I don't like it is the way it blocks views of Woolworth from the Brooklyn Bridge. Not really a fair criticism, though, since NYC architecture has never been about preserving the view of one building from another (and I guess those in the know would say that no urban architecture should). But, that was a nice view on another of my favorite buildings.

[JSsocal]

^ LOL, they could be twins from some angles...

More photos from AUGUST 21, 2010

10.
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756053-T800600.jpg


Look at the new cladding at the bottom where the elevator was, you can already see this tower's getting dirty.

So how are they going to clean the facade?
Are they?

[patriotizzy]

Well i didn't take that picture. It was shot by Andrew Mace as you could see i credited him below the pic and if you check his Flickr account he has (2048 x 1359) version

To make things easier just click HERE (http://www.flickr.com/photos/acmace/4914774463/sizes/o/) for the (2048 x 1359) version

Thank you kind sir, you are awesome :D

[wrab]

Look at the new cladding at the bottom where the elevator was, you can already see this tower's getting dirty.

So how are they going to clean the facade?
Are they?

i'm not sure that what you see at the base isn't just an ambient reflection from an adjacent building.

Anyway, stainless steel is resilient stuff. The stainless steel cladding on the Beekman is not very different from that on the Chrysler Building or on the Gateway Arch in St Louis. Stainless doesn't require a whole lot of regular intensive cleaning the way that some other materials might.

[QuarterMileSidewalk]

:previous:

Funny you should mention that:

SLToday.com: Gateway Arch showing rust and decay (http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/article_75095ba4-2d7d-5811-b4f9-a7ce769ddb0d.html)


...If you read the article, you'll see that it's obviously very different from the Beekman... but I'm just sayin'. The stainless looks glorious when it's clean, and will stay that way for decades, but it's a severe pain to shine up when it does get dirty.

[KevinFromTexas]

This has to be one of the best looking new buildings. I wouldn't really call it beautiful, it just looks wicked. And yes, I've noticed the likeness between it and the Library Tower. It also really reminds me of the Chrysler Building because of the facade material. I hadn't noticed the GE Building resemblance.

[JSsocal]

i'm not sure that what you see at the base isn't just an ambient reflection from an adjacent building.

Anyway, stainless steel is resilient stuff. The stainless steel cladding on the Beekman is not very different from that on the Chrysler Building or on the Gateway Arch in St Louis. Stainless doesn't require a whole lot of regular intensive cleaning the way that some other materials might.

Hmm... you're sure cause the area I'm pointing to is the area now being cladded in the straight line up where the construction elevator was. The column looks quite clean while the adjacent pieces are a noticeably different color.

(reposted for new page)
http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18586/756055-T800600.jpg

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

when you look at it closely the top is slightly shinier than the bottom

[KevinFromTexas]

I think that's just perspective. Unless you're talking about the setbacks creating a narrower shaft.

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

I think that's just perspective. Unless you're talking about the setbacks creating a narrower shaft.

no i mean the oldr clad just looks a lil dirtier

[Onn]

jan murphey (http://www.flickr.com/photos/34773539@N03/page2/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4924749341_e89e4f771e_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4075/4924773835_708aa21da0_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4121/4924789679_7f70c227d2_b.jpg

[NYguy]

I don't see it either. To me it looks like a modern inspiration of the GE building in NYC with those set backs. Maybe some of the windows are similar but the setbacks are not all similar either with the Library tower.

I don't see it at all. It may be vague, at best. But then I would have to compare it to a few others. I think it has more in common with the Chase Manhattan a couple of blocks away than the Library Tower. But it's similarities to the GE are unmistakable.


Jonas Savartberg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jonasvartberg/4924473691/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4075/4924473691_78c8715496_b.jpg

[J_M_Tungsten]

wow!!!!! I havent checked this in while, and look, its almost done. wahoooooo. Looks amazing!!!

[sterlingdetroit101]

the base serves a different purpose though, than the rest of the building.

[Bucktown718]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4143/4924595450_6d36938a3b_b.jpg
MacDawg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/macdawg/)

[nycdagreatest]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4119/4927838797_4d83d9173e_o.jpg severalseconds (http://www.flickr.com/photos/severalseconds/4927838797/)

[Onn]

The new guard and the old guard, constructed almost exactly 100 years apart.

[sterlippo1]

The new guard and the old guard, constructed almost exactly 100 years apart.

that's what makes NY so incredible...........so many views of the old and new in one shot. i was there 2 weeks ago and am already itching to get back. I'm thankful to be from an area (Boston) that is close enough that i can still get my fill with out too much problem or planning:tup:

[NYguy]

If you take Foster's original WTC towers, and crossed them with Beekman, you get:

http://www.fosterandpartners.com/content/projects/1210/51987.jpg
fosterandpartners.com

+

http://multifamilyinvestor.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/Beekman-Tower.jpg

=

http://worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=14559
http://static.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/14559_1_20606%20-%20Sheet%20View%20Hote-small.jpg

[Onn]

that's what makes NY so incredible...........so many views of the old and new in one shot.

And it shows an economically healthy city going back 100 years straight. There aren't many cities in the world today which can make that claim.

[hunser]

simply beautiful ...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4118/4932595537_d90bb0f392_b.jpg

kbmamba2713 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/44097298@N05/4932595537/#/)

[Dac150]

Turned out wonderful; what a truly great addition to have!

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

Woe, it seems that cladding is basicly done. NYC's and America's tallest residential skyscraper will be complete soon! :cheers:

[Onn]

Woe, it seems that cladding is basicly done. NYC's and America's tallest residential skyscraper will be complete soon! :cheers:

No the Trump and John Hancock are taller in Chicago.

But yes, I'm so glad to finally see this one topped out and cladded out. It almost didn't happen, what a loss that would have been! Terrific Building! :D

[wrab]

And it shows an economically healthy city going back 100 years straight. There aren't many cities in the world today which can make that claim.

.....Except for that near-bankruptcy in the 1970s.....


No the Trump and John Hancock are taller in Chicago.

Trump and Hancock are both mixed-use; the lower floors of Hancock are office space, and the lower floors of Trump are a hotel.

[Onn]

.....Except for that near-bankruptcy in the 1970s.....

But hey - the flip side was that rents went down, and a lot of penny-poor creative types were able to move to the city.

Yeah but things were still built during that time, like the original WTC Towers, Citigroup Center, and One Penn Plaza.

[Onn]

Everyone ready for this one...prepare your eyes to get vaporized! :stunned:





Tectonic, Wired New York

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4099/4935395402_7303ecb450_b.jpg

[NYC4Life]

Those shots of the tower still seem to resemble a computer generated rendering rather than an actual built tower. This building is that good!

[nycdagreatest]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4094/4932519416_20f0dde109_b.jpg mbenphoto (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mbenphoto/4932519416/)

[plinko]

I don't see the Library Tower reference at all (I say this as a Southern California resident and native).

I think the basic form of the building is indeed classic New York. A Hugh Ferris sketch wearing a drape if you will. Personally I think the form of the building evokes the Irving Trust at 1 Wall Street, essentially tripled in plan.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v202/plinko923/NYC/071103-1104NEWYORK533.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4078/4903094953_95da3bbaf4_b.jpg
Photo credit: John Flint (this thread)

While I'm still undecided on whether I like the building or not (I always reserve that judgement till I see it for myself), I can certainly see the pre-war architectural language that Gehry has used here. And even if in the end I decide that the tower just doesn't do it for me, I can at least appreciate the thought behind it and the really interesting exploration in vertical facade design.

[uaarkson]

This is the first truly beautiful building built in the last 10 years. It is simply magnificent in person, I almost teared up when viewing it from the street below.

[NYguy]

I don't see the Library Tower reference at all (I say this as a Southern California resident and native).

I think the basic form of the building is indeed classic New York. A Hugh Ferris sketch wearing a drape if you will. Personally I think the form of the building evokes the Irving Trust at 1 Wall Street, essentially tripled in plan.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v202/plinko923/NYC/071103-1104NEWYORK533.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4078/4903094953_95da3bbaf4_b.jpg
Photo credit: John Flint (this thread)

While I'm still undecided on whether I like the building or not (I always reserve that judgement till I see it for myself), I can certainly see the pre-war architectural language that Gehry has used here. And even if in the end I decide that the tower just doesn't do it for me, I can at least appreciate the thought behind it and the really interesting exploration in vertical facade design.

It's in the spirit...

http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/19256/765737-T800600.jpg


http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/19256/765738-T800600.jpg


http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/19256/765739-T800600.jpg


This building adds to the skyline in another way...

pmarella (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pmarella/4937071360/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4140/4937071360_2a85efee12_b.jpg


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4118/4937065250_08b2afb9c9_b.jpg

[OneWorldTradeCenter]

No the Trump and John Hancock are taller in Chicago.

But yes, I'm so glad to finally see this one topped out and cladded out. It almost didn't happen, what a loss that would have been! Terrific Building! :D

I thought about the tallest all-residential buildings. Trump and John Hancok are mixed-use.

[wrab]

^ That is correct. Hancock has office space and Trump has a hotel.

-----

..... A Hugh Ferris sketch wearing a drape.....

Plinko, that is an astute description. Toss in something about a drink or a cigarette and you'd have an epigram.

[Onn]

I thought about the tallest all-residential buildings. Trump and John Hancok are mixed-use.

And so is Beekman, it has a school in it. :)

[NYguy]

NYMAN2010 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/51949497@N08/4937593446/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4937593446_4693716311_b.jpg

[BStyles]

Wow, it's the shiniest skyscraper in Lower Manhattan!:haha:

[mfastx]

I like this tower. Really stands out when driving towards Manhattan from the east/west.

[Onn]

emmafern (http://www.flickr.com/photos/emmafern/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4080/4940579610_08c6a1c390_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4073/4939993323_d7f1f3d6d5_b.jpg

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4939996799_59c03c20da_b.jpg


Now someone just needs to get to work on that reclad of the Verizon building...

[colemonkee]

And their laundry.

[NYC4Life]

Tower looks like a rocket that's about to blast off.

[NOPA]

What a great addition to the city. It looks great with the facade almost entirely done!

[patriotizzy]

Now someone just needs to get to work on that reclad of the Verizon building...

I vote on tearing it down and have everyone in there move into one of the WTC buildings :D

[QuarterMileSidewalk]

^YES.

Now I see what you mean, in comparing Beekman to 1 Wall St. Especially in the crown, that is an unmistakeable similarity.

...And this page has some of the finest skyline shots of downtown I've ever seen! Simply glorious. I can't say it enough!

[BStyles]

I vote on tearing it down and have everyone in there move into one of the WTC buildings :D

They can't reclad it, and they can't tear it down. It's apparently landmarked.

[JSsocal]

375 Pearl Street is not landmarked, no way in hell. Don't get this Verizon building confused with the very beautiful verizon building next to the wtc.