One Liberty Plaza

[NoyokA]

One Liberty Plaza:
And an objective poll, rate the buildings architecture.

[Gulcrapek]

I chose 7. It certainly makes a powerful impression, and it has a kind of bare structuralism appeal. However, it looks odd from street level and it's a bit stubby.

[Russell]

I like it, its so brutal, it reminds me of the hancock tower without the x bracing. its a beast...

[TomAuch]

Before 9/11 I just looked at it as a giant air conditioner. Because of the way it withstood the impact, I have a lot more reverance for it now, as well as the Verizon Building and the WFC.

[ZippyTheChimp]

I hate this building. The proportions are wrong. The lobby looks like a low-slung cave entrance. And the facade - I guess US Steel wanted to show off its business - is an unpleasant reversal of glass over steel. Put casters on it, and it looks like a portable room air purifier.

Its closeness to the elegant 140 Broadway makes it look even worse.

Did I say I hate this building?

[TLOZ Link5]

I chose 4. At times and from certain vantage points this building has its redeeming qualities, but generally I don't like it. I hate it more considering the buildings it replaced.

[DominicanoNYC]

3- It looks okay from a distance, but when approching the building the details just aren't impressive.

[SunsetWorks]

1 Liberty was not subjected to the same degree of force and falling debris as the WFC, Verizon, Deutsche Bank, and 90 West; as it was separated from the falling towers by WTC 4 and 5.

Because of the way it withstood the impact, I have a lot more reverance for it now, as well as the Verizon Building and the WFC.

Had it collapsed, as was erroneously reported in the first few days following the attacks, would we be hearing the "Rebuild the Singer!" cry?

[JMC]

This building is architecturally significant, because it was one of the first *NOT* to use a curtain wall. (If not the very first).


Its interior supports surve as it's exterior skin. Very cost effective.

I give it a 10: Big, bad, mean and uuuugly!! Steel.

[BPC]

I voted 7. Yes it is ugly, but it withstood 9/11 admirably, and thus I think it should be preserved and honored. Also, it gets extra points for housing Brooks Brothers.

[Ninjahedge]

Voted 7, not just for the reason that our firm was involved in the structural on that building.

It is a good example of a STONG structure. Whether it would have held up better against a plane hitting it is a rather dumb question. Yeah, maybe. It might also be a better one in the event of a nuclear explosion or a tidal wave, but I really do not care about that.

It has MUCH larger spans and larger open window space than the WTC, which is something that architects drool over.

It looks impressive, solid, but not very attractive or innovative. I like it, but I am not overjoyed by it.

OK, maybe a 6...

[thomasjfletcher]

One Liberty Plaza (aka U.S. Steel Building)



The building replaced two interesting structures, shown at left. The thin needle of the much-loved Singer Tower once stood here, and the site also held the City Investing Building, one of the wildest structures I’ve ever seen - it's what you'd get if Caligula was mayor. Doing a little research today I found an amusing anecdote: the plaza for the U. S. Steel building was incomplete until 1980, because a tenant in a small building - a Chock Full O’ Nuts coffee shop! - refused to sell. So they waited until the lease expired, then knocked the shop down. The same damn thing happened to City Investors - there’s a small building in the corner that refused to sell, requiring the architects to work around it, as you can see. Same building?



from Chris Jones-

Interesting story about the One Liberty Plaza holdout, Chock full o' Nuts. Held out until 1980, you said. To answer your question: no. It was not the same holdout that caused the City Investing Building never to be completed. The C.I. holdout was the Gilsey building of 1859. It was on the northeast corner of the plaza.
But! The U.S. Steel holdout is just as interesting. I've seen it. It was the bottom two floors of an old fourteen-storey building that stood there. I saw that tower in a 1914 photo. What was this buildings' story? Why was it only two storeys high in its final years?

[Jake]

Thank God for that building, if there was no Brooks Brothers there half of Wall Street would be walking around naked (or perhaps they'd just shop somewhere else, but unlikely).

[BigMac]

J.Good on Flickr
March 24, 2007

Larger Size

[lizbeth li]

I hate this building with a passion. Hate it. Hate that they knocked down the Seagram's Tower and the City Investing Building (and the post above was great about how wild this one must have looked) and build this absolute brutal piece of crap. The only thing nice is the new park alongside and the steps to the Brooks Brothers are fine, but take your eyes off street level and look up, and you will faint -- this the reverse of the Stendhal Syndrome where you are overcome with beauty. Hate it!!!!!!