Union Square, Hong Kong by KPF

[Fabb]

http://www.cladding.com/images/Project/KowloonStation/KowloonStationRendering(320).jpg

http://www.cladding.com/images/Project/KowloonStation/KowloonStationRendering(400).jpg

http://www.cladding.com/kowloon-st.htm

[TLOZ Link5]

In my opinion, that building would work very well at Ground Zero.

Ooooh, if only...

[Fabb]

Yes.
It has class, distinction.
And a hollow structure at the top.
Add a spire and make room for some greenery, and you get an acceptable version of Libeskind's Garden Tower.

(Edited by Fabb at 12:16 pm on Feb. 9, 2003)

[Kris]

Ugh, no. Refined corporate architecture is good for Hong Kong.

[Fabb]

Only for HK ?
I'm thinking of the post-war addition to the Rockefeller Center. The WFC. And many others.

[Kris]

Most of them mediocre.

[Fabb]

Many others meant AOL-TW.
When big corporations pay the rents, what do you expect ?

[DominicanoNYC]

In my opinion if you added an antenna to the top of this building it would look like the proposed New York Times Tower.

[Fabb]

The light beam plays that role at night.
The other difference is the height, obviously.

[Eugenius]

Light beams aren't very visible, unless it is a cloudy or a foggy day. *As an example, take a look at the Westin at Times Square. *It's widely touted beam is barely there on most days.

[Fabb]

I can assure you that the HK harbour is cloudy or foggy most of the time. Humidity is constantly at a high level and at sunset, the combination of light and haze make skyline amazing.

There's already a powerful light beam on 1IFC... really spectacular.
I have the feeling that one was a test before those of 2IFC and US.

[DominicanoNYC]

It's actually underconstruction, but it's constantly been put on hold, but it is once again u/c. Two More pictures at http://www.skyscrapers.com/english/fi/pc/?id=101555&aid=8.

[Fabb]

I don't think it's ever been on hold.
Works on the foundations will last another 6 months.

[larven]

http://www.fakescentral.com/mattb/matt/US7.jpg

[DominicanoNYC]

Well it was according to the skyscrapers.com website.

[Fabb]

What do they know ? I've been there periodically.

Thanks for the rendering larven.

[Fabb]

Picture by Venusfan :

http://home.i-cable.com/rickpn/City/139-3966_IMG.JPG

[Kris]

Wrong thread. The only advantages the Goldman Sachs has over this one is to be bluer and not have the "enhanced penis" look. Impressive but terribly ugly and banal.

[Fabb]

Wrong opinion. But it's not your fault, the above picture is misleading.
This building has a color that depends on the luminosity.
White, sparkling white, yellowish... or light blue and sometimes even deep blue.

People were amazed. Not only tourists. They expressed very different opinions, none of which included ugliness.
When I had my own pictures developed, in Paris, the employees of the FNAC store left their customers to see me and inquire about the mystery new building.

They were amazed.
Of course, they also mentioned the WTC for comparison.

No. It's not ugly.

[DominicanoNYC]

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/topic.cgi?forum=6&topic=35 I have a forum on the 2IFC. Well if you talking about it because the picture shows the 2IFC and not Union Square.

[Fabb]

Sorry, I had no idea your thread was about 2IFC.
I figured it was about a real GSB somewhere on the west coast.
Now I understand the subtle allusion Christan made in his post.

[Kris]

I've seen several pictures of it and most of the others showed a duller skin, not that it matters. It's an aggressive symbol of power with no subtlety or originality whatsoever.

[Fabb]

It's an aggressive symbol of power

That could apply to any tall skyscraper.

I agree that's it's not original. What makes it distintive is its height... not irrelevant in the field of skyscrapers.

It's far less aggressive than Libeskind's spire, though.
Regarding subtlety, I'll leave it to you and the several pictures you've seen.
The texture did fascinate me... little white dots on the window panes, irregularities in the patterns of the different floors, shades near the setbacks and the at the end of the curved surfaces. But maybe I just like the way Pelli treats facades. I thought it was quite refined.

[NoyokA]

Supposendly Pelli's selling point is skin. But I ask what is so special? As his treatments follow one of the strictest orders....He is a corporate architect at heart.

[Kris]

He pays close attention to the skin and the proportions, but doesn't always succeed. His approach is obviously superficial; he uses the same worn formulas and aims to please.

Skyscrapers aren't necessarily aggressive, although they do symbolize power. But what kind of power? Corporate domination? Preferably more noble forms of ambition. To simplify, one should feel elevated - not belittled.

[NoyokA]

http://home.i-cable.com/rickpn/City/139-3966_IMG.JPG

Ill admit the shades are a nice touch, but how many people have good color sensibilities? For me Pelli only means skin if you think outside the grid. Look at the photo the skin is an afterthought placed with mullions following the massing, not an individual design in itself. Gehry for one uses glass as a free form, also skin and structure.

[JMGarcia]

I've seen quite a number of Pelli buildings in person that I had not been very impressed with - that is until I saw them. Its true that his buildings, while often repetative, are much better to be in than might appear to be the case. Petronas in person is far superior to any picture I have ever seen of it. I had always thought his Canary Wharf tower was dreary at best - but only until I actually visited it. Still not the best building ever but far superior to most.

[Fabb]

Quote: from Kris on 8:23 pm on Mar. 11, 2003
He pays close attention to the skin and the proportions, but doesn't always succeed. His approach is obviously superficial; he uses the same worn formulas .

Yes.
That's what irritates me.
(Until I see the finished product... then I forgive him).

[NoyokA]

JMGarcia:

I have visited very few Pelli buildings outside of New York, probably only his LA buildings. But for me atleast they are all cold and distant.

[JMGarcia]

Funny, his LA buildings are some of the ones I've missed. They are undoubtedly quite sleek but the quality and richness of the materials is what impresses me. It might just be a matter of taste though. Do you find the WFC and Winter Garden cold and distant? If so then you would probably find his others much the same.

[NoyokA]

Yes, I felt warmer towards the former WTC than to the World Financial Center.

[dbhstockton]

Herbert Muschamp's opinion of Pelli (reviewing the competition fro NYT HQ *-- quoted on STERN's website):

"Pelli is the house architect of the monoculture, a designer of iconic corporate towers that bear less relationship to their surroundings than to other corporate icons around the world...I was disheartened by the inclusion of Pelli among the finalists. Evidently, my message about the reality of architecture wasn't getting through. I could accept that this slick corporate object might represent a developer's view of The Times. I could not accept that it represented the paper's view of itself. Yes, The Times is a powerful institution, but of a particular kind. It is not part of so-called "black car" culture... The paper has the responsibility to challenge and correct, not blindly affirm, the corporate world's view of itself. Pelli's obelisk stood as aloof from these issues as it did from the site's physical context. Aloofness, in fact, is what clients hire Pelli to provide. This arm's-length attitude extends to Pelli's relationship to his own buildings. "

[Bennie B]

Ever get the feeling that *Muschamp isn't looking at the building he's writing about? *Or even writing about any particular building? *Like he's read the wrong Cliffs notes and bluffing valiantly on an exam. *

Anyway, I didn't see this particular design, but he could be describing a million firms EXCEPT Pelli's. *Pelli has a few lamers, sure -- some of the square ones -- but the curvy ones are pure gold, million-dollar cut diamonds, whatever. *Especially the fancy crowns like Goldman Sachs and Charlotte BofA. *Complex, subtle, smooth as silk. *Unbelievable. *Every one completely unique too. *I didn't even know WFC was Pelli's. *So why the heck...?? *I mean, doesn't it seem logical...?? *

Well, maybe somebody can anwer this question, but I'm not gonna ask it, at least not right now, LOL * *)

[NoyokA]

I actually agree with Muschamp.

From renderings I have appreciation for the Bloomberg Tower. But it tries not to hide its intentions, I find that refreshing from a Pelli building.

But this was not a specific design request of an endowed client rather of a constantly developing design program.

In essence it's your standard high-rise box, tailored to changing terms. As a result the design could be easily modified, as designs were moreover drawn in the act of negotiating leases.

With dimension as usually found in commercial skyscrapers the regular rectangular layouts were extended. The design aesthetic is of regularity and perfect geometry.

The design of the Bloomberg Tower was not inspired, rather it was crafted. But as floorplates were changed throughout designs, stats were manipulated, there was an underlying theme. The theme was expressed through a 60 foot backlit crown, that remained true in form despite whatever was happening to the tower. Pelli here did not conceal his intentions.

[Bennie B]

The theme was expressed through a 60 foot backlit crown, that remained true in form despite whatever was happening to the tower.
Stern, it sounds like it's gonna be awesome. *A guy who can design on the fly like that and still keep the proportions and the aesthetic going deserves to be "house architect of the monoculture," whatever the heck that means. *He earns his pay.

You may agree with Muschamp but in this case at least I think you also agree with me: Pelli can knock out a highrise like nobody else on the planet * *)