One Chase Manhattan Plaza
New York, USA

HEIGHT: 248m/813 feet
FLOORS: 60 floors
COMPLETION: 1960
ARCHITECT: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM)

was built in 1957-1961 to Downtown Manhattan as the new headquarters for the Chase Manhattan Bank.
Founded in 1877 and named after Salmon Chase, President Lincoln's Treasury Secretary, the Chase National merged with the Bank of the Manhattan in 1955 to form the Chase Manhattan Bank.

The building project was first announced in 1955 and involved the creation of a "superblock" comprising two city blocks. The old Chase headquarters building on the other block at 18 Pine Street (Graham, Anderson, Probst & White, 1928) was retained and renovated.

The architects presented two different layouts for the new Chase headquarters: a 52-storey tower with a lower 15-storeyed nearby, as well as the actually realized single 60-storey tower.

The design itself derived much from a previous SOM undertaking, the much smaller Inland Steel Building (1955-58) in Chicago, which pioneered the use of an exterior column system along with a vertically accentuated glass wall facade. The outward appearance of the Chase project was in fact very much just an enlarged version of the Chicago building.

The bank complex spans two city blocks and uses the development rights from both sites. The office tower slab, along with five underground floors, occupying the Liberty Street side block and the adjoining block having the open plaza on top of two floors of banking space. The office tower houses 167,000 m² of space and the floors beneath 56,000 m².

Construction commenced on 28 January 1957 the building was completed by the summer 1960. The construction had cost $121 million, plus the cost of obtaining the city blocks as the building site.

The building is at 247.5 m one of the tallest in Downtown and its facade consists of glass and anodized aluminium plating between the large supporting columns. The glass-walled entrance level of the tower is recessed, with only the columns from the facade above extending to the plaza level. The space between the rectangular support columns is vertically accentuated by a series of narrow aluminium mullions extending to the top of the tower.

Along with the central core for elevators etc., the only vertical supports for the building are the massive columns outside the facade, thus not only freeing the office space from further columns in the working space, but also from the large support columns themelves. The core is offset towards the north side of the tower slab, thus increasing the floor area facing the south wall side.

On the 60th floor is an executive dining room with views all over Lower Manhattan. The extensive interior design is by Davis Allen and Ward Bennett.

The building's elevated plaza was completed in 1962 and was the first one in the Downtown area. It also gave the building its non-street name address -- the pioneer of this sometimes questionable naming habit.

The sculpture work Group of Four Trees (1972) on the plaza is by Jean DuBuffet. There is also the 5-meter deep circular sunken well for Isamu Noguchi's Sunken Garden (1964), a water sculpture garden with basalt rocks imported from Japan (and originally also with goldfish) -- the street-level banking offices open to the well through their glass walls (image 1 2). The bank has also an art collection of its own.

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/rotpics01/onechase01.jpeg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/rotpics01/onechase02.jpeg

http://www.som.com/resources/projects/2/9/2/onechasebwe1_823.jpg

http://www.greatgridlock.net/NYC_Images/829.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/rotpics01/onechase03.jpeg

http://www.creativelightsourceinc.com/images/chase.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/rotpics01/onechase04.jpeg

6/10. Doesn't really impress me.

6/10

too plain

It's impressive in person, f'ing HUGE. And it destroyed downtown NY forever with it's ugly bulk! I have a further vendetta against this building for encouraging others to follow.:bleep:

This thing should have been built uptown on Sixth Avenue or not at all. One of the worst mistakes in Nyc imo.

0/10

Too plain and boxy. It was probably the first modern skyscraper to be built in Lower Manhatten, if not, the first since WWII.

6/10

one of SOM's first innovative towers i think . . . 7/10 for the time

Ah, yes. SOM, 1960. Very postwar corporate American. It is plain by today's standards, but pretty well articulated compared to the 1970s-80s. They were looking for a kind of minimalist elegance, and SOM were the masters of that. The base is a nice example.
It's very much a period piece now, but I give it credit for being at least a good example of the period that has aged relatively well.
7/10

7/10

Looks important and provides a good contrast to the spired buildings around it.

Not that interesting but it's ok.

6.5/10

One, Chase it out of Manhattan Plaza!!!

Built for the American Steel industry as a corporate PR exercise. It would have been a "WOWer" at the time, but it is not aging well IMO.

4

The building as an individual entity isn't all that bad. But like the Metlife building in MT Manhattan, it is in a BAD location in the skyline.

Because of this, I cannot rate it above a 5.0/10...

5.5/10 - It's a big ol' box - the facade is better than some, but not outstanding; can't decide which sides I like - the ones with the protuding mullions, or the ones without. Plus, it only has height when you see it from the slim side.
I think SOM's definitely done better...

A plain box, not the worst, but not the best either. It fits in the skyline fine and interior is nice as well,... but that cant cover up the fact that its just a booring box.. 6..(i think)

I don't care for it. A bit too boxy...

3/10

5, nice height.

it had a commanding presence over lower Manhattan for a long time until the WTC was built..a simplistic internationalist style box...if it weren't for it's height you really couldn't tell what city it was in...not grand but not bad either...7/10

Has no architectural value at all.I don't like it.Maybe you can give it a good rate because it's tall.Nothing more,nothing less.
4.0/10

Tall but ugly... IMO, New York area doesn't really have impressive buildings. Yes I know they have some, but they also have a lot of gross ones. :(

This one has good height, but nothing to special about it.

4.5

it has some height.. but that's basically the end of the positive things..

4.5

Sorry, But for some reason I like the building. It's one of the nicer boxes i've known and feel that it has now made the Lower Manhattan Skyline better.

Not great, but not as horrid as others have described. 7/10

3 What an ugly, bulky building... I can't believe it's that tall!

A block wrapped in a pattern.

6/10

Boring and not impressive...

6. Yet another poorly placed massive structure in New York.

6/10..For it's height, a bit too bulky and a bad location.

Not really my kind of building but ok, a 6,5.

It's just a box! The facade is horribly unimpressive too.. SOM is definately much more capable than that.. :rant:

6.5/10

Proves that not all the classics are masterpieces. 6/10

7.5

.5 for the size
7 for the ugly coloring

OK. I looked at the pictures. Once again it becomes clear: Skidmore etc. is sort of imagination-deprived. They quite predictably build boring tradition. Those people lack pizzazz!!!

I don't care how high the joint is. I give it a mere 4. :down:

6/10

It's absolutely not beautiful, but it's damn big and impressive (like the MetLife). It doesn't fit the Lower Manhattan-district, either.

5/10

7/10

Very massive in person.

6/10
From some angles this tower looks better than from others, but it's still too bulky, and quite plain.

7.5

simple box but somehow elegant

Classic.....
7/10

Shoebox 6.5/10 :)

5/10 I don't like this building it's to 60's It doesn't fit my tastes

7/10

7.5/10 White boxes rule.

7.5/10


too boxy.

i dont like it

4/10

6/10

7/10
Simple Boxy & tall, nice facade.

It's not THAT bad... A boring box but looks pretty nice. Looks very strong but for some reason it doesn't impress me in person. The only time it looks tall is from far away and when you see a 50-story tower nearby dwarved by that giant. Has the same impact as GE on Midtown skyline. 8/10.

People call it a boring box... well it's a product of it's time. It is way too large for the area, but doesn't seem to apologize for this at all with it's early 60s corporate fortress like facade. It's also quite tall. 8/10

No appeal :(
5/10

It really lets you know you're in New York.

oh yeah, 8/10

Bored, seems very metallic 5,5/10 for being of the 60s

somehow boring, but it's plaza's awesome. they should of built this in midtown though, on park avenue. it's too big of an eyesore in the crowded wall street area.

7.5/10

8/10. Awesome box!

7/10

Box #6,000,000,000 in New York, but at least it's a nice BOX!!!

New York has a lot of box skyscrapers, though DENVER leads in boxiness!!

6/10

It's ok. Boxiness is fine, especially with the exposed mullions. While the facade and shape are ok, the building doesnt fit exceptionally well to its surroundings.

8/10
I quite like it.

Don't like it. 5.

9.5/10 I know it is not the most beautiful skyscraper, but it´s the clasica skyscraper of this city; remember the Avenue of the Americas near Times Square , there are at least 6 buildings very similar. This is New york´s essence.

This thing is a frickin' masterpiece, particularly with its elegant transparent lobby and the beautiful "floating" plaza. The Dubouffet sculpture is a nice touch as well. I admit that if we had to do it all over again I wouldn't choose this site for it, but it is in no way as obtrusive and uninteresting as the buildings along Water Street, say.

"IMO, New York area doesn't really have impressive buildings. Yes I know they have some, but they also have a lot of gross ones." This, from someone in Windsor, Ontario? Exactly what sort of gold-plated downtown from an alternate universe are you hailing from?

One of the nicest boxes. The projecting columns give a sturdy look, and the light coloured glass and aluminium panels reduce the mass of the building. 7.5/10.

Hmmm, it's to boxy and it's boring to look at but has some interesting features. So I gave it a 5.

7/10

5/10

as it is from the 60s i give it a 6.5

6/10

6.5

Little apart from ordinary but still has presence in the skyline

Cool box, 7.5

I give this building a 7/10...

6/10

It's a box, but it's a tall one.
6.5/10

Another run of the mill, boring scraper 4.5

8.5/10

Does the rectangle role well. Love the facade. I give it an 8.5/10. :okay:

9.5 for me thank you very much

i like the stainless steel facade on this tower, in person IT IS REALLLY HUGE!!! plus it HAS a very nice plaza, a sunken plaza aswell.......the views from the top are AMAZING!!!

a box, and far from the nicest one
4.5/10

nice, 8

6

What can be said about a box?

8 I quite like it

Ugly, boring and old-fashioned.
Less than 3.

I just don't get an "elegant" vibe off this one. Too boxy, too big, too awkward.

A tall and ugly box

4.0/10

9/10

It's a classic of modernist architecture.

9/10 Very Inland Steel.

9/10

6/10

7.5/10.

5/10

Yet another ugly box. Why does New York have so many of these? 3 or less.

5.5/10

It's just a box. But a good one. 7,5/10

6.5/10

This building deserves a 2. Destroying the most celebrated and beautiful skyline in the world, putting this building up was one of the worst decisions ever made regarding a skyscraper. It encouraged the further destruction of the romantic skyline.

I put it up there with the demolition of Pennsylvania Station as New York's biggest mistakes.

6/10

7.5/10

1960+ classy for tht time, brilliant. 8.5

Too boxy. Boxes can ruin a city's skyline. 7/10.

the only good thing about it is its height
7.5

A few days ago while in the architectural resource centre of my uni, I found an old book, a survey of office buildings, from 1968. I was surprised to see an article talking about the Chase Manhattan Plaza, then only 7 years old, in complimentary terms, saying it was a "fresh modern new building" rising in contrast to "the jumble of downtown".

BIG BOX. 7.0

ok.... 5/10

6.5

One of the first International Style skyscrapers in New York, from the same architect who designed the Lever House (which is better in every way). Also the first big skyscraper to be build in downtown Manhattan after WOII.
On it’s own it has a certain quality, for it’s time it might even have been original to some extent. So on another (smaller) scale, and/or on a different location it might have been a 7,5/10.
But because it’s such a huge bulk on the worst location possible it’s not even going to come close to that: 4/10

7,5/10

5.5/10

6/10.

too simple but it has the height though, 6/10

boring 5

not much going on with this one 6

7/10

5/10. Nothing except the height appeals to me.

7/10. Decent looking and tall, but still a box

6/10

I love this building. Whenever I see it in person, never fails, I am very very impressed and awed by its size and height. for the amount that it impresses me i give it a 9/10. But i agree with some other forumers that this should not have been built in downtown. it should have been built in midtown, perhaps with the xyz buildings or on 3rd ave or something but not on the narrow crooked roads of downtown. so for that

8/10

This building sticks out a lot, I like it a lot. 7/10

8.5/10

3/10

Boxy but neat.

6.5

6/10

7/10

7.5/10

6/10 ;)

6/10

5/10

Pretty ordinary.

4.5/10

Its smart and elegant. 7.5/10

looks okay by day... at night it looks good i reckon

7/10

I'm bored to death 5/10

10/10

I used to work in this building and have a special affection for it.

It is classic 60's architectural modernism and a gem of the old Wall Street culture. Despite it's massive sive it has a light and airy feel to it and it's upper floors boast some of the best views in the city (Statue of Liberty, Midtown). Too many modern towers look like enlarged suburban office park building (Goldman Sachs under-construction, for example). 1 CMP is a classic.

6/10

boring very boring 5/10

the design is efficient in an office setting and is very big but it is easily forgettable.

on its own its nothing special, but it was this building that revitalized lower manhattan in the 60's, and for that i give it a 9.5/10

6/10

:puke: 60's buildings. and think that they destroyed a nice art deco tower to building that box.

the design is not really exciting but i like it very much: 8.5/10

7.5/10 huge

5.5/10

6/10

8/10

4/10

6.5/10

7/10.

7.5 kinda nice.

6/10 Nothing special

i'm digging the patterns. 8/10

6/10

8/10 looks very 1950s-60s New Yorkerish...

the building itself is nice, but i don't like what it does for the skyline. the building though, gets an 8/10 from me

I really love this building! It's one of my favorites of all time. And it looks so neat considering it was on the drawing board in the 1950s!

10/10.

7/10

10. one of my nY favourites... i don't know why..

8/10

Nah it doesn't impress me. A 5 out of 10.

Too boxy. 5/10

5.5/10

7/10

3.5/10

7/10

6/10

4/10

boxy 6/10

I bet the people who have given this amazing building bad scores have never been near it. :lol:

I kinda like it, but it's definitely not one of my favorite buildings. Fits in NYC quite well, though- 7/10.

7/10 Pretty decent for a 60's design

9,5/10 :cheers:

impressive building. just like that.

Nice building, just simple.

8/10

4/10

Not that interesting but it's ok.

One of the better boxes
5.5/10

6.5 nothing wow

8/10

6/10

5/10

6,5. It's too simple

6.5/10

Bonus point for the agelessness. In the end these are as many as 50 years and still he is looking good.

8/10

7/10

4/10

A major disappointment from S.O.M.

The only likable aspect for me is the height.

8/10
60's

8/10

Not that beautiful but is an icon in Manhattan...

5.0/10

6/10. booooooring.

8. Good building. Regards.

wow manhatan

6.5/10

6/10

Just good height! 4.0/10

7/10

7/10

The first tall modernist skyscraper in Lower Manhattan...so it has history going for it, but little else. 5

From wikimedia.org

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/One_Chase_Manhattan_Plaza_1.jpg/399px-One_Chase_Manhattan_Plaza_1.jpg

8/10

8.5

8/10

voted 7/10

8/10

7.5/10

Not too thrilling, just a classic Manhattan skyscraper. 7/10

6/10 boring

I love boxes :D 9/10

Simple box, 6/10 for height.

10/10

5/10 Its just a plain box with nothing going on. gave it a 5 to be nice since it neither hideous or beautiful...

Ten richest billionaires in the world http://theworldsbillionaires2.tk/ Learn the secret of weight loss easiest and quickest way to get rid of the secret as a result of excess weight http://losssweight.tk/

8.5

8.5

6/10

8.5/10

http://img859.imageshack.us/img859/7265/399pxonechasemanhattanp.jpg (http://img859.imageshack.us/i/399pxonechasemanhattanp.jpg/)

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/2130/450px1chasemanhattanpla.jpg (http://img39.imageshack.us/i/450px1chasemanhattanpla.jpg/)

6/10

6/10...hmmm box

7/10

8.5/10

Skidmore, Owings and Merrill = nothing less than 8/10

8/10

10/10

6/10

7/10

8/10

6/10

5/10 Its just a plain box

This looks better than most of the boxy buildings. 6,5/10

this building HAS to be seen in person to be rated fairly. I used to never think much of it until I was walking through downtown one day and its beauty and elegance smacked me in the face. After, when I moved to NY, I had to walk by this building every time I was downtown. Just too beautiful, classy, smart, powerful and a million other great adjectives to miss.

9.3/10

6/10

7.

6/10