[pico44]

You gotta love and hate New York at the same time. Here you have a picture of the greatest skyscraper built in the United States since the Seagram Building...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v202/plinko923/NYC%20-%20NYTT/071103-1104NEWYORK904.jpg




and two posts later (and a block away) a rendering of the ugliest skyscraper, in well.... perhaps ever.


http://www.pbase.com/image/77288440.jpg

[NYguy]

You gotta love and hate New York at the same time. Here you have a picture of the greatest skyscraper built in the United States since the Seagram Building...

I'm not one to bash other people's opinions. ;) But c'mon...

I don't know what the greatest skyscraper built since then is, but surely this isn't it.

[Nowhereman1280]

I'm not one to bash other people's opinions. ;) But c'mon...

I don't know what the greatest skyscraper built since then is, but surely this isn't it.

John Hancock Building??? Its like a modernist Chrysler building, not the tallest, but definitely the crowning masterpiece of its style.

Heck I would say that the old WTC is better than NYTT and you have to admit that it wasn't the greatest design in the world, it was at least ok, probably good, but it wasn't jaw dropping (from a aesthetic perspective, obviously it was impressive, but it was kinda ugly). I would say the same about this building, its at least ok, I would say good, but its in no way revolutionary and certainly not jaw-dropping stunning.

[Dac150]

I'm not one to bash other people's opinions. ;) But c'mon...
I don't know what the greatest skyscraper built since then is, but surely this isn't it.

Well when you take into consideration that the Seagram, UN, and Lever house were all drawing negative viewpoints then as the NYTT is now, perhaps a few decades down the road, the NYTT will be more widely respected and liked.

Not that it is the poster child for an architectural concept that will revolutionize how skyscrapers are built (Seagram-Glass box), but the design is very innovative and different from anything ever built.

[Fabb]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v202/plinko923/NYC%20-%20NYTT/071103-1104NEWYORK795.jpg

^That's a building that doesn't try to hide its height.
I actually looks like a 50+ story tower. When was the last time that happened in NY ?

[CoolCzech]

I think Piano conceived of this design as an ironic reference to The Times's nickname, "The Grey Lady."

Who'd a thought Renzo Piano was a NY Post man??

[NYguy]

That's a building that doesn't try to hide its height.
I actually looks like a 50+ story tower. When was the last time that happened in NY ?

This building is over 1,000 ft tall, and you say it doesn't hide its height? Somehow, I don't get that vibe.

The fact that it towers over an empty lot and a bus station is the only thing that makes it appear tall to me. I've seen shorter buildings go up in the past few years that look taller.

[NYguy]

Well when you take into consideration that the Seagram, UN, and Lever house were all drawing negative viewpoints then as the NYTT is now, perhaps a few decades down the road, the NYTT will be more widely respected and liked.

These people would probably agree with you...

http://www.pbase.com/image/77288440.jpg

[Dac150]

^^^^^^^

No doubt they would. But it all factors into opinion. I personally do not like the design of that hotel, but that's not to say a few decades from now it will not be looked upon as innovative. It's different, at least for Manhattan.

[Fabb]

This building is over 1,000 ft tall, and you say it doesn't hide its height? Somehow, I don't get that vibe.

I never considered it a thousand footer.

I just say that it has the same magnitude as Condé Nast, Bear Stearns, Time Warner Center, Bloomberg tower and 7WTC, but, unlike those buildings, it doesn't hide its height.

Soaring, vertical lines, clear identification of floors, it rises sheer from base to top, that's what I call honest verticality.

[Tom Servo]

This building is over 1,000 ft tall

dude, come on...

[Dac150]

I just say that it has the same magnitude as Condé Nast, Bear Stearns, Time Warner Center, Bloomberg tower and 7WTC, but, unlike those buildings, it doesn't hide its height.

I would take Bear Sterns out of that group.

[Dac150]

dude, come on...

Come on nothing. The building is over 1,000 ft, said and done.

[Tom Servo]

Come on nothing. The building is over 1,000 ft, said and done.

uh huh... :sly: when a person is standing on the roof, how many feet off the ground are they? i forget...
*EDIT* nevermind... i don't want to start this again...

[Dac150]

uh huh... :sly: when a person is standing on the roof, how many feet off the ground are they? i forget...
*EDIT* nevermind... i don't want to start this again...

Please don't because it'll be a never ending battle.

[Tom Servo]

Please don't because it'll be a never ending battle.

tell me about it... this has been a hot topic for the CTBUH for how long now?

[Dac150]

tell me about it... this has been a hot topic for the CTBUH for how long now?

I believe it all comes down to personal preferance. Some people agree and others don't. Back and forth, back and forth.

[aluminum]

The spire is so freakin' thin, you can't even see it properly beyond some distance in daylight. All you notice is a beautiful gray box with nothing on the top of it. [ just trying to break the adrian-dac-adrian-dac chain...]

[antinimby]

I think Piano conceived of this design as an ironic reference to The Times's nickname, "The Grey Lady."
Who'd a thought Renzo Piano was a NY Post man??Actually, I remembering reading several years back (don't ask me where because I won't and probably wouldn't be able to locate it again anyway) that the gray was decided by the Times.

Piano's choice of color originally was white but the Times wanted gray and so now we've got all the gray we can handle.

[Dac150]

White....that's an interesting choice. I couldn't picture this building in any other color than grey. NYT made a good choice.

[DowntownCharlieBrown]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v202/plinko923/NYC%20-%20NYTT/071103-1104NEWYORK795.jpg
Photo Credt: Plinko

^That's a building that doesn't try to hide its height.
I actually looks like a 50+ story tower. When was the last time that happened in NY ?

Soaring, vertical lines, clear identification of floors, it rises sheer from base to top, that's what I call honest verticality.


I completely agree with you, Fab, and this picture perfectly shows what you are talking about. And the fact that you can’t see the spire in this picture, the building is showing you its true height.

I love this building! :tup:

[zilfondel]

Renzo Piano sure can design sexy buildings. Look at that money shot!

[Jularc]

By Dustin's Pictures (http://www.flickr.com/photos/worldpics/)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2098/2029678998_ad47789b12_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2085/2028875811_42aa47a032_b.jpg

[Dac150]

I think it fits in perfectly.

[aluminum]

^ of course.

[Fabb]

It keeps a safe distance to the cacophony of Times Square. The message is clear : it's part of the family, but it holds a special place in it.

[pico44]

What a beautiful photograph. What a beautiful building.

[Dr. Taco]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2098/2029678998_ad47789b12_b.jpg

the more light you can see coming from the inside, the better this building looks. ie. the darker it gets outside, the better. It just doesn't look good in the daytime, but it really blends in at night.

Also, that stupid conde nast pole looks really industrial. Its the worst part of every skyline shot featuring NYTT :yuck:

but yeah, nytt looks very good here :cool:

[Dac150]

Also, that stupid conde nast pole looks really industrial. Its the worst part of every skyline shot featuring NYTT :yuck:

The Conde Nast Building is perhaps the most iconic building built in Manhattan since the WTC. That pole is classic. I love it.

(Chrysler, ESB, WTC, Citigroup, Conde Nast)- the NY skyline icon club.

[Dr. Taco]

^ I really can't say anything constructive in response. Its just one of those "IMO" cases. But I'm glad you like it :cool:

[FastFerrari82]

Very nice box, with an unique clad on it. But can someone tell me it that spire is for communication purposes?

[Dac150]

Very nice box, with an unique clad on it. But can someone tell me it that spire is for communication purposes?

"Very nice box"- the NYTT is not a box.
"Spire purpose"- decorative.

[Patrick]

The Conde Nast Building is perhaps the most iconic building built in Manhattan since the WTC. That pole is classic. I love it.

(Chrysler, ESB, WTC, Citigroup, Conde Nast)- the NY skyline icon club.

I disagree, just cause its tall and has a really tall antenna dosnt make it iconic. The World Financial Center or Metlife Building are MUCH more Iconic than 4 Times Square.

Chrysler, ESB, WTC, thats the NYC skyline icon club.
Woolworth, GE, Citigroup, WFC, United Nations, and Metlife can join too.

[Dac150]

I disagree, just cause its tall and has a really tall antenna dosnt make it iconic. The World Financial Center or Metlife Building are MUCH more Iconic than 4 Times Square.

Chrysler, ESB, WTC, thats the NYC skyline icon club.
Woolworth, GE, Citigroup, WFC, United Nations, and Metlife can join too.

Your not understanding what I mean. Skyline wise, the ESB, Chrysler, Conde Nast, Citigroup, and the WTC stick out the most. The buildings you listed are all more iconic than Conde, but do not jump out at you in the skyline. That is why on all NYC delivery trucks, private bus companies, etc.. that have the NYC skyline as part of their logo, always have the buildings I listed in addtion to random boxes. People see them and automatically think to themselves 'NY.'

[NYguy]

It keeps a safe distance to the cacophony of Times Square. The message is clear : it's part of the family, but it holds a special place in it.

Not for long.

[NYguy]

NOVEMBER 17, 2007

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89206426/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89206434/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89206435/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89206437/medium.jpg

[CoolCzech]

Not for long.


True - the best thing about this tower is that soon it will be overwhelmed by the Westside development:yes:

[NYguy]

Photo and article from the NY Times

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/20/arts/20time2_lg.jpg

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/arts/design/20time.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion&oref=slogin

Pride and Nostalgia Mix in The Times’s New Home

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/20/arts/timespan.jpg

The heart of the newspaper is the main newsroom, on the second, third and fourth floors, topped by a skylight and linked by stairways, with a wraparound balcony on the highest level.

By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF
November 20, 2007

Writing about your employer’s new building is a tricky task. If I love it, the reader will suspect that I’m currying favor with the man who signs my checks. If I hate it, I’m just flaunting my independence.

So let me get this out of the way: As an employee, I’m enchanted with our new building on Eighth Avenue. The grand old 18-story neo-Gothic structure on 43rd Street, home to The New York Times for nearly a century, had its sentimental charms. But it was a depressing place to work. Its labyrinthine warren of desks and piles of yellowing newspapers were redolent of tradition but also seemed an anachronism.

The new 52-story building between 40th and 41st Streets, designed by the Italian architect Renzo Piano, is a paradise by comparison. A towering composition of glass and steel clad in a veil of ceramic rods, it delivers on Modernism’s age-old promise to drag us — in this case, The Times — out of the Dark Ages.

I enjoy gazing up at the building’s sharp edges and clean lines when I emerge from the subway exit at 40th Street and Seventh Avenue in the morning. I love being greeted by the cluster of silvery birch trees in the lobby atrium, their crooked trunks sprouting from a soft blanket of moss. I even like my fourth-floor cubicle, an oasis of calm overlooking the third-floor newsroom.

Yet the spanking new building is infused with its own nostalgia.

The last decade has been a time of major upheaval in newspaper journalism, with editors and reporters fretting about how they should adapt to the global digital age. In New York that anxiety has been compounded by the terrorist attacks of 2001, which prompted many corporations to barricade themselves inside gilded fortresses.

Mr. Piano’s building is rooted in a more comforting time: the era of corporate Modernism that reached its apogee in New York in the 1950s and 60s. If he has gently updated that ethos for the Internet age, the building is still more a paean to the past than to the future.

What makes a great New York skyscraper? The greatest of them tug at our heartstrings. We seek them out in the skyline, both to get our bearings and to anchor ourselves psychologically in the life of the city.

Mr. Piano’s tower is unlikely to inspire that kind of affection. The building’s most original feature is a scrim of horizontal ceramic rods that diffuses sunlight and lends the exterior a clean, uniform appearance. Mr. Piano used a similar screening system for his 1997 Debis Tower for Daimler-Benz in Berlin, to mixed results. For The Times, he spent months adjusting the rods’ color and scale, and in the early renderings they had a lovely, ethereal quality.

Viewed from a side street today, they have the precision and texture of a finely tuned machine. But despite the architect’s best efforts, the screens look flat and lifeless in the skyline. The uniformity of the bars gives them a slightly menacing air, and the problem is compounded by the battleship gray of the tower’s steel frame. Their dull finish deprives the facades of an enlivening play of light and shadow.

The tower’s crown is also disappointing. To hide the rooftop’s mechanical equipment and create the impression that the tower is dissolving into the sky, Mr. Piano extended the screens a full six stories past the top of the building’s frame. Yet the effect is ragged and unfinished. Rather than gathering momentum as it rises, the tower seems to fizzle.

But if the building is less than spectacular in the skyline, it comes to life when it hits the ground. All of Mr. Piano’s best qualities are in evidence here — the fine sense of proportion, the love of structural detail, the healthy sense of civic responsibility.

The architect’s goal is to blur the boundary between inside and out, between the life of the newspaper and the life of the street. The lobby is encased entirely in glass, and its transparency plays delightfully against the muscular steel beams and spandrels that support the soaring tower.

People entering the building from Eighth Avenue can glance past rows of elevator banks all the way to the fairy tale atrium garden and beyond, to the plush red interior of TheTimesCenter auditorium. From the auditorium, you gaze back through the trees to the majestic lobby space. In effect, the lobby itself is a continuous public performance.

The sense of transparency is reinforced by the people streaming through the lobby. The flow recalls the dynamic energy of Grand Central Terminal’s Great Hall or the Rockefeller Center plaza, proud emblems of early-20th-century mobility.

Architecturally, however, The New York Times Building owes its greatest debt to postwar landmarks like Skidmore, Owings & Merrill’s Lever House or Mies van der Rohe’s Seagram Building — designs that came to embody the progressive values and industrial power of a triumphant America. Their streamlined glass-and-steel forms proclaimed a faith in machine-age efficiency and an open, honest, democratic society.

Newspaper journalism, too, is part of that history. Transparency, independence, the free flow of information, moral clarity, objective truth — these notions took hold and flourished in the last century at papers like The Times. To many this idealism reached its pinnacle in the period stretching from the civil rights movement to the Vietnam War to Watergate, when journalists grew accustomed to speaking truth to power, and the public could still accept reporters as impartial observers.

This longing for an idealistic time permeates the main newsroom. Pierced by a double-height skylight well on the third and fourth floors, the newsroom has a cool, insular feel even as the facades of the surrounding buildings press in from the north and south. The well functions as a center of gravity, focusing attention on the paper’s nerve center. From many of the desks you also enjoy a view of the delicate branches of the atrium’s birch trees.

Internal staircases link the various newsroom floors to encourage interaction. The work cubicles are flanked by rows of glass-enclosed offices, many of which are unassigned so that they can be used for private phone conversations or spontaneous meetings. Informal groupings of tables and chairs are also scattered about, creating a variety of social spaces.

From the higher floors, which house the corporate offices of The Times and 22 floors belonging to the developer Forest City Ratner, the views become more expansive. Cars rush up along Eighth Avenue. Billboards and electronic signs loom from all directions. By the time you reach the 14th-floor cafeteria, the entire city begins to come into focus, with dazzling views to the north, south, east and west. A long, narrow balcony is suspended within the cafeteria’s double-height space, reinforcing the impression that you’re floating in the Midtown skyline.

Many of my colleagues complained about the building at first. There’s too much empty space in the newsroom, some groused; they missed the intimacy of the old one. The glass offices look sterile, and no one will use them, some said.

I suspect they’ll all adjust. One of the joys of working in an ambitious new building is that you can watch its personality develop. From week to week, you see more and more lone figures chatting on cellphones in the small glass offices with their feet atop a table. And even my grumpiest colleagues now concede that a little sunlight and fresh air are not a bad thing.

Even so, you never feel that the building embraces the future wholeheartedly. Rather than move beyond the past, Mr. Piano has fine-tuned it. The most contemporary features — the computerized louvers and blinds that regulate the flow of light into the interiors — are technological innovations rather than architectural ones; the regimented rows of identical wood-paneled cubicles chosen by the interior design firm Gensler could be a stage set for a 2007 remake of “All the President’s Men,” minus the 1970s hairstyles.

Maybe this accounts for the tower’s slight whiff of melancholy.

Few of today’s most influential architects buy into straightforward notions of purity or openness. Having witnessed an older generation’s mostly futile quest to effect social change through architecture, they opt for the next best thing: to expose, through their work, the psychic tensions and complexities that their elders sublimated. By bringing warring forces to the surface, they reason, a building will present a franker reading of contemporary life.

Journalism, too, has moved on. Reality television, anonymous bloggers, the threat of ideologically driven global media enterprises — such forces have undermined newspapers’ traditional mission. Even as journalists at The Times adjust to their new home, they worry about the future. As advertising inches decline, the paper is literally shrinking; its page width was reduced in August. And some doubt that newspapers will even exist in print form a generation from now.

Depending on your point of view, the Times Building can thus be read as a poignant expression of nostalgia or a reassertion of the paper’s highest values as it faces an uncertain future. Or, more likely, a bit of both.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/20/arts/20time4_lg.jpg

The 14th-floor cafeteria of the Times building offers expansive views.


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/20/arts/20time3_lg.jpg

An enclosed garden of birch trees and moss greets visitors to the lobby and TheTimesCenter auditorium.

[Antares41]

I never officially stated an opinion of this bldging. But, today I am ready to say I love it. It has it faults and the article above was accurate IMO in pointing them out. But on balance still more to love than to hate.

[vaporvr6]

the interior is quite beautiful. I like it!

[NYguy]

the interior is quite beautiful. I like it!

The interior is nice. But the building is a horror best viewed at night.

[Fabb]

The tower’s crown is also disappointing. To hide the rooftop’s mechanical equipment and create the impression that the tower is dissolving into the sky, Mr. Piano extended the screens a full six stories past the top of the building’s frame. Yet the effect is ragged and unfinished. Rather than gathering momentum as it rises, the tower seems to fizzle.


That's true.
Is it too late to fix it ?
The projected garden on top of the roof was not such a bad idea afer all.

[NYguy]

That's true. Is it too late to fix it ?
The projected garden on top of the roof was not such a bad idea afer all.

They're not gonna revise it based on an architectural review.

[CoolCzech]

I read that review of the building today, too...

It seems that Ouroussoff damns the building for an inept top and muddled facade made all the worse by the ghastly gray color scheme... and then spends the rest of the article trying to convince himself he likes the thing anyway.

[Jularc]

By therach488 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/16972749@N08/)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2129/2051319055_f2a308fd4c_b.jpg

[CoolCzech]

^Perfect illustration of Ouroussoff's critique:

Note the total mess that is the tower's crown, the ghastly grey pallor of the facade, and the way the entire surface of the tower seems dissolve into featureless, incredibly bland planes...

[NYguy]

Now that they have finally, (finally!) finished work on the sidewalks, it feels great being able to navigate around that small plaza. Finally, the sidewalk (very precious to New Yorkers) is ours again.

[NYguy]

http://in.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idINL2135459220071123

Italy architect unfazed by criticism over NYT's HQ

Fri Nov 23, 2007
By Paola Italiano

TURIN, Italy (Reuters Life!) - Italian architect Renzo Piano has shrugged off criticism over his design of the new headquarters for the New York Times, calling it healthy freedom of expression at the U.S. newspaper.

Times critic Nicolai Ouroussoff attacked Piano's 52-story glass-and-steel tower in Manhattan this week by saying it had a "menacing air" and "dull finish".

But Genoa-born Piano, who rose to international fame in the 1970s for sharing the design of the Pompidou Centre in Paris with British architect Richard Rogers, defended Ouroussoff's right to express his opinion.

"I know him (Ouroussoff) very well. He has often criticized my projects, sometimes more, sometimes less," Piano told reporters on the sideline of an event on Wednesday.

"But up with criticism and up with freedom! It's also interesting to see how at the New York Times an architecture critic can criticize his own paper."

Piano's international achievements range from the reconstruction of Berlin's Potsdamer Platz to the Kansai International Airport Terminal in Osaka, Japan.

His latest project, a skyscraper for Italian bank Intesa Sanpaolo in Turin, has also come under pressure as locals say it would ruin the city's skyline.

Set against the spectacular backdrop of the Italian Alps, Turin is dominated by the spiky 19th-century Mole Antonelliana, a 550-feet-high brick building that has become the city's hallmark.

"What really bothers me is to see some grotesque reproductions of the project," Piano said.

"My building is not, as someone has portrayed it, twice as tall as the Mole. It's 177-metres (584-feet) tall and the Alps are miles away. I don't understand what's the problem."

Piano said that he accepted the Turin project as he was intrigued by the possibility of making it an environmentally sustainable building.

(Additional reporting by Lisa Jucca, editing by Paul Casciato)

[CoolCzech]

It would be interesting to hear Piano critique how his building turned out... was THIS really what he expected?

[NYguy]

NOVEMBER 24, 2007

Together with the Westin on 8th Avenue...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89447537/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89447537/large.jpg

[Dac150]

The building is still not fully lit at the top.

[CGII]

For those of you who still want to criticize the brise soleil I encourage you to visit this site:

http://windows.lbl.gov/comm_perf/newyorktimes.htm

[antinimby]

November 22, 2007 by z107mat (http://flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=2058101525&size=m)

(Click on photo for larger version)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2168/2058101525_9c1916a441.jpg (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2168/2058101525_9c1916a441_b.jpg)

[CoolCzech]

For those of you who still want to criticize the brise soleil I encourage you to visit this site:

http://windows.lbl.gov/comm_perf/newyorktimes.htm

Perhaps you should forward that link to the Times's own architectural critic. :cool:

[kznyc2k]

11/25/2007

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/193/dscf0114wp4.jpg

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/5959/dscf0112hb8.jpg

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/435/dscf01151cw2.jpg

http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/5231/dscf0117ej7.jpg

so far I'm not crazy about the street-level treatment, but maybe it'll get better once some tenants move in

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/1911/dscf0128vu6.jpg

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/3726/dscf01291lz1.jpg

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/504/dscf01321wc5.jpg

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/9596/dscf01301db3.jpg

http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/1503/dscf0136hn4.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/5661/dscf0134td3.jpg

http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/5100/dscf0137zj4.jpg

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/8882/dscf0140jb2.jpg

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/2442/dscf0143fh7.jpg

[NYguy]

It's a very colorful building on the inside. I just wish it could have been more inviting on the outside.

[NYguy]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=adJnbpHv9Blk&refer=home

Piano Floods Gray Monolith for New York Times in Gorgeous Light

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iThlt9I0bnJU

By James S. Russell
Nov. 27 (Bloomberg)

Renzo Piano's beefy 52-story tower for the New York Times Co. rises from the Manhattan skyline like a lead-gray monolith. This tough, armored look is not what you expect from Piano, whose signature is usually lightness, refinement and elegance.

It adds a forbidding note to the skyline.

The Times gave up its white terra-cotta chateau-style headquarters just west of Times Square to take 26 floors of the tower it built with developer Forest City Ratner Cos. Piano, working with New York architect FX Fowle, may seem a strange choice for the raffish surroundings: the dingy, trash-strewn Port Authority Bus Terminal and the quickly fading gaiety of 42nd Street.

Piano was a safe, blue-chip choice whose reverence for public life -- every building's got a piazza -- resonated with the Times's identity. It thinks of itself as both a profit- making and a civic institution.

Piano's success in the U.S. unfortunately has trapped him in a formulaic style, and he assembles familiar Pianoisms in the Times tower. You won't find the astonishing elegance of the 1998 Debis headquarters in Berlin, his office-building masterpiece.

Metal-framed sunscreens of ceramic rods hang in front of about half of the Times building walls. An energy-saving tactic, they repel half the solar energy that would otherwise heat the window glass.

Changing Screens

They also enrich the surface. In bright light the screens look almost solid, interrupted by slit-like openings. When a shadow from a nearby tower slides across the surface, it comes alive. Stripes of indoor lighting dissolve into telegraphic patterns of dots and dashes, overlapping with shadows the rods themselves cast.

Piano slims the building girth by cutting deep recesses into the corners. He displays supporting columns, beams and diagonal tie rods that normally would be hidden. (You rarely see supporting steel because it must be wrapped in fireproofing. Piano coated the members with a special -- and costly -- fire- resistant paint.)

The transparent floor-to-ceiling glass reveals the floors within. It's as if he's pulled away the tower's skin to show its muscles and bones.

The sunscreens stop above the ground floor to reveal the lobby next to a garden with an undulating carpet of moss and a clump of birch trees -- all wrapped in veils of glass. On the sidewalk you can see all the way through from street to street. The gray lady has raised her skirts a little to backdrop the bustling lobby with the rippling flow of city life.

Beautiful Light

The building is almost prim at street level, in contrast to the belching crudeness all around. Obsessively detailed rods and hole-punched bars, reprising details from the ``high-tech'' style of 30 years ago, suspend elegant glass canopies and neatly organize signage for ground-floor stores. To preserve the views through, tenants won't be allowed to build store shelves higher than 6 feet.

Light is Piano's favorite raw material, and he conjures the most beautiful light I have ever seen in an office building. The corner recesses shape the floor into tray-like expanses surrounded on three sides by windows, so the brightness balances perfectly. Because of the sunscreens, the effect is like a softly shadowed porch -- but one that looks out at stunning city views.

Sensor-driven internal shades buzz into place when needed; under-floor air delivery gives the staff individual thermal control. Along with the handsome, light-filled stairs between floors, these details set a new standard for interiors.

Rows of Cubicles

By contrast, the cubicle layouts (by Gensler, the corporate-design megafirm), seem surprisingly regimented. Even the top editors look corralled within the cathedral-like spaciousness of the newsroom's sky-lit nerve center.

With newspapers widely thought to be dinosaurs, skeptics may say the Times has fallen victim to the edifice complex, in which companies past their prime resort to building showy corporate palaces. (The project has figured prominently in criticism by Times shareholders.)

It's a cheap shot. The best aspects of this building came from deeply considering how workplace design could aid the company in a tumultuous era. It's not a frivolous exercise but one that smart, adaptable businesses should undertake.

(James S. Russell is Bloomberg's U.S. architecture critic. The opinions expressed are his own.)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=ixfRqG3wkkAA


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iS.4YmjDlORs


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iJXdyD0zb2Hw


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=i9F9bte8i9p0


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iUrIkyQyUxHY


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iCzUB5QeO5oU
The company boardroom in New York Times Co.'s new 52-story tower in New York, seen on Aug. 17, 2007.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iTM8wlu6LupQ


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iHe04nxD3it8

[Dac150]

I love this building both in and out.

[GVNY]

I am particularly fond of the red accents within this tower.

Overall, a fantastic skyscraper!

[Patrick]

Had the crown been done right, I would have loved this tower.

[thebestdillweed]

i really want to visit this building, i have only visited two structures that piano designed and its the deails that make his buildings really stand out, i must say i do enjoy reading others bashing this structure for the things i love about it!

[NYguy]

At this point, the best thing I can say about this tower is that its like a giant nightlight when seen at night. The expansive sidewalk on 8th Avenue is also nice, a contrast to the crowded and often blocked sidewalk accross the street in front of the Port Authority Bus terminal.

[rdm]

how come no one has posted any good night shots of this tower yet?

[rdm]

i take it back

[Thefigman]

Contrary to most on the boards, I like this building.

It looks so different at various timepoints of the day. I've come to appreciate that.

[NYguy]

Saw on the news that wind broke glass on the south side of the NY Times tower.

[NYguy]

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/03/pedestrians-struck-as-high-winds-buffet-city/

Pedestrians Struck as High Winds Buffet City

By Jennifer 8. Lee
December 3, 2007

The National Weather Service has issued a wind advisory for the late afternoon and evening, warning of west winds between 23 and 28 miles per hour, with gusts as high as 45 m.p.h. There were reports of pedestrians struck by objects falling off Midtown buildings, including the new headquarters of The Times.

There have been sustained winds from 25 to 35 m.p.h. throughout the five boroughs, with Kennedy International Airport reporting winds of up to 46 m.p.h. around 1 p.m. “We do have a wind advisory out until 7 a.m. tomorrow,” said Matthew Tauber, a meteorologist with the weather service. “We are looking at these winds continuing throughout tonight.”
Wind advisories are issued when sustained winds reach between 31 and 39 m.p.h. and gusts reach between 46 and 57 m.p.h. “If they have any loose objects outside,” Mr. Tauber said, “they should secure those and bring them in. Be aware of lose tree branches and weakened trees.”

Around 3:30 p.m., a man walking on West 40th Street by The Times’s building was struck in the head by an object that fell from the building, police and fire officials said. The man, who was described by the police as in his early 30s, had a cut on his head above the eye and was being treated on the scene.

A window on the 17th floor of the building appeared to be cracked, but it was unclear what fell from the building, according to Catherine J. Mathis, a Times company spokeswoman.

The Times building, which officially opened last month but has been occupied since May, is 52 stories high and is tied for the second-tallest building in New York with the Chrysler Building.

Also, shortly after 4 p.m., debris fell from the AllianceBernstein L.P. tower at 1345 Avenue of the Americas at 55th Street and reportedly struck a pedestrian, a Fire Department spokesman said. Initial reports suggested that the debris was falling glass. It was not clear whether the pedestrian was hurt.
There were several reports of other wind-related problems throughout the city, a Fire Department official said. Two walls fell, one in Brooklyn and the other in Queens, the official said.

[GioFX]

I am particularly fond of the red accents within this tower.

Overall, a fantastic skyscraper!

Me too, i love it! (as i always said very clearly). Its a fenomenal addition to the skyline.

I'm really confused by these negative critics... for me its nohere a monolith, nor a heavy and sturdy boring block... on the contrary, the bars and the whole metal "outer skin" gives it a sense of lightness, expecially at the top and at street level.

The only case it can appear as a grey monolith would be under direct sunlight on some angles, from far away... apart from that, for me it looks just great!

And the interiors are great too, with those light-brown wood and pastel colors, its a unique and "complementary" constrast to the grey-ish facade.

I'm looking for seeing it live when i'll come to NYC, next spring!

[NYguy]

The only case it can appear as a grey monolith would be under direct sunlight on some angles, from far away... apart from that, for me it looks just great!

And the interiors are great too, with those light-brown wood and pastel colors, its a unique and "complementary" constrast to the grey-ish facade.

I'm looking for seeing it live when i'll come to NYC, next spring!

Well, you'll be sorely disappointed. It's a grey monolith at all times except night time - even when precious sunlight hits it. Which brings me to another point. Great designs don't depend on the sunlight, they just are.

[NYguy]

http://nymag.com/arts/architecture/reviews/41518/?imw=Y

Get Me Rebuild
The new Times headquarters has all the visual appeal of a column of newsprint.


http://newyorkmetro.com/arts/architecture/reviews/nytimes071210_2_560.jpg
The multilevel newsroom, left, and the building's exterior.

By Justin Davidson
Dec 3, 2007


Print may be fading, newspapers crumpling, media stocks sagging, and the whole profession of journalism dissipating into a bloggy fog—yet on the Manhattan skyline, the Fourth Estate looks vigorous. But then architecture is often a form of illusion. Every few blocks, a bold media tower fixes the midtown horizon like a tent spike. Hearst, Condé Nast, Reuters, Bloomberg: These are the names of buildings as well as written-word brands, and the square-footage needs of periodicals may be growing even as the publications themselves shrink. The proposals for Hudson Yards include new high-rises for Condé Nast and The Wall Street Journal. Shuffling to join in all this real-estate ferment, the New York Times has lately moved out of its gloomy castle on West 43rd Street and into airy new headquarters designed by Renzo Piano with Fxfowle.

Endowed with daylight, elbow room, a decent cafeteria, and window shades that respond to the sun, it’s almost enough to put a reporter in a good mood. How disappointing for the rest of us, though, that the Times has built itself a stolid lump of a building, one that encourages the public to treat the architecture the way more and more people are treating their local paper: by ignoring it. The newspaper that doesn’t pander occupies a tower that refuses to seduce.

From a block—or a mile—away, the new Times Tower has all the visual appeal of a column of type. The horizontal gray lines banding a clear background are actually ceramic rods hung on the building’s exterior as sunshades, but it feels as though, if you squinted, you could make out a “witnesses said” here or a “senior official” there.

Slender steel columns run up the outside, framing the façade like those thin lines that separate one story from another. As if to drive home the connection between words and walls, the artists Ben Rubin and Mark Hansen have installed in the saffron-and-turmeric-colored lobby an artwork called Moveable Type, an array of screens displaying fragments of text from the Times past and present in a constant gurgle of partial information. Neither the artists nor the architect tells a specific story; rather, they honor an institution that packages the world’s chaos and organizes it into a daily ration of justified column inches. Rubin and Hansen play merrily with the meaninglessness of constant updates; Piano, though, has monumentalized the traditional hard copy, just as news is dematerializing into the Internet. He tried, I suppose, to suggest that transfiguration too. In renderings and models—and in the architect’s promises—the veil of rods rising above the top story made the tower appear to dissolve into the atmosphere. In reality, the effect is messy rather than gossamer, and the apparatus looks more like a building still under construction than one that is attempting to evanesce.

Thirty years ago, Piano and his then-partner Richard Rogers became famous by adorning ashen Paris with the see-through walls and primary-colored ducts and struts of the Centre Pompidou. The architects insisted that for a public building to be truly public, people had to be able to examine both its contents and its bones. Since then, Piano has become a ubiquitous old master—he expertly stitched together several old buildings at the Morgan Library, has been hired by a passel of American museums, is master-planning Columbia University’s expansion into Harlem, and is working on a skyscraper for downtown Brooklyn—but here, he has returned to his philosophical roots.

The Times demands transparency in government, he reasoned, so it should live in a building that encourages it to practice the same virtue. The equation he came up with couldn’t be simpler: DEMOCRACY = GLASS. It’s a shame that such a sophisticated mind should have fallen back on that old and facile metaphor and used it so half-heartedly. He placed the newsroom in a low-rise podium alongside the columnar tower, so that passersby could in theory gaze in on the operations the way the public can attend a trial or visit Congress. Openness reigns within, too. Reporters throughout the three floors can look across the central court and spy on the page-one meeting in a central glass-walled office. But seeing is not the same as understanding. A view of heads bent over desks gives Times-watchers on the side street no clues about what’s going on inside. The ultraclear walls and skylight let a gorgeously diffuse radiance into the newsroom, but the tower’s shell of sunshade rods reads as forbiddingly opaque. Transparency is a trick.

Piano is a master of the harmonious sleight of hand. He has made the load-bearing columns appear impossibly delicate and the one-ton steel stays that stabilize the structure seem like skinny wires. The restful lobby garden, with its white birches rising out of moss-covered mounds, disguises a company that virtually runs on stress. The important-looking mast on top serves no crucial purpose other than to poke up above 1,000 feet.

The building is full of magnificently curated minutiae. Elevator banks are pulled apart instead of clustered, leaving the brightly hued lobby vast and open and the sight lines clear from one block through to the next. The TimesCenter auditorium sits on the ground floor and has a glass wall at the rear of the stage, framing the real-world layers of garden, lobby, and the street beyond as a theatrical backdrop. Upstairs, the tower’s notched corners draw the outside world deep into the cubicled recesses. Red-walled staircases by the windows form diagonal slashes of color, like a copy editor’s annotations in the days before word processing. In the cafeteria, a weightless balcony hovers angelically above the sun-filled dining room. The Times’ interiors, designed by Gensler, are masterpieces of obsessive alignment: ceiling panels, light strips, and window mullions create a three-dimensional grid. The signs on the bathroom (and other) doors, courtesy of Pentagram, show not just generic male and female silhouettes but photographs of real men and women from the paper’s archives—and no two are the same. All these details make life pleasant for the building’s denizens, but they do little to animate the tower’s stifled elegance, or to lighten the glower on its public face.

[CoolCzech]

How disappointing for the rest of us, though, that the Times has built itself a stolid lump of a building, one that encourages the public to treat the architecture the way more and more people are treating their local paper: by ignoring it.

FINALLY: an architectural critic with the guts to call a spade a spade, to point out that the emperor has no clothes, to just say the awful truth without hemming and hawing about it. Bravo, Mr. Davidson.

[GioFX]

bah, so many buildings now widely recognized as masterpieces (such as the cited Centre Pompidou) received tons of negative critics as soon as they were finished... so, again, time will tell.

And btw, achitecture first goal is to produces modern, distinctive and functional buildings, not attractive for everyone (which, of course, is just impossible). Thats my :2cents: :)

[CoolCzech]

Centre Pompidou is a "masterpiece"? Please, what nonsense. If that's a "masterpiece," then my old "hamster habitat" was one, too. It's an oddity and curiosity... nothing more.

[ThreeHundred]

That building proposed in Brooklyn is what the NY Times building should've been.

[CoolCzech]

I'd say the new MoMA tower will be what the NY Times tower should have been.

[Capsule F]

I think the building is great in and out.

[NYguy]

I'd say the new MoMA tower will be what the NY Times tower should have been.

You dare put the two in the same sentence....:whip:

The new Times headquarters has all the visual appeal of a column of newsprint.

I love that...

[pico44]

You two make such fools of yourselves. To deny the brilliance of such a spectacular piece of architecture--solely out of pig-headed stubbornness--is beyond pathetic. I don't know what kind of grudge you have, but it has come time to get over it. Open your eyes.

[NYguy]

You two make such fools of yourselves. To deny the brilliance of such a spectacular piece of architecture--solely out of pig-headed stubbornness--is beyond pathetic. I don't what kind of grudge you have, but it has come time to get over it. Open your eyes.

LOL, I didn't write the article. So you've only revealed yourself as the fool, fool.

[pico44]

LOL, I didn't write the article. So you've only revealed yourself as the fool, fool.


:haha:

[NYguy]

:haha:


Brilliant post...how did this thread make it this far without your magnificent input?

[GioFX]

Centre Pompidou is a "masterpiece"? Please, what nonsense. If that's a "masterpiece," then my old "hamster habitat" was one, too. It's an oddity and curiosity... nothing more.

Different views, just that.

[STERNyc]

Brilliant post...how did this thread make it this far without your magnificent input?

He's arguably the worst, most offensive poster here. Don't let it bother you though, one can only imagine the hell of a life this loser lives.

[NYguy]

^ LOL.

Some good Times news for a change.
http://curbed.com/archives/2007/12/06/renzo_piano_plays_it_soft_at_the_times_center.php#more

Renzo Piano Plays it Soft at The Times Center

http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_11_TimesCtr1.JPG

December 6, 2007
by Pete

The last thing we heard from the recently sanctified New York Times Tower was the sound of breaking glass. While some people are more than saddened by the "unfinished" top of the tower, there is a space deep within the building which is anything but "ragged." Come with us, down where it's cozy and warm. Where everything is bathed in red and yellow and orange. This is The Times Center, where brains collide.

http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_11_TimesCtr10.JPG

There's no disappointing "fizzle" down here. It's all warmth and coziness, with walls like marmalade. The entire Center emits a golden glow, enough to give life to a whole bunch of birch trees which have sprouted right beyond its walls! Inside the lobby, hangs a bold bronze relief which calls to those who pass, "All the News That's Fit to Print." Catchy. Where did they find that? No matter. More important are the big names that gather here to chat. It's a never-ending list with something for everyone. And it all happens right in the heart of the tower, which sits smack dab at the very center of the known world.

http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_11_TimesCtr4.JPG
Main lobby of The Times Tower, with birch grove and Times Center beyond.


http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_11_TimesCtr11.JPG
Folks gather in the lobby of the Times Center.


http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_11_TimesCtr12.JPG
The Art Deco brass relief which hangs in The Center's lobby.


http://curbed.com/uploads/2007_11_TimesCtr5.JPG
final taste of that soft, yellow and orange glow.

[CoolCzech]

^I do like those interiors.

[NYguy]

^I do like those interiors.

It is nice. If only that magic could have been worked on the exterior.

[NYguy]

I have a feeling that years from now, changes will be made to the top of the building...

Photos from ((((ROB)))) (http://flickr.com/photos/roblife/)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2167/2052449964_7e920a5b1a_o.jpg


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2238/2052453344_b751197e19_o.jpg

[vaporvr6]

why is this still under construction?

[CoolCzech]

Maybe if they painted it International Orange, same as the Golden Gate Bridge.

Seriously:


http://www.dailynugget.com/images/golden_gate_hdr.jpg
(Dailynugget.com)


I think the whole top would be improved - the spire would gain in stature, the screens would look less messy. The whole building would have a real presence, other than the present Blah!, ghostly one...

[Dac150]

I like it how is now. I've never seen a building in Manhattan post the WTC fit in so well with the city so fast. I look at this building and think it's been around for decades. It'll age well, and to me, is already showing signs of it. IMO, it completes the Midtown skyline.

This building is strictly a LOVE IT or HATE IT.

[GioFX]

^ Amen to that! :)

[CoolCzech]

Anyway, people have moved in, no more cranes or scaffolding to be seen...

Ain't it about time to pull the plug on this thread and let the NY Times tower sink into its well deserved anonymous oblivion of artsy mediocrity?

[CoolCzech]

why is this still under construction?


Probably because the top looks like it might still be under construction...

And it always will.

[NYguy]

Maybe if they painted it International Orange, same as the Golden Gate Bridge.

Seriously:


http://www.dailynugget.com/images/golden_gate_hdr.jpg
(Dailynugget.com)


I think the whole top would be improved - the spire would gain in stature, the screens would look less messy. The whole building would have a real presence, other than the present Blah!, ghostly one...

I'd even take that warm, golden color from the interior. But the Times would probably find any color too flashy for its headquarters. I wouldn't mind seeing a rendering of it though.

Anyway, at least in the future the Times tower won't be so prominent on the west side, it will be boxed in somewhat.

[gttx]

I don't understand why everyone hates the top of this building. Not only do I really like it, but I think it's one of my favorites in the city. I won't bother providing any type of "analysis" about why I love it, because no one really cares, but I would like to hear why people don't like it.

[pico44]

He's arguably the worst, most offensive poster here. Don't let it bother you though, one can only imagine the hell of a life this loser lives.




Ahhhh shucks--my life ain't so bad.... I mean, it's not STERNyc-good; but geez-louise, who's is?????? If only you could admit that you love this skyscraper with all of your heart, and just get over the embarrasment of posing so long as a ridiculous philistine; you'd be perfect STERNyc. You'd be perfect. XOXO

[Dalton]

Is the top completely finished? It clearly fails to achieve what Piano was trying for and what was shown in the rendering - a soft transition from the flat gray sides into the sky. Some might say it's because the change is too abrupt. I would contend that the effect was impossible to achieve on all but the rainiest, grayest days anyway and should never have been attempted. This building will always look its best at night and on dismal cloudy days and its worst on bright, sunny days.

But then, the NY Times has never been the preferred paper of the American optimist, has it? So I guess the building fits.

[Cleveland Brown]

I HATED the building as it was under construction, but it has really grown on me. I honestly like the completed version. :shrug:

[NYguy]

but I would like to hear why people don't like it.

Just read through a few of these pages...

[NYguy]

Is the top completely finished? It clearly fails to achieve what Piano was trying for and what was shown in the rendering - a soft transition from the flat gray sides into the sky.

That's one of the reasons I think it will probably be altered years down the line.

In renderings and models—and in the architect’s promises—the veil of rods rising above the top story made the tower appear to dissolve into the atmosphere. In reality, the effect is messy rather than gossamer, and the apparatus looks more like a building still under construction than one that is attempting to evanesce.