Praise for Renzo Piano's New York Times Building

Great review in the NYTimes last week of the NYTimes Building... by a NYTimes employee! Okay, I suppose that fact doesn't warrant an exclamation point, but the truth is that nobody can really provide a better review than a writer who actually works in the building... also, I was pleased that I used the phrase NYTimes three times in one sentence. I actually spent some time in the NYTimes Building as it was constructed, which was a great experience. My consulting firm acquired a smaller firm that represented a foreign supplier that was subcontracted to provide a construction element for the NYTimes Building -- this entitled me to the option of tagging along on site visits whenever I had the chance. Walking throughout the building while it was still being completed was not only one of the most amazing experiences I have ever had, it also provided me the opportunity to learn about the construction firsthand.

Anyway, I was really impressed with Renzo Piano's building from the first moment I walked into the lobby, which at the time of my first visit was more of a giant open space than an actual lobby. Still, making the short trip to the construction site sporadically to check in on progress was more than worthwhile, specifically because doing so gave me the chance to see the building come together piece by piece, floor by floor. Each time I stopped by for a visit, the NYTimes building was closer to completion and today I am amazed that a beautiful NYC landmark building stands where I stood just twelve months ago.

The review, by NYTimes architecture writer Nicolai Ouroussoff, goes into great detail of what works and what doesn't in the fascinating building, which utilizes some truly cutting-edge technology. The review also contains a great photo slideshow that depicts some of the building's elements that Ouroussoff discusses, as well as an interactive feature containing really cool 360-degree views of various areas along with audio commentary. Just like me, Ouroussoff starts off by writing that he is simply "enchanted" by the 52-story NYTimes Building. Located on 8th Avenue between 40th and 41st Streets, Renzo Piano's design provides a much-needed visual uplift from the dreary Port Authority Bus Terminal situated across the street.

Ouroussoff's two main criticisms include the tower's crown and ceramic rod facade/screen, but he also mentions the concerns of his coworkers, which include an abundance of empty space in the newsroom and the sterile look/feel of the glass offices. Regarding the screen of ceramic rods adorning the building's facade, he writes:

"...despite the architect’s best efforts, the screens look flat and lifeless in the skyline. The uniformity of the bars gives them a slightly menacing air, and the problem is compounded by the battleship gray of the tower’s steel frame. Their dull finish deprives the facades of an enlivening play of light and shadow."

Similar rods line the facade of Piano's 22-floor Debis Tower in Berlin, Germany also (pictures available here). I was never and still am not a huge fan of the look that the ceramic rods provide, however, I do understand their purpose and the decision-making process behind their inclusion in the project. The exterior ceramic rods work with the building's large glass window panes and photosensor-controlled interior blinds to improve efficiency in a variety of areas. Designed with help from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the thin ceramic tubes actually help reduce the building's cooling (energy) loads, while the automated roller-shades help manage potential glare problems, and maximize the opportunity for daylight and views -- this is called 'daylighting.' You probably wouldn't be able to tell, but the glass walls themselves are actually made of low-iron, water-white, double-pane spectrally selective glass. In fact, LBNL ran a nine-month study to perfect this system specifically for The New York Times.

So even though the ceramic rods are not the best look for the building's facade, at least they serve a purpose. Although the building's other negative design feature -- its crown -- also serves a purpose, the benefits are not nearly as great as those provided by the ceramic tube/daylighting system. Renzo Piano decided to hide the mechanical equipment located on the NYTimes Building's roof by extending the screen of ceramic tubes six stories past the roof of the 52nd floor. According to Ouroussoff, the effect was supposed to "create the impression that the tower is dissolving into the sky... yet the effect is ragged and unfinished. Rather than gathering momentum as it rises, the tower seems to fizzle." In my opinion, he is absolutely correct in that assessment. One design feature that still keeps me on the edge between love and hate is the NYTimes Building's large spire, which actually tapers from over seven feet in diameter at its base and at its peak, almost seems to pierce the sky. It seems out of place here, but it also works well with the building's sharp lines and definitely adds to the "dissolving into the sky" effect that Piano worked to create.

On the other hand, praise for the NYTimes Building far outweighs the criticisms. The lobby is large, beautiful and bright, creating a welcoming environment to the building's tenants. As Ouroussoff describes it:

"The lobby is encased entirely in glass, and its transparency plays delightfully against the muscular steel beams and spandrels that support the soaring tower. People entering the building from Eighth Avenue can glance past rows of elevator banks all the way to the fairy tale atrium garden and beyond, to the plush red interior of TheTimesCenter auditorium. From the auditorium, you gaze back through the trees to the majestic lobby space. In effect, the lobby itself is a continuous public performance."

Again, I agree wholeheartedly. In fact, the lobby and atrium -- an atrium that contains beautiful birch trees unseen anywhere else New York City -- may just be my favorite aspects of the building. He also describes a few other great aspects of this landmark building, namely the internal staircases, an impressive cafeteria and a double-height skylight well on the third and fourth floors where the newsroom is located.

The bright red staircases that connect each floor are quite unique... rarely do newly-constructed buildings in NYC contain staircases other than those used for emergency escape, which are often located adjacent to elevator shafts or tucked away out of sight. Renzo Piano designed these staircases to be visible, architecturally pleasing, and convenient enough for employees to quickly and easily move from floor to floor without the use of elevators (and electrical energy). In the event of fire, metal barriers extend out across the open space created by the staircases to effectively prevent fire and smoke from easily moving between floors, which eerily reminded me of The Titanic. Despite my imagination, the staircases really are a useful design feature rarely seen in new buildings these days.

An expansive, colorful, double-height cafeteria is situated on the 14th floor of the NYTimes Building, and just like the lobby it enhances the building's transparency. Circular, as opposed to rectangular, tables dot the cafeteria floor and a narrow, suspended balcony hangs overhead. The enormous glass walls provide employees with breathtaking lunchtime views of Manhattan in all directions. The tall ceilings also allow for a tremendous amount of light to bathe diners, which surely enhances any meal. The idea of bringing light into the building also comes into play in the building's double-height newsroom, which has its very own skylight (and of course those trusty red staircases).

Ouroussoff concludes his review by writing:

"Depending on your point of view, the Times Building can thus be read as a poignant expression of nostalgia or a reassertion of the paper’s highest values as it faces an uncertain future. Or, more likely, a bit of both."

I disagree with him here, because to me this building contains very little of anything nostalgic, nor do I feel any nostalgia when I am there. I do understand that The New York Times building will be a New York City landmark for decades to come, if not longer, and regardless of the future of the company itself this building is as great a symbol of success as any, and it clearly indicates that this company has an eye on the future. After all, it utilizes some of the newest construction technology and a design that will challenge other architects to create something better. And that holds true for anyone's point of view.