NEW YORK | 1 Brooklyn Bridge Plaza | 165m | 541ft | 42 fl | Com

14668 Views 44 Replies 28 Participants Last post by AnOldBlackMarble, Jan 19, 2018

Ebola

Discussion Starter · May 13, 2008 (Edited)

Taconic Investment Partners is poised to spectacularly transform one of Manhattan's least popular skyscrapers.

375 Pearl (also known as the Verizon Building and One Brooklyn Bridge Plaza) is a 32-story telephone switching building at the Manhattan end of the Brooklyn Bridge. It's floors are over five meters tall and it is considered the most ugly tower in NYC by many people.

But that may change becuse Cook & Fox has designed a totally new curtain wall which will cover the entire tower and expose X-beams throughout the entire tower, without any doubt making it one of the coolest buildings in the city. Because of its location and because it is in a low-rise area, it is a well-known skyscraper.

The biggest blight upon the lower Manhattan skyline will be transformed into a great tower.

http://www.cookplusfox.com/

OLD:

NEW:

I can't wait for a stupid comment like, "I don't like the new design and the limestone facade should be left alone."

See less See more

2

Reactions: 1

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

HD

· #2 · May 13, 2008

the old facade was hideous. the new one isn't anything special, but atleast the tower will look more fresh 'n new..

ElVoltageDR

· #3 · May 13, 2008

Alright, that's great. Like HD said, it's not special, but it's way better than what was there before. And I always like exposed X beams.

Ebola

Discussion Starter · #4 · May 13, 2008

The exposed bracing is what makes it special; with the new plans, I am sure that it will become one of the most loved buildings in the lower Manhattan skyline. I don't think any other tower in the city has bracing like that, right under a glass facade. It almost screams out Richard Rogers.

HD

· #5 · May 13, 2008

the question is... will it be visible, like in the rendering? the glas usually doesn't turn out as transparent as in renderings. allright, it may be special for new york, but to me it looks like an ordinary office building that you see everywhere in europe, only on steroids (with a height of over 500ft).

See less See more

Rizzato

· #6 · May 13, 2008

HD said:
the question is... will it be visible, like in the rendering? the glas usually doesn't turn out as transparent as in renderings. allright, it may be special for new york, but to me it looks like an ordinary office building that you see everywhere in europe, only on steroids (with a height of over 500ft).

It may be special for New York??? what are you talking about..there's much bigger projects in NYC than this.

what makes this building re-cladding notable is that it's happening to an ugly building in a very visible location.

See less See more

Colonel Cadillac

· #7 · May 13, 2008

ok I'm glad someone has done a 'reclad' thread here. Now for a rant. I never liked One BBP much, or cared one way or the other. However, the 'glass invasion' is an alarming trend. First there was the reclad on the love it/hate it midtown Verizon, which met mixed reviews. Then we have the very unpopular restyling of the pre-war 3 Coumbus and the modernist classic 100 Park Ave. I understand that Der Scutt's distinctive One Astor Plaza will lose its crown and become an anonymous glass box. This is extremely bad. How would you like to see every non-landmarked major highrise in the city reclad in blue-green glass? Every internat'l style building, every postmodern one, and many prewar ones. Developers love that sort of thing, a 'new' old buidling, and ennviromentalist types will clamor for it too. NY is not the emerald city! Anyway, there's a greater point here about how US architecture is regressing back towards the late seventies, but I'll deal w that later. Also, please don't quote this whole post unless you're many posts later...it's so annoying when people do that!

See less See more

Skyscrapercitizen

· #8 · May 13, 2008

This is a landmark building for New York. If you like it or not, it is recognizable and presents its time. Now it will have a re cladding which will make it just another glass box which are UC everywhere in town allready.

Don't get me wrong, I adore the glass towers, and I'm not big fan the existing facade of this tower, but different aged buildings make the skyline more diverse and by that better. So far my opinion. :cheers:

See less See more

ZZ-II

· #9 · May 13, 2008

IMO the new facade looks much better

Ni3lS

· #10 · May 13, 2008

The new glass is much better ! :cheers:

koolkid

· #11 · May 13, 2008 (Edited)

Colonel Cadillac said:
I understand that Der Scutt's distinctive One Astor Plaza will lose its crown and become an anonymous glass box.

No way! That would seriously suck majorly. I really hope that doesn't happen.

Blue glass again, eh? I see 375 pearl st. everyday on my way to school and I'll admit it's current design has grown on me... While I'm aware that it's not the prettiest thing out there, I'd also hate to see it be replaced with what's becoming an overload of blue glass... yeah, a bit of mixed feelings here.

See less See more

MDguy

· #12 · May 13, 2008

FINALLY! Ive been waiting for them to reclad the building for so long! It'll look so much better! But i really hope they don't do the same thing to One Astor Plaza!

ElVoltageDR

· #13 · May 13, 2008

Colonel Cadillac said:
ok I'm glad someone has done a 'reclad' thread here. Now for a rant. I never liked One BBP much, or cared one way or the other. However, the 'glass invasion' is an alarming trend. First there was the reclad on the love it/hate it midtown Verizon, which met mixed reviews. Then we have the very unpopular restyling of the pre-war 3 Coumbus and the modernist classic 100 Park Ave. I understand that Der Scutt's distinctive One Astor Plaza will lose its crown and become an anonymous glass box. This is extremely bad. How would you like to see every non-landmarked major highrise in the city reclad in blue-green glass? Every internat'l style building, every postmodern one, and many prewar ones. Developers love that sort of thing, a 'new' old buidling, and ennviromentalist types will clamor for it too. NY is not the emerald city! Anyway, there's a greater point here about how US architecture is regressing back towards the late seventies, but I'll deal w that later. Also, please don't quote this whole post unless you're many posts later...it's so annoying when people do that!

Yeah, I don't mind this one, because it needs it badly IMO, but there are just a ton of prewar buildings getting glass facades and I'm not all for doing that type of thing. It really takes away from the architectural variation in the city. I think it's better for the less than lovable buildings (this one was a real eyesore), but others really shouldn't be stripped of their uniqueness.

See less See more

koolkid

· #14 · May 13, 2008

a ton? Are there really that many getting recladded?

xXFallenXx

· #15 · May 13, 2008

I don't like the new design and the limestone facade should be left alone.

storms991

· #16 · May 13, 2008

I don't like the new design and the limestone facade should be left alone. Just joking. Honestly, I would knock the entire thing down and build something with an art deco style.

ElVoltageDR

· #17 · May 13, 2008

koolkid said:
a ton? Are there really that many getting recladded?

Maybe not a ton, but a lot. Just walking from about 34th to 50th street you can see a number of buildings being reclad with glass.

Marutokung!

· #18 · May 14, 2008

I love this design.It look clean and bright.

philvia

· #19 · May 14, 2008

here is a quick chop i did

See less See more

Ebola

Discussion Starter · #20 · May 14, 2008

Pretty good job. Someone mentioned that there may be a small height increase too.

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.