#139 l JR Central Towers l NAGOYA l 245m l 51fl

[RafflesCity]

JR Central Towers
Nagoya, Japan

HEIGHT: 245m/804 feet
FLOORS: 51 floors
COMPLETION: 2000
ARCHITECT: SAKAKURA Associates/ Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates

JR Central towers is in Nagoya, Japan’s third largest metropolis. The challenge of the project was to integrate a complex mixed use program with a large transportation hub, which includes the high-speed bullet train, the Shinkansen.

Located on a significant site at the entrance to the city, two soaring office and hotel towers rise from a 20-story retail podium to create an image of a ‘gateway’. Although the two towers are different in composition and function, their strong vertical expression and their gently curved surfaces help to tie them together.

The contrast between the vertical of the towers and the horizontal of the podium reflects the desire to integrate the building into the urban context at two different levels. Reminiscent of a long stretch of rail lines, the horizontal articulation of the podium provides a link to the surrounding context. The vertical towers anticipate the buildings that will inevitably rise around the building in the 21st century.

http://www.kpf.com/images/Projects/jrcentraltowers/n0834_5004z.jpg

http://www.synapse.ne.jp/tak/nagoya/nagoyaeki1.jpg

http://www.taisei.co.jp/english/business/image/build_con_06.jpg

http://www.synapse.ne.jp/tak/nagoya/twin_towers2.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/rotpics01/japan.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/rotpics01/japan2.jpg

http://www.kpf.com/images/Projects/jrcentraltowers/n0834_4023z.jpg

http://www.kpf.com/images/Projects/jrcentraltowers/n0834_4020z.jpg

[Bob di Gills]

there ok....the last pic is the best...

...7/10

[NickT]

6.5/10 I like how theyre curved but other than that nothing special

[Muse]

They stick out like dog's balls (don't know if that's just an Aussie expression) and i guess that is the idea.

Even though a collaboration, yet more KPF round-meets-square trademark forms. Most, not all, "cookie-cutter architecture".

Nagoya is more interesting to visit in its older areas.

5.5

[Sunflower]

they're ok but nothing special.

7/10

[Subdude]

Most innovative new construction of 1980!
4/10

[NickT]

Originally posted by Subdude
Most innovative new construction of 1980!
4/10

If you read the top it says completion: 2000,

[Muse]

Errr, i think Subdude was saying it should be from 1980 and i would almost agree. i.e. he was being tongue-in-cheek. Check out his score :) .

[SteelCity32]

Not too exciting. But I like it. 7/10

[Caledon1981]

blecch . .. . 4/10 .. . . .2000? are you sure???

[TYW]

hmmmmm...... OK, not bad

they are the world's biggest train station??

[AG]

Nice shape, but the facade is boring and plain.

5/10

[SUNNI]

is it a boring pic or is it a boring building?. .. 7..

[DamienK]

They looked better (more "glassy") in the renderings. 7/10

[Francis20]

i like the shape, but the dull color spoils it...6.5

[RafflesCity]

7.5/10

Nice and massive sculptures, but the facade is tiring.

[DrumCorpsAlum]

7.5/10. Interesting.

[Steven]

It looks like something out of the 70's:fart: :baaa:

6.5/10

[Jeff from Winnipeg]

I usually like curves on buildings, but this one doesn't have that sleekness that appeals to me. ->7/10

[Liz L]

6/10 - the curved/square shapes are interesting, and the towers have good height, but the facade is so-so, and (I know I keep saying this!) a setback or two might have been nice. THe towers also don't seem to have much relationship or connection to their base, at least in the pictures.

[Jasonhouse]

I think that thier massing is very interesting, but the facades are bland and uninspiring. The base is also quite unattractive, and doesn't seem to have any relation whatsoever to the towers it cohabitates with.


6.5/10

[D-Mac]

These towers are so large and dominating, which wouldn't necessarily be bad, except they look like a mistake from the 1970's. Could be much better, but could be worse too. 5.5/10

[Bobdreamz]

amazing considering KPF designed this...pretty boring..they could have done better but oh well....6.5/10

[The Messiah]

A bit too white?The curves are ok but that's it.
6.0/10

[Monkey]

Deja vu all over again ... o dear, what a bore! I have repeatedly suspected that architects tend to run out of ideas. This is the perfect example. The connecting base sucks & therefore fails to fulfill its function. The towers themselves, while their shapes are fine, also disappoint me. No reason to make them lookalikes. Distressing that KPF came up with this in 1990.

A mere 6 (only because of the height). :D

[Evergrey]

3 Wow, this buildings look like they came straight out of the 70's... both are UGLY!

[airsickpenthousedweller]

Modesty that worked out quite well in these towers.

[CTroyMathis]

I don't mind them. They're nothing super special, but, they provide awesome views. 6.

[TropicalSQ744]

Shapely towers.. They have got the clean cut look too.. :)

8/10

[renell]

in the last pic it looks ok. but the rest it doesn't look that good, or is just damn ugly 6.5

[graspee]

here's a night shot:

http://www.btinternet.com/~graspee/nagoya.jpg

[rj2uman]

Tell me if this isn't straigt out of Buck Rogers or not. I swear this looks like "new Chicago" 8/10

[Imperfect Ending]

8

Too white

[Falcaonet]

I like how they stand above the rest of the city.7.5/10.

[MiCH]

I love these... 9/10

[Hacksaw]

Curly, but way too white.

Looks better at night. 7/10

[james2390]

i dont think i have ever seen these before, 7

[AtlanticaC5]

Nothing special, 7/10

[intervention]

At least its facade has some variation. 7.5

[Wu-Gambino]

4/10

[SFtoBoise]

4/10

Who knew that postmodernism could be building an 80's style building?

[Patrick]

they're ok


7

[Javier]

They have an european look

[Kommentare]

7.5/10 :)

[Trances]

So white looks like a model and not real

[dumatod]

Nice and grace!
8/10

[SeeMacau]

Nice
7/10

[alex3000]

5/10

[MCC]

7/10

[Fabio]

7/10


it depends on the view, so 9 from one side but 5 from the other =7

[manx_bkk]

7.5/10
Looks cool & has a wonderful shape, don't like the facade.

[Primo]

they are ok 7.5/10

[peterthegreat]

no, no, no... 5/10

[sjambler]

8/10

[7 World Trade]

nice shape, boring facade though. reminds me of azrielli center in tel aviv...

7/10

[Trances]

Facade is dull and so much white
Which may work in cold climate i guess but still
I was going to see these bad boys but skipped it in Favour of more time some where eles better spent !

[Schroedinger's Cat]

7.5/10

[yoyo22]

4/10

In this case, the box-meets-cylinder look of the towers just doesnt work (I usaully am partial to it), and the whiteness is a bit too strong. Also, the facade is almost great, if it looked like the renderings I would be more appreciative, but instead, because its so close to being good, it looks bad. Also, the black thing on top bugs me.

[therock]

I DON'T LIKE IT.

5.5/10

[sdtj]

Nagoya's landmark with 52 stories above ground n 4 stories beneath the ground level and a 3-story Penthouse

http://www.jr-central.co.jp/info_e.nsf/ci_all_w/85E1794A7CD36EB749256DB70020CE21/$FILE/P25.GIF

http://www.jr-central.co.jp/info_e.nsf/ci_all_w/6DEEF98E87C38F2E49256E23001A3BE6/$FILE/42-1.jpg

http://www.embargentina.or.jp/guia/images/rocas13.jpg

http://www.valco.co.jp/English/jpeg/twin_towers2.jpg

http://mc2000.arch.hku.hk/KPF/JRCentralTowers_pic.jpg

http://www.n-sharyo.co.jp/business/tekko/buildingframe/jrcen.jpg

[Imperfect Ending]

8/10

theres something about Japanese buildings that makes it so unique

[jimm]

8/10

[Winus]

Cool, they look very urban to me. 8/10

[Jheef]

7.5/10

[David3820]

They are very cool expecially the circular shapped one but I can't get too excited over them. 6.5/10

[Dubai-Lover]

look a bit dull! 6.5

[Monkey]

These buildings look better from close-up than further away.

This pic (http://mywebpage.netscape.com/rotpics01/japan2.jpg) (with its flip-top crown) reminds me of the DIFA Tower that was proposed in London a while ago.

The overall form and shape of the towers is good. Nice, clean, simple facades, uncomplicated design with a roundness that is pleasing to the eye. Street-level integration is also good.

8/10

[Monkey]

I have a book on skyscrapers that features these buildings on the cover:



http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/8495692252.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

[Zuelas]

6.5

The circular tower is attractive but the rest is quite plain. The base is awful and the two towers together look awkward. The complex would have a different/better feel if the circular tower was 2x its height.

[empersouf]

8.5, the towers shouldn't be together in one building I think.

[Imperial]

7/10

[Sitol447]

I give it a 7/10..

[andysimo123]

On some pics they look mint but other just normal. So.. 8.5/10

[Pedrillo]

7.5/10

Looks very nice at this picture:

http://www.synapse.ne.jp/tak/nagoya/twin_towers2.jpg

[Taufiq]

Well they are very distinct in the skyline...
7/10

[Jon Reid]

7, NICE CONTRAST BUT NOT SPECTACULAR

Damn caps.

[cjfjapan]

These are my favorite buildings in Nagoya--they jut out of the long Nagoya skyline and finally give it the signature exclamation point the city needed. I really like the contrasting size, and contrary to what other posters have said, I think the buildings are very well integrated into the pedestrian landscape--they are easy to access, but provide a pivotal focus for the Mei-eki area. As for the towers themselves, I like how helipad on the taller tower (on the right) is off center, giving the impression that part of the building is flying away. My criticism of the complex are that the back side of the large building is flat--very stark and quite plain. Coming in from the Northwest (Kyoto/Gifu/Ichinomiya) the complex just looks like a boxy tower--the towers are definitely better viewed from the east--the just moon the western wards (the old pleasure quarters) of the city.

[SkyHawk]

7/10

[MattSal]

Good no matter how you look at them. I give them a 8.5/10. :D

[Medo]

Nothing special. 6

[get13]

Great from some angles but crap from others 5/10

[Pengui]

Yuck.
The best part is the podium. They should have stopped there. Really.
Less than 3.

[flatiron94]

The color brings it down to a 0/10

[Latoso]

6.5/10

[Jules]

6.

[Reflex]

7.5/10.

[Phobos]

7/10

The base is too big IMO.The building looks very imposing from some angles!

[pon]

8.5
I think it's not bad.

[B@dGuYoM]

7.5/10

[DRAKKO]

8/10

[ROYAL BLUE]

8/10

[CborG]

Nice curves but the back lacks inspriration, 7/10

[SoboleuS]

Cool towers. I like their curved shape and the facade. 8/10

[El_Greco]

beautiful 9/10

[Xoceelias]

beauty 9.5/10

[Skylandman]

6/10

[www.sercan.de]

6,5/10

[Sinjin P.]

6/10

[Blue_Sky]

6.5/10

[sander]

7.5/10

[Mosaic]

Wow! that's beautiful.8/10

[۩SkyScraper۩]

8/10

[forvine]

7.5/10

[Principes]

7/10

[flashlight]

8/10 :)

[sharpie20]

6/10 weird looking facade

[Accura4Matalan]

7/10 for uniqueness. Apart from that, I find them quite ugly.

[Effer]

6/10.

[I-275westcoastfl]

for being built in 2000 it doesnt look like it 6/10

[mr_storms]

decent shape but disappointing facade 7/10

[Scruffy88]

yuck. hate the facade. Hate, well i just about hate it all. I like that they attempted 2. but i hate hate hate it. hate. hate

3/10

hate

[LordMarshall]

9/10

[musicqro]

6/10

[blue79]

6.5/10

[Cabman]

These towers could be a lot better. 6.5/10

[warnings]

8/10

[marpa]

7,5/10

[dżimi pejdż]

7/10

[999]

6/10

[FJP]

I like the white towers... 8/10

[clarky]

9/10

[Skyman]

9/10

[anakin]

7/10

[Bodrum]

8/10

[ZZ-II]

look like a 70's building, 8/10

[Henk]

6/10.

[virarch]

6/10

it doesn't pay (well, most of the time) to glue different geometric shapes together. looks like they didn't learn anything from past failures.

[gutooo]

7.5/10

[Mosaic]

7/10

[mtt16]

8.5/10

[chinatown]

boring
6/10

[Dreamlıneя]

7.5/10

[(((myx)))]

8.5 nice.

[Chinky Orz]

8/10 It's nice but still pretty boring design

[weirdo]

i only find the round top interesting in this one. 5/10

[hoangduong]

7/10

[myf282828]

I give it 9.5/10 as it looks huge and beautiful..:)

[LAYZIEDOGG]

great love it 8/10

[artech21]

5.5 / 10

Could have been among the great ones but the incomprehensible shape and top ruined it.

[W!CKED]

7/10

[Ralphkke]

Nah some pics look good some not, i dunno. A 7 out of 10.

[Kelsen]

9/10.:cheers:

[Aliya]

9/10

[Skyman]

7/10

[FloridaFuture]

Base doesn't match the towers at all.
5/10

[LMCA1990]

7/10

[Slodi]

interesting towers 8/10

[newyorkrunaway1]

7/10

[Astralis]

9/10

[MasonicStage™]

8/10

[RON-E]

4/10

[DragonAnime]

Hate the color- 6/10

[Popiel]

7,5/10

[Eric Offereins]

6/10

[Nikkodemo]

This is the first that I see a couple of towers of a diferent shapes.

9/10

[kon133]

5,5/10

[krzewi]

8 :)

[incognito_rn]

OK, not bad

[Sound.]

9/10

[Gregor]

6/10

[Halabalooza]

nothing special. 5

[WAuzzie]

7/10

[Fundador]

8/10 cool

[stasiua]

8/10

[Rutger1991]

8/10

[Kawasaki_Kragujevac]

7/10

[Nielsiej13]

8/10

[briker]

8/

[snail456]

I dont like them

1/10

[Fred_]

4.5