PDA

View Full Version : Hearst Tower - 300 West 57th Street @ Eighth Avenue - by Norman Foster



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

NoyokA
January 6th, 2003, 08:12 PM
Construction should start this month. Im excited.

dbhstockton
January 6th, 2003, 10:35 PM
Awesome!

TLOZ Link5
January 6th, 2003, 10:36 PM
Cool!!!! *:)

Eugenius
January 7th, 2003, 10:45 AM
What's the proposed completion date. *I can't wait to see this thing rise. *Perhaps it could sway New Yorkers toward the Foster WTC design...

chris
January 7th, 2003, 12:57 PM
I try to avoid, "Me too!" posts, but this (and AOL) will be my new living room window view when it is completed. So...

Me too!

chris
January 7th, 2003, 01:14 PM
And BTW, does anyone have any other renderings? This is all I've seen:

http://www.c-grayson.com/posted_images/hearst.jpg

http://www.c-grayson.com/posted_images/hearst_2.jpg

BrooklynRider
January 7th, 2003, 02:47 PM
Can I be a little lazy and just ask someone for height & square footage?

Eugenius
January 7th, 2003, 03:59 PM
Skyscrapers.com lists height as 596 feet. *I haven't been able to find square footage information.

Fabb
January 7th, 2003, 04:55 PM
The dark, tall, residential building next door is ugly.

Evan
January 7th, 2003, 06:51 PM
Is Hearst still going to add six more stories to the building? *I believe they made a deal with the city, offering to renovate a nearby subway enterance in exchnage for more square footage.

TLOZ Link5
January 8th, 2003, 05:20 PM
Quote: from Evan on 5:51 pm on Jan. 7, 2003
Is Hearst still going to add six more stories to the building? *I believe they made a deal with the city, offering to renovate a nearby subway enterance in exchnage for more square footage.

I heard about that, too. *Stern's site lists the number of stories as 48, and the height above 600 feet. *So I guess he took that into account but Skyscrapers.com hasn't yet.

dbhstockton
January 8th, 2003, 05:30 PM
The hight's kind of disappointing. *The rendering makes it look taller than that, I think. *

Derek2k3
January 8th, 2003, 10:01 PM
The 6 stories are already included in the 42 story tower.

Rich Battista
January 10th, 2003, 08:18 PM
what???????!!!!! That is pretty bad, i was hoping for 625 at least and possibly 700's. We will see how it turns out, it will be a bad project if it does not turn out as high as it was once supposed to be. It will be very disappointing if we cannot see this beautiful building from Queens and the east side.

NoyokA
January 10th, 2003, 08:59 PM
In all it will be 48 storeys (including the base in all figures). It was originally 42 storeys, and once opted for 54.

Derek2k3
January 10th, 2003, 10:53 PM
Where did you hear that from?

Gross area: 856,000 ft2 / 79,500 m2
Zoning Area: 721,000 ft2 / 67,000 m2 (120,000 ft2 / 11,000 m2 from subway bonus)
Typical Gross Floor area: 20,000 ft2 (1,900 m2)
Typical Floor to Floor Height: 4 m
Building Height: 597 ft (182 m)
Number of storeys: 42

According to the numbers they already added in the bonus.
"zoning bonus that would permit a building of 720,000 square feet, 20 percent larger than would usually be allowed"


The community groups twisted this probably to get more support or maybe just a misunderstanding. They probably thought it is a 42 sotry tower over a 6 story base but it's *36. Then if you count in the 6 more stories the bonus it would be 54.

Rich Battista
January 14th, 2003, 10:26 PM
ahha, lol, all the little loop holes

Agglomeration
January 15th, 2003, 03:25 AM
While I try not to exaggerate, If these NIMBY's completely had it their way, they would actually reduce it from 6 floors to two. Sound familiar?

amigo32
January 15th, 2003, 03:29 AM
From the NIMBY point of view, why not just live underground?

TLOZ Link5
January 15th, 2003, 11:48 AM
Quote: from amigo32 on 2:29 am on Jan. 15, 2003
From the NIMBY point of view, why not just live underground?

Then they'd argue about the lack of light and air =P

JerzDevl2000
January 18th, 2003, 04:05 AM
Rich and Dbhstockton - I agree with ya that this should be taller. I wish they had renderings of this from Jersey, since I think it's not gonna stick out too much among the 7th Ave./Colubus Circle cluster that has risen in the last 20 years.

I think this will be the LVMH tower of our decade...not necessarily the tallest or the most noticed new tower in the city, but the one that *the critics and fans talk about, as well as the tower that pushes design in a new direction.

chris
January 18th, 2003, 04:37 AM
Hearst 597ft @ 42 floors - vs - LVMH 328 ft @ 25 floors

Come on now...

You won't see much from the Circle sure, but from the west side you will, and it's a corner lot, LVMH is a mid block building. LVMH is flush with its neighbors on both sides. Hearst is up on a pedestal by itself. It doesn't touch another building from any direction. The footprint for Hearst is probably 5 times that of LVMH. It might not be a skyline defining building, but it will have visibility, you can be sure of that.

(Edited by chris at 3:42 am on Jan. 18, 2003)

JerzDevl2000
January 18th, 2003, 04:41 AM
I guess you're right Chris. It's just funny how everyone knows of Norman Foster's idea for the WTC site, which might not get built, and hardly anyone in the general public knows of this, and this is a go! I'm looking forward to it - this the NYTT are the only two major projects that are groundbreaking this year, from what I can think of right now.

chris
January 18th, 2003, 04:45 AM
Hearst vs WTC...

Sure more have heard of it, once again, think of what you're comparing.

dbhstockton
January 18th, 2003, 01:58 PM
Hearst 597ft @ 42 floors - vs - LVMH 328 ft @ 25 floors

Come on now...


Chris, You may have missed JerzDevl2000's point. *I shouldn't have to tell you that there's more to a skyscraper than just height. *This forum is also supposed to be about architecture.

(Edited by dbhstockton at 12:59 pm on Jan. 18, 2003)

DominicanoNYC
January 20th, 2003, 08:34 PM
Maybe they should have demolished the building on which their building it on. That part of the building really doesn't match with the top, but aside from that the Hearst building will be a nice addition to the NYC skyline.

dbhstockton
January 20th, 2003, 10:36 PM
The bottom half of the building is kind of a landmark (between that and 2 Colombus Circle, two of the funkiest in the city). *

I do wish the new Hearst building could be an wholly independant architectural statement, but I assume there is some attachment to the old building in the Hearst family, and preserving the facade is a tactic that helped with the NIMBY's. *As a side-note, the NY Times has acquired landmark status just for the facade of its old building off Times Square, so that could be the scene of a similar project once they move out.

The Hearst building was designed by [Joseph?] Urban, a famous Austrian set designer of the time. *I think that really explains the over-the-top theatricality of its art-deco. *It looks like something right out of Batman's Gotham City. *Trully weird.

chris
January 21st, 2003, 08:28 PM
> Chris, You may have missed JerzDevl2000's point. *I shouldn't
> have to tell you that there's more to a skyscraper than just height. *
> This forum is also supposed to be about architecture.

Um, I think you missed the point completely.

JerzDevl2000 is saying that Hearst is beautiful like LVMH, but it's too bad, also like LVMH, that it will not be tall enough to stand out in the skyline, and therefor will not get much notice except in architecture circle... That it will be great, but not contribute to the skyline. I'm stating for the reasons above, that I disagree, and state the reasons why it will not be an obscure gem, but a prominent gem, and state the reasons why it will have more visibility than LVMH.

I think you're the one who completely missed the point.

Due to the fact that JerzDevl2000 replied to me with:
> I guess you're right Chris.

But JerzDevl2000 can speak up if I'm misrepresenting.

-----

dbhstockton wrote:
> ...I do wish the new Hearst building could be an wholly independant architectural statement...
> ...preserving the facade is a tactic that helped with the NIMBY's.

DominicanoNYC:
> Maybe they should have demolished the building on which their building it on.

--------

My god! You people have completely lost your minds!

If there is anyone who is missing the point here.

The Hearst building was originally designed to have a tower on top. Then there was this thing called the depression. The money was never there. It has been a plan for about 70 years to build a tower on top of the Hearst platform. One of the reasons Foster got the commission was his past experience integrating a modern structure atop and older work, the German Reichstag. With those credentials, that is EXACTLY what he was hired to do!!!

http://www.bundestag.de/bau_kunst/kunstwerke/haacke/derbevoelkerung/grafik/reichstag.jpg

http://www.coilwindingexpo.com/tiergarten-reichstag.jpg

http://home.wanadoo.nl/~rbouw/Reizen/Berlijn/Reichstag.jpg

http://www.vu.union.edu/~robleec/prague/Germany/Berlin/reichstag-glass.jpg

Before:

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/images/Germany/reichstag.jpg

Talk about missing the point.



(Edited by chris at 7:31 pm on Jan. 21, 2003)

Rich Battista
January 21st, 2003, 09:21 PM
lol, i feel the project deserves more credit than it gets

DominicanoNYC
January 21st, 2003, 09:26 PM
I also think more about the looks of the building rater than teh height. I have to admit that before I did think more about height rather than the apperance of a building, but after reading some books on architecture I realized that buildings are more than just height.

JerzDevl2000
January 22nd, 2003, 02:50 AM
I didn't mean to get everybody all riled up about this. I guess if ya boil down what I meant to say, is that even thought Hearst will be seen from the west and up/down 8th Ave, I think it's going to be missed from a lot of the city. Good design seems to go by the wayside - look at the Austrian Cultural Institute, or the Ford Foundation Building on 42nd St. (one of the best atriums in the city). With ground zero, everyone seems to be clamoring for all these amenities, and it must look good, fit in, be groundbreaking, daring, please the local residents, etc. I understand that 9/11 was a landmark day in our society, but how much have we learned if we demand excellence in rebuilding, but medoicrity in the rest of the city?

I love New York - most of ya would probably s*** a brick at the stack of books I've read about the city. New York 1880, 1900, 1930, and 1960 by Stern, Mellon, and Fishman, the AIA guide to New York City, Manhattan Skyscrapers, and bunch more for starters. Design doesn't have to be run of the mill. I love Chris's pics of the Reichstag because they remind me of the excellent job tha I.M. Pei did with the glass pyramid at the Louvre in Paris. Hearst will work well - the base will give the groundbreaking glass top a great foundation in more than one way!

We should demand excellence at ground zero, but more importantly, what we should demand is that this whole process that New York is going through in this 1st decade of the new century, will give us more gems like the afermentioned so we can have the city we deserve!

amigo32
January 22nd, 2003, 03:09 AM
Bravo, once again, I admire your tenacity and determination! *:)

ZippyTheChimp
January 22nd, 2003, 09:49 AM
I think that whatever happens at the WTC site will influence how New Yorkers regard their public spaces. That's what makes this process so important.

For about 30 years, NYC has been in gradual decline.We seemed to be breaking out of this for the last 5 years when 9/11 happenned. Now we're at a crossroad.

But we've been there before. The 19th century NYC (Manhattan) was running out of room. The city of Brooklyn held more promise for growth. A revolutionary approach was taken, and the city expanded vertically, reinventing itself.

Fabb
January 22nd, 2003, 10:42 AM
Quote: from ZippyTheChimp on 8:49 am on Jan. 22, 2003

For about 30 years, NYC has been in gradual decline.


Certainly not.
I don't know what you're talking about.
In the field of supertall skyscrapers, maybe ?

ZippyTheChimp
January 22nd, 2003, 12:54 PM
Quote: from Fabb on 9:42 am on Jan. 22, 2003

Certainly not.
I don't know what you're talking about.
In the field of supertall skyscrapers, maybe ?

Do you remember the NYC of the 70s? I have lived here all my life, and I do. The crime rate was rising year after year. Businessess were leaving. The population actually declined. The general feeling was that NYC was becoming unmanageable.
Remember Gerald Ford and "drop dead New York"?

I know quite a few people who packed up and left New York in the 80s, and were amazed at the change in attitude when they returned a decade later.

Fabb
January 22nd, 2003, 01:47 PM
A malaise that lasted a few years. No more.

NoyokA
January 22nd, 2003, 03:55 PM
Back to topic quite possibly the best part, the notched corners will be visible from Columbus Circle. It should be visually stunning.

billyblancoNYC
January 22nd, 2003, 04:28 PM
As long as crime is in check and taxes don't get out of hand (making things even MORE expensive), NYC will strive and be #1 for some time to come.

ZippyTheChimp
January 22nd, 2003, 04:48 PM
I've always liked the "movie set" quality of the original building. If this is done right, it will look great. Located on the corner of 2 wide streets, with Bway nearby, will give it good visibility. My dentist has an office across the street. I'll be able to check progress - if my teeth hold out.

Fabb: You seem to me to have little NYC experience. Do you live in the area, and for how long? *

dbhstockton
January 22nd, 2003, 05:06 PM
Ouch.

I've been away from this thread too long to defend myself, so I'll just let it go. *Chris, I agree with you more than you might think. *It's just a matter of miscommunication. *The bold type was a little over the top, I think.

NoyokA
January 22nd, 2003, 05:18 PM
A jewel box. Here is the corner angle I was talking about.

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid48/p6201ea90fae6aa21ddb59258359dd872/fcbe18fa.jpg

chris
January 22nd, 2003, 06:01 PM
What a beauty... Not him, the building.

http://www.c-grayson.com/posted_images/hearst_2.jpg

chris
January 22nd, 2003, 06:02 PM
Have no doubt, it will be visible... it might not define the skyline, but it will be visible... Most importantly, it will be visible right out my living room window!

Bennie B
March 9th, 2003, 04:38 PM
Thanks for the tip, DBH! *You're right, it's not bad at all, and it's great that they're keeping the original base intact. *It looks like a good match-- two truly out-there designs stacked on top of each other-- but talk about a split personality!

ZippyTheChimp
March 12th, 2003, 09:34 PM
All the WTC talk has left me exhausted. All you Lord Foster
fans might enjoy watching this one go up.

I know I will.

NYatKNIGHT
March 12th, 2003, 10:22 PM
Hearst Magazine Building on 8th Avenue

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid54/p39fcac9bfe32889cd26dc40bbe0da7d4/fc83569d.jpg

(Edited by NYatKNIGHT at 9:46 pm on Mar. 12, 2003)

Bennie B
March 13th, 2003, 04:15 AM
Nice shot, NYatKNIGHT--dramatic. *Amazing building. *What's the pointy one behind?

NoyokA
March 13th, 2003, 09:47 AM
whoa now...Bennie B.... I only suggest you visit wirednewyork the site, before you ask such blatant questions.

billyblancoNYC
March 13th, 2003, 11:49 AM
To the left... World Wide Plaza. Nice place.

dbhstockton
March 13th, 2003, 12:47 PM
Benny B, do you live in New york?

DominicanoNYC
March 13th, 2003, 09:55 PM
The Hearst is one of my fav. buildings. It's design is so great and unique.

Bennie B
March 14th, 2003, 01:06 AM
Hey thanks, billyblanco. *Agreed--REALLY nice, especially for SOM. *Guess the ol' cookie-cutter broke down that day, heh.

Point taken Stern *)

DBH, native son of NY jews, tho I'm agnostic myself. *How about you?

dbhstockton
March 14th, 2003, 01:23 AM
DBH, native son of NY jews, tho I'm agnostic myself. *How about you?

I'm a born-and-bred non-practicing NY Jew as well, though I've settled in New Jersey in recent years. *

Bennie B
March 14th, 2003, 08:01 AM
DBH, for a big apple, NY sure has a lot of nuts, LOL *)

NyC MaNiAc
March 14th, 2003, 09:13 AM
LOL, do you plan to move back into the city DBH, or are you happy in New Jersey?

dbhstockton
March 14th, 2003, 11:11 AM
I'm planning on moving back when I can afford to do it in style, and in Manhattan.

billyblancoNYC
March 14th, 2003, 11:15 AM
Move out of Jersey, now, damnit. *NYC needs more good people to be here, especially in these tough times!!

STONE DIVISION
March 15th, 2003, 08:43 PM
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *HEARST (BIRDS EYE VIEW)

HEARST SITE LOCATION PIC_1
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid55/p512deeb1ef6c12f7d3ae5dbef7d143de/fc802b70.jpg

HEARST SITE LOCATION PIC_2
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid55/pcb91e15e20a4f65786dbe561981f3077/fc802b58.jpg

HEARST SITE LOCATION PIC_3
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid55/p085eefc1e67cb51b8e0e66a8e3e473ba/fc802708.jpg

HEARST SITE LOCATION PIC_4
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid55/p4fbb67e77b3b60d4ae51a441a166869f/fc802c55.jpg

Kris
March 15th, 2003, 08:52 PM
A whole new perspective! Thanks a lot. I didn't know it had a U-shape and an interior courtyard.

DominicanoNYC
March 15th, 2003, 09:05 PM
This might make it's construction much easier than I thought.

TLOZ Link5
March 15th, 2003, 09:57 PM
Quote: from Christian Wieland on 7:52 pm on Mar. 15, 2003
A whole new perspective! Thanks a lot. I didn't know it had a U-shape and an interior courtyard.


Had to. *Buildings of those days, before there was flourescent lighting and air conditioning, needed light courts to allow light and air to penetrate the entire building. *I didn't think about it before, but those pictures prove that it makes sense.

Nice shots, Stone! *Where were you taking these from?

jack
March 15th, 2003, 11:26 PM
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=31&papass=&sort=1
Has anyone ever considered topping off the Metropolitan Life Tower just like the Hearst Magazine building. Originally, as it was proposed, it was supposed to take away the crown as the world's tallest from the Empire State Building, but only the base was used. The pic is obove.

dbhstockton
March 16th, 2003, 03:21 AM
I wonder about that, too. *The building always looks stunted to me, really not well-proportioned.

Evan
March 16th, 2003, 11:58 AM
I would love to see that happen, but with a modern design. *Maybe Lord Norman Foster can work his magic again with the Metropolitan Life Tower.

Kris
March 16th, 2003, 02:17 PM
"Preservationists" would probably scream.

Kris
March 16th, 2003, 02:19 PM
Would the current zoning even permit it?

jack
March 16th, 2003, 02:48 PM
…nonetheless, it'd be a perfect spot for a 1000 footer, on top of what already is probably around 300 ft.. Yes I can image a sleek, black, Forster style addition to that building, beautiful.

dbhstockton
March 16th, 2003, 02:53 PM
Some of you may be aware of a similar addition being done by Vornado at 640 fifth ave -- they're adding a modern glass shaft to the top of a 1949 building. *I can't find a direct url for an image, but Vornado's website is www.vno.com

TLOZ Link5
March 16th, 2003, 04:47 PM
The MetLife North Building was designed to be between 80 and 100 stories and meant to be the WTB. *Considering the economic condition during its construction (the Depression was already underway), there's a lot of doubt as to whether MetLife ever intended to finish the building. *However, what was finished of it is definitely massive; the floorplates are 80 feet deep and were perfect for large-scale trading operations. *This building might have been the forerunner for the open-floorplan designs of International-style buildings following WW2.

NoyokA
March 16th, 2003, 06:51 PM
I was aware of the internal courtyard, which only makes its harder to believe it was a corporate headquarters. But folks, we are close to construction here, very close. The building is now closed for all extensive purposes.

Agglomeration
March 16th, 2003, 06:52 PM
If it comes to that with Metlife North, I'd like to see it clad in the same white masonry as the 30-floor base. Preferably up to 40 extra floors without any further setbacks. And screw the preservationists.

chris
March 16th, 2003, 08:15 PM
dbhstockton wrote:
Some of you may be aware of a similar addition being done by Vornado at 640 fifth ave...

Yes, I put up a post about this what seems like close to a year ago when the scaffolding first went up. I took a photo of the rendering on the front of the building. I cannot find that image now. I think I pulled it from my server. I'd still have it archived somewhere... Regardless, funny you should bring it up, I photographed it again this weekend. The building is starting to rise. You can see the rendering on the front of the scaffolding...

http://www.c-grayson.com/posted_images/640_5th_ave.jpg

ZippyTheChimp
March 25th, 2003, 06:49 PM
http://www.pbase.com/image/14721411.jpg
View SW from Wollman Rink. The slim green building is 301 W 57 St, directly north across the street from Hearst. The tower will rise just to the left of the taller dark brown building.

As a height comparison, 301 w 57 is 628 ft (according to Stern), so 32 ft shorter.

It would be nice if it was taller, but the visability from Central Park will be good.

Kris
March 25th, 2003, 08:26 PM
Thanks.

Edward
July 19th, 2003, 08:06 PM
Construction started on Hearst Magazine Building (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/default.htm). Eighth Avenue on 19 July 2003.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/images/hearst_magazine_eighth_19july03.jpg (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/default.htm)

TLOZ Link5
July 19th, 2003, 11:15 PM
Great to hear.

AJphx
August 25th, 2003, 05:13 PM
Does the Hearst building still have an art deco lobby? If so, are they going to be keeping it? (they are gutting most of the base's interior right?)

(Edited by AJphx at 4:17 pm on Aug. 25, 2003)

billyblancoNYC
August 25th, 2003, 05:26 PM
Man, the new tower will be amazing, and very close to the one right behind it.

BrooklynRider
September 18th, 2003, 02:52 PM
From September 2003 Issue of NY Construction News

Showing Steel
New Hearst Building to Use Innovative Steel Frame

The Hearst Corp., which has long played a role in American society, will now impact the New York City skyline with a $500 million, 42-story steel and glass tower at Eighth Avenue and 57th Street.

The Hearst story started in the late 19th and early 20th centuries when William Randolph Hearst’s newspaper empire brought into being the splashy daily tabloid in American journalism. The Hearst chain of newspapers, at one point read by one in four Americans, played a major role in stirring up support for the Spanish American War in 1898.

Today, Hearst owns only 12 daily papers, but it has become the largest publisher of monthly magazines in the world. Among its better known titles are Cosmopolitan and Good Housekeeping, both of which it has published for nearly a century, and the more recent O, The Oprah Magazine.

Hearst’s King Features Syndicate distributes some of the country’s most popular comic strips, including "Popeye," "Blondie" and "The Family Circus," along with advice columnists Dr. Joyce Brothers and Dr. Ruth Westheimer. Hearst owns 27 broadcast television stations that reach 17.5 percent of U.S. households, along with a number of popular cable networks including A&E, ESPN, Lifetime and the History Channel.

Still on the Corner

The new 856,000-sq.-ft. tower, when completed in 2006, will serve as the corporation’s world headquarters. The building at 959 Eighth Ave. has been designed by Lord Norman Foster of Foster and Partners in London, a Pritzker Prize-winning architect whose body of work includes renovation of the British Museum and the reconstruction of the Reichstag in Berlin. This is his first building in New York.

Foster’s design preserves the six-story façade of the landmark Hearst-owned building that now stands on the corner. From its hollowed-out core will rise a geodesic-like office tower featuring triangular steel bracing from the 10th floor up. It will have no vertical columns around the perimeter, creating corner views that are not possible in a typically framed building.

The steel framework will be a visible both inside the building and on the street. Referred to as the "diagrid" (a contraction of "diagonal grid") by those involved in the project, this perimeter will consist of 4-story-tall, grade-65 steel triangles prefabricated by the Cives Steel Co. at two plants, one in Gouverneur, N.Y., and the other in Winchester, Va. Cornell and Co. of Woodbury, N.J. will be the erector.

"Our buildings are designed to show how they’re put together," said Mike Jelliffe, project director for Foster and Partners. "We use steel because it’s a lot more flexible. Concrete has its place; we have done many concrete buildings as well. But in the environment of New York, steel is the obvious choice."

The Decision

Building its new headquarters at the site of its original New York headquarters was also an obvious choice. Hearst, which currently has 1,800 employees spread out in nine separate buildings in Midtown, had long ago outgrown its real estate.

"As leases were turning over we were reviewing several different options, which included renewing leases where we were, buying another property or developing one of several sites that we own, including 959 Eighth Ave.," said Brian Schwagerl, senior manager of facilities planning for Hearst. The Eighth Avenue site had several advantages, including its location on top of the Columbus Circle subway station, its proximity to Central Park just two blocks away, considerable air rights—and its history.

The old building was designed specifically for Hearst in 1927 by Joseph Urban and George B. Post & Sons. The original plan had been to eventually add 12 more stories to the base building. On the roof of the old building you can still see the stub-outs of the columns that were designed to carry the additional load.

The Depression intervened, and the additional stories were never built. In the meantime, the squat six-story building was designated a historic landmark. Four years ago Hearst asked Tishman Speyer Properties to do an analysis of the possibility of building on the site.

"We did a feasibility study, put together design and approval teams and oversaw the approval process," said Bruce Phillips, senior director of design and construction for Tishman Speyer.

Since the building had been landmarked, building on the site required approval from the Landmarks Commission, which allowed construction of the new building on the condition that the original façade be preserved. Because it is situated above the subway, the project also had to go through the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure. In the end, in exchange for improvements to the subway station—including a new entrance, installing three elevators, repositioning turnstiles and adding and moving stairwells—Hearst was given a bonus of six floors to add onto the tower.

Phillips and his crew gave Hearst a list of possible architects. "Foster’s work on the Reichstag and the British Museum where he brought the old and new together attracted us," Schwagerl said.

Tishman Speyer has stayed on as development manager and will oversee the project until completion. The Cantor Seinuk Group Inc. quickly joined the team as structural engineer and Flack and Kurtz Inc. as mechanical engineer. Turner Construction Corp. is the construction manager.

The Diagrid

The unusual design of the building’s exoskeleton has meant a close working relationship between Foster’s team and structural engineer Ahmad Rahimian, executive vice president at Cantor Seinuk.

"Working with Cantor Seinuk, we developed this triangulated concept, this diagonal grid that breaks up the sides," Jelliffe said. "It’s a three-bay elevation to the east side and a four-bay elevation on the north and south sides. At the corners (because there are no vertical columns) we had the opportunity to create something special.

"We cut back the diagrid to form what we term the ‘birds’ mouths.’ They open up most of the floors and allow a much more panoramic view. So when you’re standing on those floor plates you’re not looking into corners, you’re looking into chamfers which open up the view."

Triangular bracing on the perimeter of a skyscraper is not new. It has been done before, most notably for the John Hancock Building in Chicago.

"What’s unique about this is that there is no column, no vertical element on the perimeter; it’s all triangulated," said Rahimian. "The triangular frames carry the gravity load. At the same time, the triangulation has inherent strength and resistance to the lateral loads, seismic and wind. …The triangulated shape means you don’t need any additional bracing and you don’t need to have any concrete walls in the building."

Because the triangles are so efficient in terms of bearing both the gravity and lateral loads, the building will use 21 percent less steel tonnage than a conventional building of its size.

The diagrid also allows for larger open floor plates, which Hearst considers important. Schwagerl said some of the older buildings in the neighborhood are beautiful, but "inside they not very helpful to us as we put out our magazines. These 22,000-sq.-ft. floor plates are designed to give us the open space we want."

The Old and the New

The diagrid begins at the 10th floor. From 10 down the building rests on raking mega-columns that allow for vast open spaces for the lobby, a cafeteria, meeting rooms and other public spaces.

"The tower loads are collected in a few locations with the mega-columns coming all the way down from the 10th floor to the foundation," Rahimian said.

None of the structural elements of the old building will remain; the new building will have its own foundation and new columns. Only the framing at the perimeter of the old building will remain to stabilize the existing landmark façade, and even that is being upgraded to meet current wind and seismic criteria.

"From the bottom to the 10th floor is one structure and from the 10th floor up, it’s framed entirely differently," said Ted Totten, president and general manager of Cives Steel Co.

"Considerable steel work will be required to reinforce the historic façade. The mega-column/mega-brace system up to the 10th floor consists of 44-in. square plate box weldments. Then from the 10th floor to the 42nd, the building changes to an exposed exterior diagrid column system. The wide flange diagonal columns and 10-in. plate connection nodes will require special fabrication and erection skills to interface the steel frame with the curtain wall system.," he added. "We will be field assembling the diagrid system in 4-story A frames, with the intermediate beams preinstalled to the columns, which will then be set in one piece."

"You enter through the existing arch (on Eighth Avenue) that is part of the landmark element and will be left well enough alone," said Jelliffe. "Then it opens up and you immediately see three escalators in front of you which take you up to the third floor level. Those escalators are set into a sloping water sculpture, which will cascade down past you as you’re going up."

The third to the seventh floors will be an atrium divided into different areas for different uses and enclosed in a skylight. "When you’re sitting in the cafeteria, you can look up through the skylight and see the tower soaring above on one side and you can see the existing landmark wall on the other," Jelliffe said.

Green and Secure

In addition to its innovative architectural and structural features, the new Hearst Building is being constructed with an eye toward attaining LEED certification from the U.S. Green Building Council.

"The efficiency of the steel frame of the building, which will resist wind and lateral forces with less tonnage, is an innovation worthy of note within the LEED system," Phillips said. "We’ve also developed some energy-efficient HVAC systems. For example, to heat and cool the giant atrium space we will be using spill air from the tower. That will allow us to provide most of the a.c. and heat from so-called waste air." In the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Foster made some changes. The building’s core, rather than being in the center, has been positioned at the west side of the building away from any possible assaults from the street. (This offset core also allows for a larger footprint and more open space on the east side of the building.)

In addition, concrete block will be used to contain the stairways, which will be wider than in most pre-Sept. 11-office buildings.

Demolition of the old building began in May. The foundation work is scheduled to begin in October. Totten said the steel will start rising in February and should take about a year to complete.

"We spent the last hundred years on this corner; we hope to spend the next hundred, and beyond, here," Schwagerl said. "We are creating a building that will support the company through the next century."

DEVELOPMENT TEAM
Owner/Developer: The Hearst Corp., New York
Design Architect: Foster and Partners, London, U.K.
Production Architect: Adamson
Associates Architects, Mississauga, Ontario
Development Manger: Tishman Speyer Properties, New York
Construction Manager: Turner
Construction Corp., New York
Structural Engineer: The Cantor Seinuk Group Inc., New York
Mechanical Engineer: Flack + Kurtz Inc., New York
Steel Fabricator: Cives Steel Co., Gouverneur, N.Y.
Steel Erector: Cornell and Co., Woodbury, N.J.

NoyokA
September 18th, 2003, 04:32 PM
Demolition of the old building began in May. The foundation work is scheduled to begin in October. Totten said the steel will start rising in February and should take about a year to complete.

We wont be seeing anything for another 6 months, and then in strides. Construction has begun though, and the diagrid is a reality!

matt3303
September 30th, 2003, 09:15 AM
I think this building is even more interesting than the NY Times Tower. They build stuff in (or on) the frames of old buildings all the time in Europe (although never this tall) and we're finally getting it here.

billyblancoNYC
September 30th, 2003, 10:56 AM
So, is it like they almost hollowed out the old structure?

krulltime
September 30th, 2003, 01:06 PM
matt3303,

I think building on old structures is a great idea...but where the NY times tower is going to be build I dont see anything especial to be save.

check out this baby in philadelphia being built: (The lower structures were an old bank and some row houses)

http://www.skyscrapers.com/re/en/wm/bu/134078/

the facade of the old bank and the row houses are save. But I think most of the part is hallow inside. The way you see some new buildings with old structures in washington, DC.

matt3303
September 30th, 2003, 07:33 PM
I agree about NY Times---I never said there was anything we should save. Actually, more blight needs to be torn down. Also, don't quote me on Hearst, as i'm not sure they're "hollowing it out", it would just be nice to see. (Although how are they going to extend the current elevators, pipes, etc. is beyond me)

BrooklynRider
October 1st, 2003, 10:43 AM
I walked by Hearst on Saturday and it does, indeed, look like only the walls of the old structure remain - hollowed out completely...

emmeka
October 2nd, 2003, 07:10 AM
If thats true then so long for keeping the old origional building. surely they havent removed the structure of the building? They were going to use that for the tower!

Clarknt67
November 22nd, 2003, 05:44 PM
A whole new perspective! Thanks a lot. I didn't know it had a U-shape and an interior courtyard.

I used to work in that building, the courtyard was very nice, we used to grab lunches on the tables back there. Maybe they can preserve an atrium feeling there.

Interesting factoid: The courtyard was originally designed as a vanity stage for Marion Davies, William Randolph Hearst's actress lover. I'm not sure what happened to that idea, but it seems to me, Davies left the stage after being savaged by New York critics. Neither she or William were popular in NYC.

I took a peek at the work being done on 959 and they've completely torn the outside walls on the courtyard side. A little odd seeing my old office like that, like a real like cutaway drawing.

kliq6
November 22nd, 2003, 05:50 PM
this project is awesome, another great addition to Midtown, hopefully allof eighth ave will be developed especially that areas from 43rd to 49th. Many new towers could rise along there

Clarknt67
November 22nd, 2003, 05:59 PM
Does the Hearst building still have an art deco lobby? If so, are they going to be keeping it? (they are gutting most of the base's interior right?)

(Edited by AJphx at 4:17 pm on Aug. 25, 2003)

The lobbys nice, marble and brass, if I remember. (That I only vaguely remember a lobby I walked through for 3 years, may indicate it's not very remarkable.)

There are some corner offices that are truely beautiful with gorgeous wood paneling and woodwork. I hope they take pains to preserve them. There are some butt ugly drop-ceiling, florescent-lit, cubicle-land beige offices also (of course, I'm referring to my former office), let's hope they don't preserve those.

Clarknt67
November 22nd, 2003, 06:15 PM
If thats true then so long for keeping the old origional building. surely they havent removed the structure of the building? They were going to use that for the tower!

Apparently that's what they're doing, completely removing the structure of the old building, jus the skin of the facad will remain.

JMC
November 23rd, 2003, 12:00 AM
That's what they call a "Fascadomy."

emmeka
November 23rd, 2003, 04:43 AM
If thats true then so long for keeping the old origional building. surely they havent removed the structure of the building? They were going to use that for the tower!

Apparently that's what they're doing, completely removing the structure of the old building, jus the skin of the facad will remain.

Thats kinda defeting the object isnt it then.

Clarknt67
November 24th, 2003, 10:29 AM
If thats true then so long for keeping the old origional building. surely they havent removed the structure of the building? They were going to use that for the tower!

Apparently that's what they're doing, completely removing the structure of the old building, jus the skin of the facad will remain.

Thats kinda defeting the object isnt it then.

No, I think the object is for the building to remain visibly unchanged from the street level. It sounds like they're totally rearranging the interior space. Which probably is a good idea as the U-shape of the current interior won't really allow the sort of grand enterance or large un-interupted spaces that a high-rise corporate headquarters would ideally have.

emmeka
November 25th, 2003, 10:19 AM
What I meant was that the great thing about the origional hearst building was the fact that it was origionally intended for a huge skyscraper in the first place. I understand why they are doing what they are doing but I just thougt that it was a little odd because thats what they origionally intended to do.

Clarknt67
November 25th, 2003, 01:37 PM
What I meant was that the great thing about the origional hearst building was the fact that it was origionally intended for a huge skyscraper in the first place. I understand why they are doing what they are doing but I just thougt that it was a little odd because thats what they origionally intended to do.

Oh, I get what you're saying. I guess they have to start over with the structural underpinnings because, they obviously didn't envision in 1920 the glass tower Foster's designed.

The support a steel & glass tower requirements may differ from the requirements for a bricks and motar, which was undoubtably what they first had in mind.

Plus the interior of the building, with atriums and a cafeteria almost certainly wasn't envisioned in the early part of the century, when it was first built. Hearst also wants (and needs) the flexibility of open spaces on each floor. Open space wasn't so in vogue then, the original plan for support probably would have required load bearing walls throughout the floors.

emmeka
November 25th, 2003, 02:23 PM
Okay I get it now. Thanks.

kliq6
November 25th, 2003, 04:59 PM
yeah th efloor plates are big on this job, its like for a financial service firm and not a publisher

Clarknt67
November 28th, 2003, 12:14 PM
yeah th efloor plates are big on this job, its like for a financial service firm and not a publisher

Actually, it's a very smart and common plan now for a publisher. Magazine publishers need their offices to be flexible. Generally, most of the staff works in a cube and bullpen situation (it's a real sign of status to get an office at many magazines). They're highly collabrative environments and require a lot of interaction, say between editor's and designers, so open spaces work better.

Also, as a corporation they need to be able to reconfigure office spaces quickly and easily. Seven years ago, Oprah magazine did not exist. After a very successul launch, Hearst had a new crown in it's publishing portfolio. The staff there quickly grew to the size of their other big books, Harper's Bazaar, Good Housekeeping. But where to house all the new people? Custom publishing (doing a mag for a single sponsor, like say Lincoln drivers) is increasingly popular and lucrative and requires workspaces that may vary month to month.

billyblancoNYC
November 29th, 2003, 02:32 AM
Oy vey, Oprah.

Clarknt67
November 30th, 2003, 01:37 PM
Oy vey, Oprah.

You are clear I declared it a successful magazine, not necessarily a GOOD one?

billyblancoNYC
December 1st, 2003, 12:57 AM
This is true.

kliq6
December 2nd, 2003, 01:05 PM
Steel will begin on this project when?

emmeka
December 2nd, 2003, 02:07 PM
http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/

There is a construction shedule on the main website.

There are also picures insid the building during demolition and renderings and a virtual tour (which i cant seem to play on my pc).

NYatKNIGHT
December 2nd, 2003, 03:26 PM
Great website! I got that virtual tour going after a minute or so - very cool.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/artist/render3.jpg

NoyokA
December 2nd, 2003, 04:17 PM
Thanks emmeka.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image2.jpg

I can’t put my finger on it but this isn’t just a cross-braced box, it has that unquestionable Foster touch.

NYguy
December 2nd, 2003, 06:20 PM
I like the way its visible from the park...

emmeka
December 3rd, 2003, 07:07 AM
the buildings plan is actually rectangular instead of square (not mentioning the shaved off corners).

ZippyTheChimp
December 3rd, 2003, 10:25 AM
Thanks emmeka.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image2.jpg

I can’t put my finger on it but this isn’t just a cross-braced box, it has that unquestionable Foster touch.
Instead of vertical, the corners follow the triangles.

Oops. Emmeka just said that.

emmeka
December 3rd, 2003, 12:23 PM
I hope that this will be the building that becomes a new icon of new york, the one that appears on all the guidebooks and architecture books.

Clarknt67
December 3rd, 2003, 12:43 PM
This image I hadn't seen before.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/artist/render2.jpg

I see better now how gracefully it's integrated into the first 6 stories. The earlier drawings--to me--looked like a modern box plopped on top a vintage building.

But this rendering seems to indicat they're using the roof of the current building as a sort of "street-level" platform for the tower, as if there will be a grand lobby on the 7th floor, with views of the deco columns. It looks like it will be great.

emmeka
December 3rd, 2003, 12:47 PM
uh huh!!!

TLOZ Link5
December 3rd, 2003, 12:52 PM
I'm so glad this is being built. Foster's renderings are normally very honest, so I'm extremely optimistic that this is what the building will look like.

billyblancoNYC
December 3rd, 2003, 02:57 PM
Seems it will be much more impressive at night, when the office lights are on presenting a nice contrasting to the criss-crossing steel. This is a great one.

JonY
December 4th, 2003, 06:18 AM
That's what they call a "Fascadomy."
I thought the common term is facadism.

BTW I'm sure most of you have seen St Mary's Axe, otherwise known as The Swiss Re HQ in London. IMHO The new Hearst Magazine Tower (total lettable area = 79,500 m2) is kinda like an angular version of the "cocoon" in London:

___________http://www.fosterandpartners.com/internetsite/images/project_media/1004/1004_02.jpg

emmeka
December 4th, 2003, 09:07 AM
yes, but they are only similar in the style of their structure.

JonY
December 4th, 2003, 09:26 AM
IMHO The new Hearst Magazine Tower is kinda like an angular version of the "cocoon" in London
I think that's what I sort of meant emmeka :) A bit of a grey area there.

emmeka
December 4th, 2003, 09:31 AM
Okay, Okay. I just thought that you meant ....... oh never mind!

BrooklynRider
December 5th, 2003, 02:19 PM
That's what they call a "Fascadomy."
I thought the common term is facadism.

BTW I'm sure most of you have seen St Mary's Axe, otherwise known as The Swiss Re HQ in London. IMHO The new Hearst Magazine Tower (total lettable area = 79,500 m2) is kinda like an angular version of the "cocoon" in London:

___________http://www.fosterandpartners.com/internetsite/images/project_media/1004/1004_02.jpg

I am SO glad we are not getting a dildo building in NYC.

JMC
December 5th, 2003, 02:32 PM
fascadomy has a more negative ring...few planner buddies, down in DC, use it a lot...

JonY
December 5th, 2003, 02:50 PM
I am SO glad we are not getting a dildo building in NYC.
Ouch! Depending on where you 'put' it.....looks like it would hurt re: the width. :shock: :lol:

JMC Yeah, facadism also has a negative ring to it too. Not many people are crazy about keeping beautiful old facades from yesteryear and plonking a not-so-sympathetic scraper in the middle.

Even though personally I love most of Foster & Partner's designs, not sure about Hearst Magazine Tower's positioning in this case. IMHO As a stand-alone it would probably look terrific.

emmeka
December 5th, 2003, 03:58 PM
Oh i hate it when people call it either of these;

The dildo
The erotic ghurkin
The rocket
The egg building

When you see it in real life these are the last things that come into your mind, its just so amazing!

Anyway, that hearst website is great isnt it, demolition pics, renderings, virtual tours, shedule what more do you want?

Clarknt67
December 5th, 2003, 04:00 PM
Oh i hate it when people call it either of these;

The dildo
The erotic ghurkin
The rocket
The egg building

When you see it in real life these are the last things that come into your mind, its just so amazing!

Anyway, that hearst website is great isnt it, demolition pics, renderings, virtual tours, shedule what more do you want?

It is amazing to me that they have created such a comprehensive site about the projects. I guess they must have a sense they need to keep the PR spining in a positive direction?

emmeka
December 5th, 2003, 04:04 PM
suppose so.

JMGarcia
December 5th, 2003, 05:03 PM
My opinion of this building is that it is much better when it looks like it is slightly tapering as in this pic

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/artist/render2.jpg

Than the square look as in this

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image2.jpg

As far as it works with the facade of the original base, it is sooo unrelated to it that each can be taken seperately almost. I don't necessarily see that sort of total unrelation as a bad thing.

The Foster building might work better on its own, but given that the base was there, was going to be saved, and that there would be a new tower on top then I think this is as good as could be expected. The alternative may have been to completely replicate the design for the original tower that was supposed to be built on top. That would probably be considered inadequate though by today's office standards.

Clarknt67
December 5th, 2003, 06:13 PM
My opinion of this building is that it is much better when it looks like it is slightly tapering as in this pic

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/artist/render2.jpg

Than the square look as in this

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image2.jpg

As far as it works with the facade of the original base, it is sooo unrelated to it that each can be taken seperately almost. I don't necessarily see that sort of total unrelation as a bad thing.

The Foster building might work better on its own, but given that the base was there, was going to be saved, and that there would be a new tower on top then I think this is as good as could be expected. The alternative may have been to completely replicate the design for the original tower that was supposed to be built on top. That would probably be considered inadequate though by today's office standards.

yes, I was justing imagining what a cool architectural statement it would have been to have either built the tower as true as possible to the original plan or made a deco tower that would have blended seemlessly, so future generations would never have been able to tell they were built almost 100 years apart. One could even have given the new stone a weathered look.

ZippyTheChimp
December 5th, 2003, 06:50 PM
No, no, no. It would never turn out like the original. Too expensive. We would wind up with...Muschamp's description makes me laugh,

Processed cheese. :P

Clarknt67
December 6th, 2003, 01:41 PM
No, no, no. It would never turn out like the original. Too expensive. We would wind up with...Muschamp's description makes me laugh,

Processed cheese. :P

No, but that was my point, what if it did turn out great? what if it DID look totally vintage? It would be Hearst's answer to the statement that they just don't build em llike they used to.

Which is not to say I'm not thrilled with this project as is.

Kris
December 19th, 2003, 07:31 PM
December 21, 2003

COMMERCIAL PROPERTY | MIDTOWN

A Tower Designed to Be Environmentally Friendly

By JOHN HOLUSHA

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2003/12/18/realestate/21commprop-184.jpg
Brian Schwagerl, senior facilities manager, with a model of the Hearst Corporation headquarters building at Eighth Avenue and 56th Street.

THE new Hearst Corporation headquarters building at Eighth Avenue and 56th Street will be an architectural standout, with a 42-story stainless steel and glass tower designed by Norman Foster rising from the interior of the six-story masonry structure the company has occupied since 1928.

The building is also being designed and equipped to be energy efficient, to minimize waste and to provide a bright, attractive interior environment for the 1,800 employees who will work there.

Such an approach is considered green, or environmentally friendly, because it reduces the consumption of resources while holding down pollution added to land, air and water.

Indeed, executives of the privately held corporation, say they will be seeking the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design award from the United States Green Buildings Council, a nonprofit association of designers, builders and consultants pressing for environmentally thoughtful development.

No building in New York City has ever won the award, although several upstate projects have been designated. Because Hearst will own and occupy the building, both the exterior and interior will be rated according to the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design criteria, more commonly known as the LEED standards.

Another new Manhattan building, 7 World Trade Center, is expected to seek the LEED award under a different set of standards, the organization's new core and shell criteria, according to Ashok Gupta, an official of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a leading environmental group. This is because developers of multitenant buildings build only the inner core and outer shell of their structures, with the tenants controlling the layout and finishing work of their own spaces.

The new criteria could allow Silverstein Properties, which is building the replacement for one of those destroyed in the Sept. 11 attack, to seek the award for its own efforts, regardless of tenant decisions.

The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program is an important effort in the right direction, said Mr. Gupta, who is director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's air and energy program. "LEED is a good test; it's really the only one out there," he said. "It has become a national standard."

But because it was designed with suburban projects in mind, with points awarded for installing bicycle racks and having grass growing on the roof, it has been difficult for skyscrapers in urban locations like Manhattan to qualify. "It is harder for urban buildings to score points," Mr. Gupta said.

The approach at the Hearst tower appears to be a combination of common sense, careful attention to how office buildings actually operate, canny shopping and some innovative design. Whether it will meet the green building criteria cannot be determined until the 850,000-square-foot, $500 million tower is completed in June 2006.

But with officials of both the developer, Tishman Speyer Properties, and one of its consulting engineers, Flack & Kurtz, on the board of the Green Buildings Council, it will not lack for advice.

PART of the common sense part of the approach is to ban the use of materials, coatings and adhesives that emit volatile organic compounds — known as V.O.C.'s — a family of chemicals that may include some that are health hazards. "We won't have a new building smell," said Brian Schwagerl, senior facilities manager with Hearst. "We will have zero V.O.C.'s.

Another is recycling, which reduces the amount of waste to be disposed of and reduces the amount of virgin materials that need to be grown or mined to develop new products.

Although the new tower was developed conceptually as an extension of the tower originally designed to eventually be built on top of the old structure, in fact the existing building has been gutted to its landmarked walls. In recent weeks, excavation machines have been pounding at the hard Manhattan bedrock to prepare a foundation for the new building.

According to Mr. Schwagerl, about 85 percent of the demolished material has been recycled in one way or another. The steel for the new structure will be 20 percent lighter than that in a typical Manhattan office building because of the structural design and will contain at least 90 percent recycled content.

(Since virtually all the structural steel produced in the United States comes from mills that use scrap steel as a raw material, project managers would have been hard pressed to find beams and columns made from iron ore.)

One of the distinctive features of the building will be a grand three-story atrium, with escalators taking visitors, who will come through the existing entrance on Eighth Avenue, upward under a skylight. The escalators will be set amid a stepped wall with water flowing downward as the people rise.

Regulating the temperature of such a large space would normally require huge volumes of chilled air and big refrigeration units to produce it.

Engineers working on the project have devised some other solutions. For one thing, all the glass in the building will have a coating that tends to admit visible light while reflecting a large part of the invisible solar radiation that causes heat.

The floor of the atrium will be fitted with pipes that contain chilled liquid that will absorb the heat rays that do enter, before they can be reflected back into the air.

"The entrance opens into a 70- to 80-foot-high space with a skylight," said Asif Syed, a senior vice president of Flack & Kurtz. "That volume of space would consume a lot of energy with conventional air-conditioning." Because of the tubes, which can carry heated or chilled fluid depending on the season, the floor becomes a radiant surface either emitting heat or absorbing it, without the need for conventional air-conditioning units and ductwork. This approach has been used in Europe to cool large spaces, Mr. Syed said, but as far as he knows, it is the first time it has been used in Manhattan.

Even the water feature surrounding the escalators is being pressed into service to help control the temperature in the entry space. "The water feature is there for architectural reasons, but we can use it by chilling the water flowing over it," Mr. Syed said. "If we want an ambient temperature of 75 degrees, we will cool the water to 65 degrees so that the water feature becomes a radiant chilling source as well."

In the upper floors of the building, high efficiency air-conditioning equipment will be used, with sensors and variable speed blowers designed to adjust the volumes of air according to actual need, rather than at a preset level. The chilling units will use none of the chemicals that have partially depleted the earth's protective ozone layer in the atmosphere.

"We have a system that will respond to the needs of the building," Mr. Syed said. "At lunchtime, when people leave and are not running their computers and generating heat, the sensors will detect this and adjust the system."

LIGHT and motion sensors are to be installed as well, to turn off lights when people are absent or when there is enough natural light coming the glass outer wall that artificial lighting is not needed. "In closed offices we will use a motion sensor, and in open spaces, a light sensor," he said. "There will be a great deal of natural light, but people just do not turn off their lights, even when they do not need them."

A grass roof may not be practical in Manhattan, but the roof on the Hearst tower will be put to use to collect rainwater. This is expected to result in a 25 percent reduction in the amount of water that will be dumped into the city's sewage system during rainfalls, compared with a similar conventional building.

The rainwater will be stored and used to replace water lost to evaporation in the office air-conditioning system. It will also be fed into a special pumping system to irrigate interior plantings and street trees. The captured rain is expected to account for about 50 percent of the tower's irrigation needs.


Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

Gulcrapek
December 19th, 2003, 11:07 PM
I like this standard for the future.

emmeka
December 20th, 2003, 05:59 PM
The Swiss Re tower in London (by foster) was designed with rising atriums that spiral up the building this is so that a natural flow of air is obtained without ventilation. All of fosters buildings are equipped with such envirometally friendly and energy saving systems.

Gulcrapek
December 20th, 2003, 06:26 PM
Yeah... him and Fox&Fowle are the main big-firm pioneers, I think.

emmeka
January 13th, 2004, 02:21 PM
steel is supposed to rise in february but the concrete is already underway;

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image29.jpg

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image30.jpg

Unfortunatley i didnt take the pictures, they are from the hearst tower website.

p.s. the virtual tour is great (if your computor will have the guts to run it)

radical overemphasis
January 13th, 2004, 02:37 PM
I have looked at and read this forum for over two years and i will be even more exited to see this start to rise tan the freedom tower I think

Ninjahedge
January 13th, 2004, 05:08 PM
I think it looks kind of like a large towel or storage rack on top of an old wooden box.

They did not try to make it look like it was coming or integrated in any way with the original building, it looks kind of clunky.....

Ah well, whatever.

radical overemphasis
January 13th, 2004, 05:10 PM
that is your opinion and i respect that. although i strongly dissagree.

emmeka
January 14th, 2004, 02:31 PM
Ah, radical. you remind me of someone I used to know.

Me.

Ninjahedge
January 14th, 2004, 03:36 PM
What always annoys me about all of this is the fact that people seem to think that there are only two camps when it comes to "Architectural innovation".

there is the camp that likes the radically different architecture, then there is everyone else. Somehow the "everyone else" is lumped into a group that does not "favor anything new and innovative".

That is a gross classification that is extremely unfair.

there are all types, mione being the type that likes to see some sort of integration and progression with the surroundings.

THAT shows skill to me. This looks like one of the toys I had when I was a kid. Go to any engineering class in architecture and you will see simple, but divergent geometrical designs like this one. I went through them, I saw them 20 years ago.

The hardest part about architecture are two things. One is a knowledge of the materials you are working with. It would be nice to have a building with no walls, but you have to be realistic about what you are doing.

Second is an integration. Using what is around you. Doing something radically divergent is relatively easy compared to trying to get something like that to appear to be the same, or coming from the existing building, while at the same time have a new and fresh feel to it.

So whatever. You are entitled to your opinions, but I have seen so many gharish buildings go up in midtown lately, this just looks like another attempt to do something "more different".

Clarknt67
January 30th, 2004, 12:42 PM
What always annoys me about all of this is the fact that people seem to think that there are only two camps when it comes to "Architectural innovation".

there is the camp that likes the radically different architecture, then there is everyone else. Somehow the "everyone else" is lumped into a group that does not "favor anything new and innovative".

That is a gross classification that is extremely unfair.

there are all types, mione being the type that likes to see some sort of integration and progression with the surroundings.

THAT shows skill to me. This looks like one of the toys I had when I was a kid. Go to any engineering class in architecture and you will see simple, but divergent geometrical designs like this one. I went through them, I saw them 20 years ago.

The hardest part about architecture are two things. One is a knowledge of the materials you are working with. It would be nice to have a building with no walls, but you have to be realistic about what you are doing.

Second is an integration. Using what is around you. Doing something radically divergent is relatively easy compared to trying to get something like that to appear to be the same, or coming from the existing building, while at the same time have a new and fresh feel to it.

So whatever. You are entitled to your opinions, but I have seen so many gharish buildings go up in midtown lately, this just looks like another attempt to do something "more different".

Well the original building on which the foster tower is based could not reallly be more garish. I love art deco, but lets be honest, simple and tasteful it's not.

I think the idea of the glass tower on top was not to integrate seamlessly into the original, but rather create a new era for the building. I wasn't a fan of it at first, but I've come around. Having walked through that building many times, I'm able to visualize the new interior spaces and I think it will be a real beauty.

Freedom Tower
January 31st, 2004, 12:53 PM
Ah, radical. you remind me of someone I used to know.

Me.

Haha. Didn't we figure out that "emmeka" IS "Radical overemphasis" ?
We still havent heard from emmeka about this, have we? Why did you make another name?

ZippyTheChimp
February 18th, 2004, 07:00 PM
Crane at the Hearst Tower site.
http://www.pbase.com/image/26174466.jpg

Kris
May 3rd, 2004, 12:14 PM
Jewels on the horizon

New midtown skyscrapers for Hearst and The Times aim to rise above the ordinary.

BY JUSTIN DAVIDSON
STAFF WRITER

May 2, 2004

The towers that make up the midtown Manhattan skyline are a motley bunch. In among the elegant needle of the Empire State Building, the twinkling chrome cap of the Chrysler Building and the runaway-truck ramp of Citicorp is a chorus line of undistinguished slabs. The ensemble changes constantly, yet the stars remain the same.

Two projects that for now exist mostly on paper hold promise as high-rise heartthrobs: Renzo Piano's New York Times Tower, poised for the corner of Eighth Avenue and 42nd Street, and Norman Foster's Hearst Tower, already going up at Eighth and 56th. Both will one day reach out to passersby and demand a strong opinion rather than just a glazed nod.

The Times Tower, a glass-skinned beauty sheathed in a see-through veil of ceramic tubes, is designed to disappear. An actual 52-story skyscraper rarely looks as gossamer as it does in models and renderings, but here, lightness is both a metaphoric and an architectural goal.

Structural symbolism

The Times wants a symbol of its journalistic values and the qualities of an ideal democracy: openness, integrity, transparency. Piano wants a structure that doesn't glower behind dark glass like a highway patrolman wearing shades. Instead, he has imagined a self-effacing edifice that will shimmer and dissolve as it rises to a slender needle.

To achieve that mistiness, Piano decided to enclose each floor in untinted, ultraclear, low-iron glass, then wrap it in a coat of white rods, which will deflect heat and glare. The veil of rods continues upward well beyond the top story, making it look as though the shroud were being plucked skyward by a heavenly hand.

Theatrical illusion

The Hearst Tower spins another kind of theatrical illusion: the effect of one era's modern architecture giving birth to another's. Foster's crystal rocket will rise out of a squat, six-story structure built in 1928 for the corporation founded by William Randolph Hearst. The architect and set designer Joseph Urban gave the International Magazine Building, as it was grandiosely called, a wanly heroic touch with columns that reach past the roofline, topped with precarious Art Deco urns. It looked unfinished, and it was: The Depression squelched Hearst's plan to erect a high-rise on top of it.

"I wanted something which had qualities of the theater and where sculpture was an important factor," Hearst cabled Urban in 1927. His headquarters should display "conspicuous architectural character" that would reflect "the public character of our publications." What he wanted, in other words, was a work of architectural branding - which his namesake corporation still desires.

More than 70 years later, Foster has responded to Hearst's cravings for boldness and modernity with a crystal box supported not, as in traditional skyscrapers, by a load-bearing concrete core, but by an external honeycomb of steel, which the architect calls a "diagrid" of beams.

The relationship between the new and the old is one of polite separation. Foster has eviscerated Urban's building, and the new 42-story palace seems to float above and behind the original shell. The setback pleased the Landmarks Preservation Commission, which amiably waved the project on when it came up for approval in 2001.

The original has become all facade; the new one consists of naked structure. Where Urban emphasized the corners with exclamation points of fluted concrete columns, Foster marks them with geometric gaps, following a rigorous logic of triangles combining into hexagons: Look Ma, no vertical lines! Seen from the inside, these bird-beak corners will appear as breathtakingly canted glass walls. Urban's sidewalk setpiece will be relegated to a character role, while the real drama takes place above.

The power of place

The Hearst and Times projects will fill in a media corridor that runs from the Times Square agglomeration of Reuters, Condé Nast and MTV, among others, to the Time Warner Center at Columbus Circle. There's an irony to this concentration of communicators. Even as the industry grapples with a nebulous, digital future, it is still reckoning with its masonry-and-paper past. Hearst and The Times both emerged from the 19th century to become informational behemoths in the 20th. While the millennium was supposed to herald the dispersal of media into cyberspace and suburban office parks, these two companies (like many others) have bet not just on real estate and location but on the galvanizing power of architecture.

Place wasn't supposed to matter, but media architecture shows that place matters more than ever," says Aurora Wallace, an architectural historian at New York University and author of the forthcoming book "The Architecture of News."

"If you're not on the skyline, you don't exist."

The Times and Hearst buildings do more than proclaim the supremacy of their media brands. They also represent a long tradition of magnanimous design, of private architecture as civic gesture. The 16th century palazzos of Florence provide one example, Rockefeller Center another. What makes these two new towers qualify as urban gifts is that they are better than the bottom line demands.

Recent midtown architecture, expensive and flashy though it may be, has not risen to that standard. At Columbus Circle, the Time Warner Center throws open the doors of its luxury shopping mall to the throngs, but it has also crowned the West Side with two large, dark forms, like the shadows of a pair of gangsters in a classic film noir. This building is all business.

A dozen blocks south, a complicated coalition of public officials and private interests has transformed Times Square into a public gathering place at the base of a klatch of busy high-rises that are more collectively hyperactive than individually exhilarating. The most recent of them, Times Square Tower, designed by Skidmore Owings and Merrill, will open soon; like its neighbors, it aspires to jazz heat mixed with corporate cool.

Like all skyscrapers, Foster's and Piano's must make economic sense. The Hearst corporation will take over its whole new location, bringing under one roof publications currently scattered across nine midtown addresses. The Times will move from its location on West 43rd Street between Seventh and Eighth avenues to just the lower portion of its new tower; the project's developer, Forest City Ratner, is trying to rent out the rest of the building. Yet, these structures are intended not only to squeeze a dollar out of every bolt but to make strong statements of collective aspiration.

Laboratories for design

Both are also architectural research facilities. They have been engineered to withstand our era's new range of nightmare scenarios and allow thousands of people to flee with maximum efficiency. They aim to consume as little energy as possible and set ambitious standards for green design.

Having dispensed with the traditional doughnut of cubicles wrapped around a central elevator core, their layouts strive to distribute soul-nourishing daylight and views to every rank of worker. The communal spaces have a magnificently unnecessary grandeur: The Times boasts a garden cloister on the ground floor; Hearst, a cafeteria in a lofty atrium.

"The architects have made spaces for workers to relax and interact, which is a whole lot different than the American mentality of gathering around the water cooler," says architectural historian Carol Willis, who runs the Skyscraper Museum in Battery Park City. "These buildings are a test case for New York. It's more expensive to build a new paradigm. Will it be attractive enough for tenants to demand it and economical enough for developers to supply it? I don't know, but they're certainly doing a lot of research and development, which is not exactly typical for an office building in New York."

Architectural homage

Designed for old-fashioned companies that perform fundamentally the same tasks they did more than 100 years ago, each tower also pays its own architectural homage. Foster's Hearst dwarves and detaches itself from Urban's, proclaiming how far the art has evolved in 75 years.

And even in all its glittering modernity, the Times Tower gestures toward the 19th century impulse to decorate the city. Its heat-deflecting ceramic tubes recall the elegant terra cotta ornamentation on such civic monuments as the Woolworth Building, says Willis. "Whether Piano was conscious of it or not, it's really part of a New York tradition."

At the moment, that tradition is partly in the hands of an Italian and a British lord, who bring to the Manhattan skyscraper sensibilities forged in Europe and honed around the globe. For years, New York City has watched other megalopoli become skyscraper laboratories while it tolerated towers of modest distinction.

With the planned rebirth of its downtown and this pair of midtown jewels in the offing, Manhattan is once again tending to its skyline silhouette.

Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.


New York Times Tower (http://forums.wirednewyork.com/viewtopic.php?t=634)

krulltime
May 3rd, 2004, 12:57 PM
AMEN to that! :wink:

NoyokA
May 6th, 2004, 06:27 PM
A high resolution rendering:

http://www.permasteelisausa.com/image/exteriors/Hearst2.jpg

Here's a first look at the interior lobby:

http://www.permasteelisausa.com/image/exteriors/Hearst1.jpg

This space should not be closed to the public, it was afterall designed for us, however things have since changed.

http://www.permasteelisausa.com/image/exteriors/Hearst3.jpg

NoyokA
May 6th, 2004, 06:31 PM
Part of the lobbies supercolumns have already been assembled:

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image45.jpg

OKoranjes
May 7th, 2004, 05:24 AM
Wow, this looks so great. I have been to Foster's "gherkin" Swiss Re in London and was dissapointed that I wasn't allowed in any further than the lobby--so I hope we are at Least allowed in that atrium pictured above.

Archit_K
May 7th, 2004, 10:42 PM
Stern those are some killer renderings of the Hearst Magazine Building Lobby, not bad for Foster and Partners, for some reason when I look at HMB it reminds me of Foster's preliminary WTC proposal. Do you think he recycled the WTC proposal for the HMB or that’s just his style?

Gulcrapek
May 7th, 2004, 10:50 PM
I thought the HMB was designed before his WTC design...

NoyokA
May 8th, 2004, 12:56 AM
Foster’s was specifically choosen for his handling of historically sensitive sites, among them The British Museum. The contrast between the old and the modern is refreshing, the approach is apparently similar on the Hearst Magazine Tower project.

http://www.0lll.com/lud/pages/architecture/archgallery/foster_britishmuseum/images/great_court_02.jpg

http://www.0lll.com/lud/pages/architecture/archgallery/foster_britishmuseum/images/british_museum_11.jpg

http://www.0lll.com/lud/pages/architecture/archgallery/foster_britishmuseum/images/british_museum_05.jpg

Likewise the Hearst lobby will be light and airy.

krulltime
May 8th, 2004, 01:39 AM
What a fantastic building...I am so happy this is getting built in NYC. :D

Clarknt67
May 13th, 2004, 03:38 PM
I thought the HMB was designed before his WTC design...

It was. I'm guess that's just the ideas he's playing with now.

Edward
May 17th, 2004, 10:32 PM
Construction of Hearst Magazine Building (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/default.htm). 16 May 2004.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/images/hearst_magazine_tower_16may04.jpg (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/default.htm)

NoyokA
May 25th, 2004, 06:29 PM
Hearst's modern work space:

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/3dinterior3260.jpg

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/3dinterior1260.jpg

In many cases there will be a specific magazine for each floor.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/Section_10260.jpg

Cross section of the lobby.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/cafeteriaseating2260.jpg

Escalators leading from the public area to the Hearst's lobby.

krulltime
May 25th, 2004, 07:57 PM
Wow! I must get a JOB there! Not Really...not even in my dreams. :cry:

dbhstockton
May 26th, 2004, 02:39 AM
You can at least try to get an interview. :wink:

I must confess that I once interviewed at Conde nast so I could get a look at Gehry's cafeteria (It was at a magazine I'd be embarrassed to work for). My resume isn't as attuned recently to the publishing industry, though, so I think I'd have trouble getting an interview with Hearst.

krulltime
May 26th, 2004, 11:12 AM
I know I will interview for a cleaning person that way I get access to all of the building! :mrgreen:

Although I don't know how to clean well...Maybe I need to practice.

NoyokA
June 1st, 2004, 09:27 AM
http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image46.jpg

May 21, 2004: Panoramic shot from ground floor of The Hearst Tower.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image47.jpg

May 21, 2004: Panoramic shot from 4th floor of The Hearst Tower.

The super-columns:

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image48.jpg

May 24, 2004: Columns readied before being put into place.

The heart of the structure, the central core:

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image49.jpg

May 24, 2004: Progress on the inner core of The Hearst Tower site.

dtolman
June 2nd, 2004, 10:53 AM
Wow! Those are some fantastic shots!

Is the Hearst Corp updating these on a regular basis?

krulltime
June 2nd, 2004, 11:04 AM
This one is going to go up really fast! I am so happy. :D

NoyokA
June 11th, 2004, 09:14 AM
Some exciting images as the lobby’s super columns are assembled. Think of it as a giant erector set that will support a 36 storey skyscraper.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image50.jpg

May 28, 2004: The 65,000 lb. keystone beam arrives at the Hearst Tower site.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image51.jpg

June 3, 2004: 17-ton super column being erected at the Hearst Tower site.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image52.jpg

June 3: 2004: Crane positions super column at the Hearst Tower site.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image53.jpg

June 4, 2004: Super column positioned into place.

Archit_K
June 14th, 2004, 02:34 AM
sexy sexy look at Norman Foster design go.

NoyokA
July 3rd, 2004, 11:46 AM
Construction is now visible above the street, base, and scaffolding:

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/Hearst.jpg

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/Hearst3.jpg

Construction has also begun on the diagrid:

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/Hearst2.jpg

Bob
July 4th, 2004, 10:37 PM
Saaay... would anybody here have a shot of the original 30's-era plan for a tower at this site to go with the Urban base?

I recall this is not the only building in NY that was stopped mid-stream due to the Depression.

Archit_K
July 8th, 2004, 03:50 AM
Saaay... would anybody here have a shot of the original 30's-era plan for a tower at this site to go with the Urban base?

I recall this is not the only building in NY that was stopped mid-stream due to the Depression.

It proposed by the firm George P. Post & Sons which was the extra floors for the 6 story Hearst Magazine Building. I couldn't find any renderings or plans for 1930s orignal proposed of the extra floors. I'm interested in seeing these too.

Yeah quite of few buildings wasn't completed as stated in architectural drawings b/c of the Great Depression for example the North MetLife Building adjecnt to the MetLife Tower.
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/28newyorkcity-metropolitianlife.jpg[/img]
My friend told me it's designs was taller than the Empire State Building.

TLOZ Link5
July 8th, 2004, 02:14 PM
Yes, the MetLife North building was meant to be the world's tallest. There's actually some skepticism as to whether MetLife actually intended to finish the building, but the 30-story completed portion is obviously to the scale of a much larger building. It is now the headquarters of Credit Suisse First Boston.

The Farmers Trust Building at 20 Exchange Place was also "cut short," so to speak, due to the Depression. The original plans were for it to be 975 feet high to its roof, which would have been a pyramidal crown — easily the tallest building in the Financial District pre-WTC.

According to Higher by Neil Bascomb, there are two other notable "never builts" in New York City from this era: the 110-story Larkin Building on West 42nd Street that would have been slightly shorter than the ESB; and a 1600-foot, 150-story building on (I think) Chambers Street, just north of City Hall in the old wholesale district.

Gulcrapek
July 8th, 2004, 02:33 PM
It was a blessing Larkin never got built. I never heard about the second one but it sounds interesting.

TLOZ Link5
July 8th, 2004, 02:37 PM
It was a blessing Larkin never got built. I never heard about the second one but it sounds interesting.


Agreed. From what I've seen of the Larkin's renderings it didn't look very interesting. The Chambers Street building I can only give rudimentary knowledge on, because I lent my copy of Higher to a friend and he's not done with it. Stern, I think, has a copy, because when I went on Amazon.com a while back I noticed that someone with the ID "Stern" had written a review for the book.

Archit_K
July 8th, 2004, 03:44 PM
Come on people it's not that bad.
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/281newyorkcity-larkintower.jpg
On second thought maybe it is.

NYguy
July 8th, 2004, 06:20 PM
Come on people it's not that bad.
http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/532/281newyorkcity-larkintower.jpg
On second thought maybe it is.

I don't know, by now it no doubt would have been topped by some kind of antenna, giving it a more "needle-like" appearance. It might have looked nice illuminated at night...

NoyokA
July 8th, 2004, 06:33 PM
Agreed. From what I've seen of the Larkin's renderings it didn't look very interesting. The Chambers Street building I can only give rudimentary knowledge on, because I lent my copy of Higher to a friend and he's not done with it. Stern, I think, has a copy, because when I went on Amazon.com a while back I noticed that someone with the ID "Stern" had written a review for the book.

That wasn't me.

TLOZ Link5
July 8th, 2004, 06:42 PM
Okie dokie, then.

Archit_K
July 8th, 2004, 06:48 PM
TOLZLink5 who was it then?

TLOZ Link5
July 8th, 2004, 07:01 PM
TOLZLink5 who was it then?

Somebody else with the ID "Stern" apparently.

hella good
July 9th, 2004, 05:22 AM
I am so thankful that they didnt build that. the hearst tower project is so much more interesting.

thirduncle
July 9th, 2004, 10:02 AM
Notice how the top of North MetLife resembles a greek temple atop a mountain.

The USA sure had some great architects until Walter Gropius and his Bauhaus brainwashing kit took control at Harvard.

NoyokA
July 9th, 2004, 10:06 AM
I am so thankful that they didnt build that. the hearst tower project is so much more interesting.

The pictured building is the Larkin Building and it was proposed for West 42nd Street on a site that is now the original McGraw Hill Building.

Supposedly, I have read that the original designs for the Hearst Magazine Tower have mysteriously disappeared. In other words they were lost in time.

NoyokA
July 9th, 2004, 10:12 AM
Yes, the MetLife North building was meant to be the world's tallest. There's actually some skepticism as to whether MetLife actually intended to finish the building, but the 30-story completed portion is obviously to the scale of a much larger building. It is now the headquarters of Credit Suisse First Boston.

The vaulted entrance also has a grander presence befitting a signature building. I’ve always dreamt that one day someone will fulfill the original design, but perhaps in a modern-day fashion clad it in glass and make it shimmer.

ddjiii
July 10th, 2004, 12:48 AM
Elsewhere on the site the Metropolitan Life Insurance Buildling (that's what we're talking about right? Where is it, Herald Square?) was built in 1909. So how could it have been cut short because of the depression.

I have a feeling this is a dumb question, but I don't yet know why...

hella good
July 10th, 2004, 06:01 AM
I am so thankful that they didnt build that. the hearst tower project is so much more interesting.

The pictured building is the Larkin Building and it was proposed for West 42nd Street on a site that is now the original McGraw Hill Building.

Supposedly, I have read that the original designs for the Hearst Magazine Tower have mysteriously disappeared. In other words they were lost in time.

thanks for clearing that up for me. I knew about the past of the hearst tower project and the metlife north tower but i must have gotten a little confused.

BrooklynRider
July 10th, 2004, 12:14 PM
Elsewhere on the site the Metropolitan Life Insurance Buildling (that's what we're talking about right? Where is it, Herald Square?) was built in 1909. So how could it have been cut short because of the depression.

I have a feeling this is a dumb question, but I don't yet know why...

The MetLife Tower is on Madison Park (at 23rd Street). Now, the building currently referred to as the Metlife Tower is the building that was built in 1909 (the one with the clock) - it ws the tallest building in the world until the completion of the Woolworth Building in 1913. The Larkin building is the building to the north of it, it was never completed. I belive it also has the highest ratio of elevators to tenants/floors of any building in the city. There was an article on it years ago about how tenants rarely had to wait for an elevator because there were enough elevators and shafts built to accommodate the entire tower.

TLOZ Link5
July 10th, 2004, 02:51 PM
Elsewhere on the site the Metropolitan Life Insurance Buildling (that's what we're talking about right? Where is it, Herald Square?) was built in 1909. So how could it have been cut short because of the depression.

I have a feeling this is a dumb question, but I don't yet know why...

The MetLife buildings are on Madison Square, not Herald Square. In addition, the 1909 MetLife building at One Madison Avenue is referred to as the South building, whereas the unfinished 1930s building we are referring to is called the North Building.

NoyokA
July 11th, 2004, 07:04 PM
The Larkin building is the building to the north of it, it was never completed. I belive it also has the highest ratio of elevators to tenants/floors of any building in the city. There was an article on it years ago about how tenants rarely had to wait for an elevator because there were enough elevators and shafts built to accommodate the entire tower.

The Larkin Building was never built. It was proposed at the current site of the original Mc Graw Hill Building. The stunted building to the north of the original Met Life Building is originally enough the Met Life North Building.

NoyokA
July 17th, 2004, 02:07 PM
http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image54.jpg

June 28, 2004: Elevation floors 10, 11, and 12 looking Northwest

James Kovata
July 17th, 2004, 04:22 PM
EXCELLENT. This building is definitely going to be a landmark.

Clarknt67
July 22nd, 2004, 01:29 PM
I was please to see the other day that the steel is rising. It's a few stories above the 6th floor (previously the building's top floor).

NoyokA
July 24th, 2004, 08:47 PM
http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image55.jpg

June 30, 2004: Diagrid construction begins at The Hearst Tower project site.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image56.jpg

July 15, 2004: Node is fastened.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image57.jpg

July 15, 2004: Workers prepare 14th floor node.

Catching pace:

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image58.jpg

July 16, 2004: “Y nodes” installed as The Hearst Tower project reaches an early milestone.

Archit_K
July 26th, 2004, 12:29 AM
The node is fascinating.

NYatKNIGHT
July 26th, 2004, 11:02 AM
Nice shots Stern. This should be a fun one to watch rise.

NYatKNIGHT
August 2nd, 2004, 12:45 PM
http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/NYatKNIGHT/hearst_1.sized.jpg

Johnnyboy
August 2nd, 2004, 01:34 PM
when were were the pictures made?

NYatKNIGHT
August 2nd, 2004, 02:02 PM
yesterday

hella good
August 4th, 2004, 07:00 AM
cant wait to see the facade!

NoyokA
August 12th, 2004, 11:23 PM
http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/Hearst_001.jpg

http://galleries.soaringtowers.org/albums/Stern/Hearst2_001.jpg

OKoranjes
August 15th, 2004, 04:03 PM
I love it! sooo glad this is real!

Johnnyboy
August 15th, 2004, 11:09 PM
you can see the advancement of the construction of the building.

NoyokA
August 20th, 2004, 06:13 PM
http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image59.jpg

August 10, 2004: Concrete being poured on the 10th floor.

kliq6
August 20th, 2004, 08:22 PM
i agree this one will be fun to see rise

ZippyTheChimp
August 22nd, 2004, 07:02 PM
Sun, Aug 22

http://www.pbase.com/image/32882685.jpg

From Columbus Circle
http://www.pbase.com/image/32882920.jpg

Gulcrapek
August 22nd, 2004, 07:55 PM
Ohhhh yes.

NoyokA
August 22nd, 2004, 08:54 PM
FUN FUN FUN

I have a hunch this baby will sparkle and glisten.

NYguy
August 23rd, 2004, 09:10 AM
Nice photos. It also makes me anticipate the Freedom Tower rising...

Johnnyboy
August 23rd, 2004, 02:06 PM
doesn't the Freedom tower have the same type of outer wall with the shape of an xxx like this one?

ZippyTheChimp
August 24th, 2004, 09:43 AM
Yes.

Diagonal grid, or diagrid for short.

NoyokA
September 2nd, 2004, 03:54 PM
http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image60.jpg

August 23, 2004 -- Aerial view of The Hearst Tower project.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image61.jpg

August 23, 2004 -- Floors 16, 17 and 18, looking northeast.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image62.jpg

August 23, 2004 -- View of atrium space.

TLOZ Link5
September 2nd, 2004, 06:03 PM
Let's see some glass, already!

thirduncle
September 8th, 2004, 07:19 AM
After tens of thousands of buildings based on the infectious aesthetic gonorrhea of Mies V.D. Rohe, someone finally figured out that glass could have different, vibrant colors like stained glass, and shaped in something other than a square. Lord Foster, you are truly a knight in shining armor!

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2004, 10:46 AM
In this shot from Hoboken, you can see the crane next to 301 W 57th. The building will be visable from the river.

http://www.pbase.com/zippythechimp/image/33580173.jpg

Edward
September 12th, 2004, 10:25 PM
Construction of Hearst Magazine Building (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/default.htm). 11 September 2004.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/images/hearst_magazine_11sept04.jpg (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/default.htm)



Construction of Hearst Magazine Building (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/default.htm). 4 September 2004.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/images/hearst_magazine_4sept04.jpg (http://www.wirednewyork.com/real_estate/hearst_magazine_building/default.htm)

NewYorkYankee
September 12th, 2004, 11:03 PM
Where did you take those pics from Edward? Great shots!

JerzDevl2000
September 16th, 2004, 09:23 PM
Great shots Edward, once this gets a bit higher, a view from Central Park would be the icing on the cake!

NoyokA
September 22nd, 2004, 09:40 PM
Some fairly recent pics:

http://genji.image.pbase.com/u41/sternyc/upload/34134915.Hearst.jpg

http://genji.image.pbase.com/u41/sternyc/upload/34135292.Hearst2.jpg

http://genji.image.pbase.com/u41/sternyc/upload/34135361.Hearst3.jpg
http://genji.image.pbase.com/u41/sternyc/upload/34136195.Hearst4.jpg

http://genji.image.pbase.com/u41/sternyc/upload/34136364.Hearst5.jpg

TonyO
September 22nd, 2004, 11:17 PM
links give errors.

NoyokA
September 23rd, 2004, 09:24 AM
http://www.pbase.com/sternyc/image/34134915

http://www.pbase.com/sternyc/image/34135292

http://www.pbase.com/sternyc/image/34135361

http://www.pbase.com/sternyc/image/34136195

http://www.pbase.com/sternyc/image/34136364

yepole
September 23rd, 2004, 10:54 AM
Yeahh! Hearst GO GO GO! 8)
Unfortunately I haven't seen it by myself yet.

NoyokA
September 24th, 2004, 02:22 PM
One from Hearst's site:

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image63.jpg

September 17, 2004: The Hearst Tower, view from 8th Avenue.

NYatKNIGHT
October 7th, 2004, 09:47 AM
October 7, 2004

Hearst Tower Echoes Trade Center Plan

By DAVID W. DUNLAP

Of the nine might-have-beens from the 2002 design study for the new World Trade Center, one is actually taking form in microcosm. It isn't by Daniel Libeskind. And it's nowhere near ground zero.

Instead, what has begun to claim an angular place in the sky is Norman Foster's Hearst Tower, near Columbus Circle.

With its bold introduction of a quiltwork diagonal grid, or diagrid, into the relentlessly right-angled cityscape, the future headquarters of the Hearst Corporation gives some sense of what New York might have experienced in Lord Foster's proposal for the trade center site.

The case should not be overstated. The two designs differ in important respects, beginning with their massing and scale. The Hearst Tower is a single building, rising 597 feet from the hollowed-out shell of a six-story landmark structure. The trade center proposal called for two towers, joined at three points, rising 1,764 feet.

(Come to think of it, perhaps that was the strategic error made by Lord Foster in his trade center design. It may have been 12 feet too short for the liking of state officials, who were captivated by the symbolism of Mr. Libeskind's 1,776-foot proposal.)

Nonetheless, the emergence of the steel framework of the Hearst Tower, now roughly 270 feet above the sidewalk on Eighth Avenue between 56th and 57th Streets, offers New Yorkers their first full-scale taste of one of Lord Foster's diagrids.

More disorienting than any other feature of the Hearst Tower are its crimped corners. They will slope inward at 75 degrees for four stories, then outward at 105 degrees for four stories, then inward, then outward, inward, outward, inward, outward, inward.

"Once you have a diagrid, there's no reason to have a vertical column on the corner," said Brandon Haw, a senior partner in Foster & Partners of London, which is working on the Hearst Tower with Adamson Associates Architects. Cantor Seinuk is engineering the structure. Flack & Kurtz are the mechanical engineers. Turner Construction is building the 42-story tower, which is to be finished in 2006.

This zigzag profile utterly confounds expectations. After all, even buildings with sloping crowns or curving facades can be pretty much counted on to have straight-edged corners. It simply seems to be in the order of things. Not at the Hearst Tower.

And not in the trade center proposal, either. Starting 224 feet apart on the ground, these buildings would have leaned toward one another, meeting at the 42nd floor; then diverged outward to a distance of 224 feet, joined by a bridge on the 84th floor; then leaned inward again to meet at the 126th-floor summit.

The Hearst Tower zigzag occurs on a much smaller scale. The basic triangle in the diagrid is four stories tall, or 52 feet. And the crimp is meant to play a neighborly role.

"It cuts back and offers more of a view than a vertical slab," Lord Foster said, pointing across a 15-foot-deep crimp toward the adjacent Sheffield apartment tower.

The views from within are also revelatory. Where the corner of the building rakes inward, for example, one can stand as far as 10 feet from the window sill, look down and still see Eighth Avenue almost directly below. (On an ordinary floor, the view would be of carpet tiles.) From inside out, the powerful diagrid becomes a delicate weblike network. Fourteen pairs of slender diagonal columns seem to dance lightly around a perimeter that would normally be a palisade of uprights.

"You wonder how much mass can be carried with such little interruption," Lord Foster said. Indeed, the diagrid uses 21 percent less steel on the exterior than a conventional frame.

Yet, he said, it is a robust structure that offers many alternate paths to carry the weight loads in case of a partial collapse.

THE most surprising facet of the Hearst Tower - and the one most difficult to see from the street - is the atrium that has been created within the shell of the Hearst International Magazine Building, a designated landmark designed by Joseph Urban for William Randolph Hearst.

It opened in 1927 but was never really completed, since Hearst contemplated a tower for which the six-story structure was to be a base.

With the approval of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, Hearst hollowed out the building. The new tower rises from within these old walls, supported on diagonal and upright megacolumns. Its lowest floor doubles as the ceiling of a new 70-foot-high atrium.

The space between the landmark shell and the new skyscraper will be enclosed in glass, creating a vast skylight and clerestory. But the persistence of the old facade around the atrium will create the sense of a town square, Lord Foster said.

Because of security concerns, it is a town square that will not be open to the town - except by invitation or on tours or at special events - although it will be possible for the public to get a glimpse of the atrium from the ground floor.

To judge from the emerging structure, however, the exterior will give New Yorkers plenty to talk about and reason enough to wonder what might have been built downtown. Or, given that Lord Foster is one of Silverstein Properties' prospective architects at the trade center site, what still might be.

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/10/06/nyregion/20040704_blocks_184.gif http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2004/10/07/nyregion/blocks.184.2.jpg

Left: Lord Foster’s proposal for World Trade Center site called two towers rising 1,764 feet.
Right: The tower, which is near Columbus Circle, is to be finished in 2006.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company

Johnnyboy
October 8th, 2004, 05:20 PM
thats one of the proposals for ground zero i wanted above all choises. Can't wait to see glass going up on this building.

NewYorkYankee
October 8th, 2004, 11:22 PM
will this building add to the skyline? Or will it not be seen?

Johnnyboy
October 9th, 2004, 08:58 AM
Its pobably going to be seen but not too much and from a few angles only.

Pilaro
October 9th, 2004, 07:46 PM
One should be able to see it from the park right?- so long as TWC isn't in the way.

BrooklynRider
October 22nd, 2004, 01:24 AM
Got a chance to stop by this site last night. It's halfway up. For folks into the construction process, it should be on a short list of sites to visit in the near future. It is so incredibly unique.

Johnnyboy
October 22nd, 2004, 08:20 AM
can someone please post a picture of this building at its present stage of construction?

ZippyTheChimp
October 22nd, 2004, 11:11 AM
I'll be in the area this weekend. Last week, I noticed the lower floors had "clips" on the frame, presumably for attaching the curtain wall. Hopefully, there will be some glass.

NoyokA
October 22nd, 2004, 11:16 AM
I'll be in the area this weekend. Last week, I noticed the lower floors had "clips" on the frame, presumably for attaching the curtain wall. Hopefully, there will be some glass.

I check out the quickly rising Hearst Tower yesterday, sorry no pics, its at half its total height and glass is being installed.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image64.jpg

October 8, 2004: Installation of clerestory panels on SE corner of Tower.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image65.jpg

October 8, 2004: Inside shot of clerestory panels.

NYatKNIGHT
November 4th, 2004, 11:48 AM
Last weekend......


http://pbase.com/image/35935302.jpg

http://pbase.com/image/35935337.jpg

TLOZ Link5
November 4th, 2004, 01:58 PM
Not showing up.

NYatKNIGHT
November 4th, 2004, 03:59 PM
Sorry. How about now?

http://pbase.com/image/35935302.jpg

http://pbase.com/image/35935337.jpg

BrandonUptown
November 4th, 2004, 04:05 PM
Yup, I can see it now.

Johnnyboy
November 4th, 2004, 09:21 PM
oooooo. Its growing finally. Well, at a slow pase.

Johnnyboy
November 4th, 2004, 09:23 PM
its kind of disapointing that its almost half way there. This will be a beauty though. Can't wait for glass work.

ZippyTheChimp
November 4th, 2004, 10:00 PM
It just seems slow, because they had to do a lot of work to stabilize the old building, but if you compare NYatKnight's photo with the one I took on Aug 22, about 12 storeys were put up in 10 weeks. That's fast.

NoyokA
November 15th, 2004, 08:17 PM
http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image66.jpg

November 8, 2004: Glass continues to be fitted around the structure.

NoyokA
November 15th, 2004, 08:19 PM
Some people like the dark glass over the cross bracing. Personally Im looking forward to the contrast of white on dark.

hella good
November 16th, 2004, 06:20 AM
"orgasms"

The dark parts where the cross bracing is could just be a base for another part of panelling.

antinimby
November 16th, 2004, 09:53 AM
Interest here is starting to pick up again, I see. This has got to be the sexiest building in all of NY. Would be even more beautiful if it was taller.
Damn it :? .

ZippyTheChimp
November 16th, 2004, 12:56 PM
I was at the building this morning (sorry, no photo). Cladding over the steel was being installed at the corner. It is matte aluminum in color, and trapezoidal in cross section.

Clarknt67
November 16th, 2004, 01:46 PM
I saw it yesterday, the few couple of floors past the landmark part are finished, and they look GREAT, imo.

NoyokA
November 18th, 2004, 03:17 PM
Cladding over the steel was being installed at the corner. It is matte aluminum in color, and trapezoidal in cross section.

According to the Hearst's website its stainless steel.

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image67.jpg

November 15, 2004: First stainless steel-clad section arrives

This heavy piece of metal will one day shimmer and shine…

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image68.jpg

November 15, 2004: First stainless steel section installed on the southeast corner of the tenth floor

Russell
November 19th, 2004, 08:56 PM
Pic from last weekend, the stainless bracing will look great!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v214/sax0vtr/100_1792.jpg

TLOZ Link5
November 19th, 2004, 09:32 PM
It would be a lot nicer if that apartment building weren't looming over the site. This building screams for splendid isolation.

NoyokA
November 20th, 2004, 09:05 PM
While some buildings would look better in an isolated context as sculpture, I think Hearst has a message in its, it’s a box form with special corners, its jagged edges almost eat away at conventional buildings, giving visual interest to a rather familiar and overdone form.

antinimby
November 28th, 2004, 08:37 PM
Saw this building in person today and let me tell you, it is GORGEOUS. Sorry, didn't have a camera, but photos won't do it justice anyway.
The cladding looked white.

NoyokA
November 28th, 2004, 09:57 PM
Antinimby, I like your mantra.

antinimby
November 29th, 2004, 05:59 PM
My mantra?
Why, thanks!
I kinda like it myself. :wink:

kliq6
December 1st, 2004, 04:55 PM
need more great building like this on 8th ave in the 40's

NoyokA
December 6th, 2004, 11:36 AM
We're nearing structural topping off:

http://www.hearstcorp.com/tower/images/gallery/image69.jpg

November 26, 2004: View from the 28th floor of The Hearst Tower

TLOZ Link5
December 6th, 2004, 01:53 PM
This is a real head-turner. I've seen so many people, tourists and natives alike, do double-takes when they pass by Hearst.

ZippyTheChimp
December 12th, 2004, 05:57 PM
Still about 12 storeys to go - or 3 triangular sections.

From 8th Ave
http://www.pbase.com/image/37416356.jpg

From the Sheep Meadow
http://www.pbase.com/zippythechimp/image/37416939.jpg

Gulcrapek
December 12th, 2004, 06:20 PM
*emits sound similar to "yessssssssshahah"*

Alonzo-ny
December 15th, 2004, 02:49 PM
wot is everyones opinion on random house tower in that pic?

TLOZ Link5
December 15th, 2004, 03:26 PM
wot is everyones opinion on random house tower in that pic?

Not much. It's an "eh" building.