Architects at Foster Partners are seeking to resurrect art déco with the design of J.P. Morgan’s new headquarters in New York. The 423m-tall 270 Park Avenue will replace the company’s former skyscraper designed by SOM in the 1950s. According to F P architects, the building is intended to be climate-neutral and the materials needed for its construction were sourced directly from the company’s previous headquarters. Interestingly, the electricity to power the building will come from the state’s hydroelectric plant. The company’s assurances have been met with criticism from the trade press, which sees the investment as a waste of raw materials and energy. However, are their accusations correct?
Recycled skyscraper
The Union Carbide Building (or J.P. Morgan Chase Tower) was built in 1960 in the business district of Midtown, Manhattan. It was designed by SOM architects to create a tall international-style office building for the chemical company Union Carbide. At the time, the glass and steel façade structure was considered the pinnacle of simplicity and functionalism. Interestingly, asbestos moulded in the shape of honeycombs was also used in the construction. The black Union Carbide skyscraper looked in vain for ornamentation or precious stones, which was in keeping with the modernist architectural trends of the time. The 215-metre tall skyscraper was bought by J.P. Morgan in the 1980s and was the company’s headquarters until 2018. Attempts to list the skyscraper as a city landmark failed, and demolition of the building began in 2019. Interestingly, 97 per cent of the building materials such as steel and glass were recovered from the Union Carbide edifice. These materials were then used in the construction of the new skyscraper.
From the outside, the new building is intended to be reminiscent of the classic skyscrapers of New York. The stepped block is somewhat reminiscent of Rockeffeler Plaza or the Empire State Building from the 1930s. New York is full of gradually rising towers in the art déco style, and 270 Park Avenue attempts to fit in with the neighbourhood. An interesting detail is the colour scheme of the facade. Dark gold mixed with black and soft white are classic art déco colours. Equally important are the rhombus-shaped geometric patterns, which are in fact the frames of the exposed skeleton of the building. Interestingly, the heavy stepped volume of the skyscraper has been raised by 24 metres on a tapering skeleton. This arrangement increased the footprint of the pavement and the nearby plaza. The skyscraper’s neo art déco ends at the façade, however, as the visualisations show a rather modest lobby. Of course, this is modesty in relation to the dripping gold and expensive stone lobby of the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Building.
Largest tower on electricity
The new skyscraper at 270 Park Avenue designed by Foster Partners is intended not only to increase office space relative to its predecessor, but also to respond to climate challenges. The previous building could accommodate 3,500 employees and offered 140,000 sq m of office space. In contrast, the skyscraper from F P will provide jobs for 14,000 people spread over 230,000 sq m of office space. Moreover, the company will be able to adapt the space to its needs. It is worth noting that the older, smaller skyscraper could not meet the office requirements of the global leader in investment banking, so the natural step was to dismantle the previous building and build a large tower.
A marker of the building’s modernity is its sophistication in terms of self-sufficiency and energy efficiency. 270 Park Avenue will draw its energy from the state’s hydroelectric power plant. Moreover, all heating, air-conditioning and ventilation (HVAC) systems will be more efficient thanks to the façade’s triple glazing. In turn, a suitable water storage and filtration system will reduce water consumption. Of course, all these systems will be powered by electricity, further reducing the building’s carbon footprint.
An unnecessary pastiche
The industry press, however, has not been as enthusiastic about 270 Park Avenue as Foster Partners. A journalist from the local Brooklyn Rail believes that the new skyscraper is simply an unnecessary pastiche of the art déco era. In addition, the previous building was an important example of the international style and the technological solutions incorporated in the Union Carbide were considered a breakthrough. Of course, skyscrapers in this style are not in short supply in New York or around the world. It is difficult to argue the eminence of an old skyscraper when there is an almost identical 1957 Seagram Building on Park Avenue and One Liberty Plaza a few streets away. Nor is it that, since older International Style buildings are plentiful, the loss of one will not be acute. The premise of the style is simplicity, functionality and repetition, so it is not at all a work of art like the Chrysler Building that has been destroyed, but a ‘working machine’ that has served its purpose.
On the issue of art déco pastiche, the author of the article is somewhat correct. The potential for a modern approach to an iconic style has not been fully realised in the tower. The ornate but functional interior design and the more interesting façade details are missing. 270 Park Avenue is a mere substitute for neo-art déco. On the other hand, one has to appreciate the architects’ willingness to change the beaten path of modern design since Le Corbusier. Although the building does not fully live up to the tenets of modern art déco, it does mark a certain desire to return to its former glory in a more practical and relevant to our times.
And who needs it?
A slightly more insightful and critical article by Fred Bernstein, an architecture graduate from the prestigious Princeton School of Architecture, proved to be a bit more insightful. In a text for The Architect’s Newspaper, the author takes it in turns to ‘refute’ F P’s arguments for green solutions at 270 Park Avenue. According to Bernstein, the skyscraper should never have been built and the creation of such a building in downtown Manhattan “sends the wrong message to the world” due to climate change. The author’s main argument is that a skyscraper is in fact not environmentally friendly, as the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere during construction is enormous. However, following this logic, humans should not be building large buildings at all because they are damaging the climate.
What’s more, Bernstein believes that climate-neutral status is not enough for future-proof architecture. The building has neither solar panels nor wind turbines… which is just like the overwhelming majority of projects in the world. The fact that the skyscraper runs entirely on hydropower is also ‘not enough’. According to the author, such a solution is not a manifestation of the building’s innovative architecture, but merely ‘creative accounting’. But is this a bad thing? Since it manages to remain carbon neutral anyway, thanks to such a solution.
The Architect’s Newspaper had no problem with similar solutions in the skyscraper The Spiral, which you can read about HERE. At the time, the skyscraper was a breath of fresh air that could apparently meet the climate challenge. BIG’s design did not involve drawing energy from a hydroelectric power station, and its biggest selling point was the green terraces, which do not actually affect the ‘greenness’ of the building.
The author’s intentions show towards the end of the text, where he points out that we shouldn’t build high-rise buildings and I guess we just have to accept that. The problem is that it is impossible to put up such a large, non-skyscraper headquarters on Manhattan’s small lots. F P’s goal was to create a larger and more modern headquarters that, in addition, does not emit significant amounts of carbon dioxide. This goal has been achieved. In contrast, the old headquarters did not meet the requirements and the growing needs of the company forced J.P. Morgan to demolish the skyscraper. Would it be better for the climate to build once, during which significant amounts of carbon dioxide are released, or to operate for many years an old skyscraper that does not meet office and energy standards?
A new wave
270 Park Avenue could herald a new style. Just as architects in the second half of the 19th century created Neo-Gothic, Neo-Romanism and the Neo-Byzantine style, so today, more than a century after the creation of art déco, we are referring to old patterns. Although F P’s Neo-art déco is far from perfect, 270 Park Avenue is a firm step towards popularising the new style. Some would even say that it is an example of a slightly greener approach to building. Others will complain.
Photo source: Foster Partners
Also read: Architecture | Curiosities | Skyscraper | Art Deco | New York | United States | whiteMAD on Instagram
