IAC BUILDING FACT SHEET
Location: East side of the West Side Highway, (11th Avenue) between West 18th and
West 19th Streets (across from Chelsea Piers).
Site area: 29,380 SF.
Number of Floors: 9 stories, with underground parking level and rooftop mechanical
Building Height: 155 feet from sidewalk level.
Building Area: 146, 930 zoning square feet
Elevators: 4 passenger elevators.
Materials: The building will have a concrete structure with a sculpted glass façade. The
glass will be insulated and will have special coatings and patterned ceramic frits to
improve energy efficiency.
IAC/InterActiveCorp Headquarters Building
Located on 11th Avenue between West 18th Street and West 19th Street, the IAC Building
will encompass 165,000 square feet and consist of 9 floors. A façade of uniquely treated
sculptured glass will envelop the entire structure. As part of the building’s core concept
there will be a ground floor public space and a restaurant that will reflect and utilize all of
the IAC brands and be as interactive as the Company and Frank Gehry can conjure. The
building is expected to be completed by the end of 2006; IAC is developing the building
in partnership with The Georgetown Company (TGC), a privately-held diversified real
estate company based in Manhattan.
Gerhy is a great architect. He has changed the way to see at architecture in these recent years (see Bilbao and Praha). I think this is a very innovative scheme; Herbert is right when he stresses the fact that now the use of glass a part LVMH and I add Westin is very conservative. As Lever House changed it now it's the turn to try something different. I guess Renzo Piano NYTimesTower will have too some interesting things to say.
Wow, via the web site for InterActiveCorp that billyblancoNYC posted,
the above renderings particularly nos. 1, 2 & 4 really now show the lightness of the building,
stressing particularly no.1!!
No.3 is a total 'write-off' and no.5 just looks like either
an upside-down cup-cake or muffin plonked down on the coffee table
If you haven't already done so, compare them to the renders on page 1 of this thread.
A sailboat from north or south...a ziggurat from east or west. Wow.
Hmm...I dunno...This certainly isn't as hideous as some of his other ideas, like his proposal for the NY Times tower.
It still looks odd, but it might dance with the light very nicely. The shape would also seem to allow for a lot of light and shadow. I still don't think I'd say it has a highly ornamented roof, though - sorry, Herb! :lol:
V. observant with the ziggurat analogy!Originally Posted by TLOZ Link5
NEW YORK TIMES HEADQUARTERS (UNBUILT)
New York 2000–
Photo by Whit Preston, courtesy of Frank O. Gehry & Associates.
It is perhaps not unexpected that the skyscraper—a quintessential emblem of Modernist architecture—has not been a part of Gehry's realized works. In the summer of 2000, however, Gehry in association with David Childs of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill accepted an invitation to participate in a competition for the New York Times Headquarters; the other participants were Norman Foster, Cesar Pelli, and Renzo Piano. The requirements for a new forty-five-story building—with its site bound by Fortieth and Forty-first Streets on Eighth Avenue, across from the Port Authority Bus Terminal—included office space for the New York Times Company in its lower half and speculative space for commercial and retail tenants above and at its base.
In the highly congested real estate of midtown Manhattan, the Gehry/Childs design manages to contest the normative vocabulary of the high-rise and break out of the rigid straitjacket that constrains the neighboring buildings. Their glass tower is graced at the top by sculptural forms—based on an abstraction of the Times logo—that create a visual identity for the organization along the skyline. Halfway down the otherwise rectilinear form, the slender high-rise gently begins to twist and erupt in a cascade of molten forms. In this fashion, the design is simultaneously tailored to both the specific needs of the New York Times organization on the lower levels, and the neutral environment required for the speculative offices above.
Oh, as forumer Liz L has termed it, the crumpled 'Kleenex Tissue' scraper.
A compendium should be made of all the trivial nicknames given by the public to fine buildings in order to easily dismiss them.
Good idea Christian. But don't just sit there. Start one up :wink:
Good idea, Christian, but, with all due respect, I have to say I DON"T think Gehry's hulk is "fine" or anything near it....
If I didn't know better, I'd say it (NY Times) looks like a gestural intimation of a collapsing tower. I don't think we as a culture have returned to the early Victorian notion of contrived romantic 'ruins.'
I am heartened to see Gehry return to a more 'regulated' architecture (IAC HQ). If he is to be a prolific builder we needn't have our cityscapes 'littered' with gestural sculpture masquerading as buildings. The novel position of opposition (to 'normal' building forms) has lost its luster.
Just as surrealism creates a new datum of reality, this distorted vocabulary is ultimately derivative and secondary. For me the goal of true high Architecture is one of primacy.
As Gehry's work relies less on contextual opposition and becomes more independently vital, his sucess in redefining the contemporary formal paradigm can be treated as sucessful. I welcome new forms, but a mature architecture does not rely on 'punk rock' antagonism, or 'pie in the sky' earnestness to suceed.