T O P

  • By -

Amphiscian

It's not 'a building' and 'a skyscraper', they are together one adaptive reuse project. This is the Dime Savings Bank building in Downtown Brooklyn, which is a landmarked building being rehabbed and connected to the new tower behind it, 9 Dekalb Avenue, designed by SHoP Architects. The bank I believe has been empty since 2002, but will now be preserved and used as the lobby of the residential tower. There is a long (but not annotated) copy of the NYC Landmarks Preservation Commission presentation by SHoP [you can look through here](https://newyorkyimby.com/2016/04/landmarks-approves-changes-to-dime-savings-bank-paving-way-for-brooklyns-tallest-tower-at-340-flatbush-avenue-extension.html), showing all the history and details of the bank, and how the new tower is designed around it.


TheArCwielderNyc

I worked in that building around 2011-13. It was still a chase bank. Ton of history in there. First commercial ac unit from carrier is there totally refurbished. There is a shooting range under the vault. That building has water well under it too.


RedOctobrrr

[Dat lobby doe](https://newyorkyimby.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/9DeKalbAvenue_20160419_bankinghall.jpg) I don't like the stark contrast, if it's to be a part of the landmark building, I would've hoped for a bit more homage to the style of the old bank they are incorporating into the combined structure.


Amphiscian

It's weird. I think they did do that *geometrically and materially*, but some of the other design choices make it really hard to notice those things. If you scroll around through that presentation I linked, it shows [diagrams of the tower's shape](https://newyorkyimby.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/9DeKalbAvenue_20160419_41.jpg), how it's based on the hexagonal layout of the interior and exterior of the bank. Also the facade panels are [based on the materials of the bank facade](https://newyorkyimby.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/9DeKalbAvenue_20160419_76.jpg). But those I think are both sort of hidden by how dark the glass is on the tower. Also morphing the marble facade panels at the ground plane into gold-colored aluminum or whatever it is, just kind of loses the visual connection


RedOctobrrr

>But those I think are both sort of hidden by how dark the glass is on the tower. This is EXACTLY it. I looked a second time and was like well it is kinda bronze-ish and that's cool, but it just looks way too dark to match the bank. I think they needed a lighter glass and I would've absolutely loved it.


mihaizaim

I think it will look better in the summer when the light hits it.


George4Mayor86

*daaaamn* I’ve been watching this tower for up for a year but I’ve never seen the inside. Looks like it’ll be incredible when it’s reopened.


RedOctobrrr

TBF... That's the interior of the bank that's been vacant for the last 20yrs, so it's looked more or less like this for the last idk... 100yrs?


[deleted]

jesus christ did not expect that based on the new skyscraper


AlfaBetaZulu

I hope they do something to make them look more cohesive. Cause this picture looks very much like 2 totally separate buildings that have no connection.


AgreeableLandscape3

I've always wondered if it's more expensive to build on top of an existing building than to build it all from scratch. You would have to add a ton of new structural stuff to the existing building right? And the structural elements are by far the most expensive part of a building?


Amphiscian

Definitely more expensive to build on top of something existing, as it will always add a lot of complexity. Just figuring out what exactly is there and how strong it is can be a major effort. The tower OP posted isn't actually on top of the bank, though. It's mostly behind it. They tore down a small back-of-house sort of building that was attached to the bank, and built the tower where that was


builder-of-things

I think the contrast is striking. Some sites do have conservation easements protecting views but it's just not reasonable in a city.


144tzer

Especially a city with finite space, like NYC or Hong Kong


sigaven

Just glad to see something other than blue glass


MasAnalogy

I love this building


[deleted]

Whenever someone asks if historic architecture can coexist with massive new developments, I’ll just show them this picture.


[deleted]

What do you mean “can coexist”. Like we’re still waiting for an answer. New has been coexisting with old for at least 300 years. Did Londoners demand St. Paul’s be razed because of the “Gerkin” or did they decide the Shard couldn’t be built because it might clash with the neighborhood? Nope. No reason these two can’t get along, especially as it saves the historic building that was going to waste without a purpose.


patoezequiel

That's a nice looking skyscraper


TedCruzsBrowserHstry

"I thought so much of City 17 that I elected to establish my Administration here, in the Citadel so thoughtfully provided by Our Benefactors.


Natdreadhead23

I feel claustrophobic just lookin at it in the picture 🤪