How do you rate the architecture of 17 State Street?

[Viktorkrum77]

17 State Street is among one of tourists (and New Yorkers?) favorite buildings in New York City. The building is situated on what I estimate to be one of the most expensive properties in NYC (help?). But granted its amazing view, the building does have a rather small square footage, and not much flexibility for tenants. And the two façades of the building behind the curved façade, for the most part, face two large bulky office (or apartment, can't remember) buildings that cast dark shadows. The front facing façade can also often show how dirty it is in the sun.

So how do you rate 17 State Street?

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/8/81/200px-17state.jpg

Too big:

http://www.dube.com/samples/17WaterStreet2.jpg

[ablarc]

Nice to look at as an isolated object, this building is wrong for its context, and would be wrong in any urban context. A prima donna that hogs the skyline from the water. Much too flashy and ultimately scaleless, like the even much worse buildings at the Eastern tip, where the East River starts.

It also doesn't help that it replaced a rather nice little church-owned modernist skyscraper that was stylish in itself and simultaneously deferred in both scale and material (brick) to the historic little mission building next door.




Btw, this area is a mess at street level.

[Stern]

One of my favorite buildings in the city. Its just a tight design, it doesn't try to do to much, everything's right with it, the curve is simple enough relating to the geometry of the site and the dynamic flow of water, as is the fascade reflecting its context the Harbor, the Park, and anything that catches the curve. Its nicely framed, its cool and modern. I can't think of a single flaw with this building, as I said it's tight.

[Stern]

Nice to look at as an isolated object, this building is wrong for its context, and would be wrong in any urban context. A prima donna that hogs the skyline from the water. Much too flashy and ultimately scaleless, like the even much worse buildings at the Eastern tip, where the East River starts.

It also doesn't help that it replaced a rather nice little church-owned modernist skyscraper that was stylish in itself and simultaneously deferred in both scale and material (brick) to the historic little mission building next door.




Btw, this area is a mess at street level.

Maybe scaleless, but how is it flashy, out of context, and hogging of the skyline, all it does is reflect its context through a giant curving wall, which is well one of the best context's in the city, and it is acknowledged through the entire building's self. I think the fact that it doesn't try to do too much, itself, is respectfully remarkable.

[kz1000ps]

I guess I can hold an argument against that '80s opaque blue glass, but I don't mind it overall. At least it diverts attention away from the two banal, black boxes that surround it (imagine things without 17 State). Plus, I think it acts as a decent focal point to ALL of the banal boxes that are down at the end. Witness this classic picture:

http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/3072/nycdt2or4.jpg

I don't find it terribly flashy, yet save for the Twins, it's more or less the eye-catcher from this view.

Plus, the thing looks like a freakin' battery! And considering that it overlooks Battery Park, I can't imagine that this was a mere coincidence. As long as this building stands I won't be forgetting the name of the park down there, that's for sure.

[Citytect]

It may be shiny, but I don't find it all that flashy. I voted 'good'. I like the shape and proportions but find it a bit too shiny. It also softens the boxiness of neighboring buildings and provides a bit a variety and contrast.

However, had the area not already become crowded with bulky boxes when 17 State was built, the design would be inappropriate.

[Fabrizio]

Maybe from some angles and some days it works, but it mostly reminds me of a tacky cigarette lighter. And that harsh metallic blue.

A gold sibling in Atlantic City?:

http://www.hotelmanagement-network.com/projects/borgata/borgata1.html



333 Wacker Drive.... a more elegant, studied version?:

http://artefaqs.com/UnifiedImageLanding.php?ID=1059&IN=A&SS=CAI

http://artefaqs.com/UnifiedImageLanding.php?ID=1059&IN=B&SS=CAI


---

[pianoman11686]

I was going to vote "good," but chose "the best" just because I've always felt this building does a great job (more than any other building) in completing that area of the skyline. It fits in perfectly.

However, had the area not already become crowded with bulky boxes when 17 State was built, the design would be inappropriate.

Kind of pointless to say, as I'm sure the design was impacted by the context.

[Citytect]

^I was alluding more to the fact that the architectural standards for what constitutes "good" had changed greatly since the Modern buildings began to rise downtown. Part of what makes the building "good" to me is that it doesn't block anything special. In other words, low standards.

[TREPYE]

^I was alluding more to the fact that the architectural standards for what constitutes "good" had changed greatly since the Modern buildings began to rise downtown. Part of what makes the building "good" to me is that it doesn't block anything special. In other words, low standards.

I agree. On its own the building is pretty decent, nice unique shape and nice color facade. But relative to the backdrop of some of those dumpy looking 60's disasters and emblems of bulk this building stands out as being outstanding, graceful even. 17 State St is alright in my book ;), I voted "good".

[pianoman11686]

^I was alluding more to the fact that the architectural standards for what constitutes "good" had changed greatly since the Modern buildings began to rise downtown. Part of what makes the building "good" to me is that it doesn't block anything special. In other words, low standards.

Well, now that you've elaborated, what you said takes on a whole new meaning.

What's "good" and what's "appropriate" are often two very different things.

[BPC]

I only voted "good" because the architecture is not brilliant, but in all honesty, I have always loved that building in that location. I used to work around the corner on Water Street, and walking through Battery Park I would admire it daily. I like contextual architecture in a lot places, but there are certain high-profile locations where more showy architecture is appropriate, and this is one of them.

[stache]

This building looks fantastic in the opening scene of the "Wall Street" movie.

[kz1000ps]

This building looks fantastic in the opening scene of the "Wall Street" movie.

The opening scene to Wall Street is great.. aerials all around downtown and the Twins with Sinatra honkin' away. Love that movie.

But 17 State is under construction in the film, so I'm not sure how fantastic it could've looked at that stage..?

[kliq6]

I guess I can hold an argument against that '80s opaque blue glass, but I don't mind it overall. At least it diverts attention away from the two banal, black boxes that surround it (imagine things without 17 State). Plus, I think it acts as a decent focal point to ALL of the banal boxes that are down at the end. Witness this classic picture:

http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/3072/nycdt2or4.jpg

I don't find it terribly flashy, yet save for the Twins, it's more or less the eye-catcher from this view.

Plus, the thing looks like a freakin' battery! And considering that it overlooks Battery Park, I can't imagine that this was a mere coincidence. As long as this building stands I won't be forgetting the name of the park down there, that's for sure.

Great picture of it with the towers. A great building. My first ever lease was done in that building so I have a special place in my heart for it

[MidtownGuy]

It would be better if it were taller. To rise further above all those ugly, squat boxes. It's not nearly as bad as the other stuff on that side of the island's tip. Will Gehry's tower peak above things from this view?

[Punzie]

It's a beautiful buiding, but you don't put Brad Pitt's face on James Gandolfini's body. I voted "eye soar".

[Skylimitone]

One of my favorites in the city, its Timeless. Looks brand new every year.

[TREPYE]

One of the handful of towers in NYC that actually deserves to be in waterfront. Fantastic glass that gives quite a spectacle at sunset.;)

[brianac]

From the ferry, it certainly catches the eye.

http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z245/brianaclift/New%20York%20June%202007/js1024_P6150037.jpg

[Skylimitone]

One of the handful of towers in NYC that actually deserves to be in waterfront. Fantastic glass that gives quite a spectacle at sunset.;)

Couldn't agree more.

[macreator]

Once again, I'm a sucker for curves and this building has a fantastic shape. :)

One of my favorite modern Lower Manhattan buildings.

[kz1000ps]

Said in a Homer Simpson voice:

"aahmmmmmm... curves.."