Reminds me of something…
6 Likes
The lighting plan was one of the most amazing parts of the original plan. It looks like it’s not going to happen. That would be a major loss.
4 Likes
The lack of lighting at the crown is unfortunate; but a minor aesthetic issue compared to all that exposed ‘structural steel’ inside the crown, all of which is clearly visible from most angles.
I had always thought that crown looked “CaCa” because of the clearly visible X shaped structural steel members inside the crown.
I know this is nit-picking: but that oversight always seemed odd to me given that everything else is perfect. That crane contraption at the top not so great either: but I suspect there are good reasons why they are there - all reasons which are admittedly beyond my understanding. 
9 Likes
The lost lighting was not just about the crown. The plan also included curved lighting on the skinny facades matching the trim. The renders were beautiful.
3 Likes
I did not know the extent of that lighting plan: I will check the thread to see if I can find some more of those lighting renderings. There were a few wrinkles in this project for sure: those big X structural steel support beams in plane sight are my only quibble.
However, I did find these ‘night time’ renderings which do look lovely.
Here is another look at the structural steel beams: not exactly a ‘elegant’ look for a crown IMHO.
1 Like
The lighting company still has it on their website but now under completed.
The description still talks about the crown and terra cotta lighting as if it happened. The company has done some pretty famous buildings and structures so I’m disappointed if this is officially dead.
6 Likes
Well, we do know for sure the lighting does not look “completed” as stated on the website description. The claim that the lighting project is “dead” still remains to bee seen.
Someone needs to do a ‘coffee table book’ book title something like - “The architectural saga of 111 West 57th Street”. This tread will be a great source of research material. 
Thanks for that link - I go take a look now.
1 Like
We do know that LEDs exist within the sides of 111, so there’s at least a glimmer of hope they’ll do more testing 
I’d like to think this would one day get lit up! 
Still, it HAS been a hot minute since we did see any lights tested, so perhaps that’s as much as we’ll ever see 
Otherwise why take this long to test out the rest of the lighting, unless there’s a technical hurdle preventing it…?
7 Likes
Central Park Tower hasn’t been lit up for several months now either. They were doing testing back in the summer but never quite got it right (which is surprising). I wonder if the tenants don’t want the building to draw attention to itself, in spite of it’s height.
1 Like
I suspect the lighting on CPT broke and they haven’t bothered (or cared) to fix it. It seems they don’t bother fixing it once the lighting breaks. The same can be said for 4 WTC whose top LED strips have been blown out for over a year and now 1 and 2 Manhattan West have stopped lighting up as well.
5 Likes
There is an epidemic of LED projects gone wrong. Electrical engineers and lighting technicians need to get their act together. Seems like the endurance of indoor and outdoor systems is vastly different.
12 Likes
It’s honestly pathetic. If an iPhone with tons of holes, potential failure points, and billions of circuits can be weatherproofed and droppable from a freaking plane, then why can’t lighting engineers get basic LED bars to last for more than a week?
7 Likes
This was a very expensive - and risky - design decision given that this LED lighting technology is relatively new: so I give the developer some credit for taking on this added expense, for what is now a questionable financial return. The guiding principal for most RE developers is “form-follows-finance” and I do not think this lighting scheme payed off too well in term of ROI.
This is one of those cases where the developer needed to say “we’re not doing that” because it is not something we are familiar with, or SURE about.
I personally wish they would just ‘pull the plug’ (pun intended) on the whole lighting scheme so we can finally call this building COMPLETED.
Credit to JDS/ShoP for going above & beyond a simple dollars & cents calculation in order to create a truly ICONIC work of Architecture. Architecture with a Capital A…
This is my opinion but if the developer and/or lighting design firm knew was very risky and expensive, then logically they shouldn’t have mentioned the lighting scheme at all
I agree!
2 Likes
All good observations. I am completely ‘in-the-dark’ regarding the lighting feature on this building. 
Is there actually an LED lighting feature to be completed? If yes, has the lighting plan been abandoned?
I would sure like to be ‘enlightened’ on the matter at this point. 
Cheers
2 Likes
Maybe TKDV can shed some light on the matter
5 Likes
If lighting was part of the plan; what was it supposed to look like. Somebody dropped the ball; or dropped the “bulb” if in fact a lighting scheme was part of the project scope.
The final architectural icon that is 111W 57 is a fantastic final outcome; but their have been too many bumps on the road to completion.
Or, is this building ‘completed’ - who knows for sure.
2 Likes
Here is an image I posted on this thread in 2022 when I saw lighting being tested briefly at 111. It never showed up again in test or otherwise. The image also shows other lighting on 57th street buildings that is now invisible.
10 Likes
Wow, thanks. That is a proof positive that ‘lighting’ was intended as an integral part of the project.
1 Like
The picture also shows the failed lighting at One57 and the Central Park Tower. Add in the Hudson yards area failures and you begin to “see” the scope of the problems.
4 Likes