View Poll Results: What proposal would you like to see built for Hudson Yards?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Brookfield: SOM, Field Operations, Thomas Phifer, SHoP Architects and Diller Scofidio & Renfro

    64 65.98%
  • Durst / Vornado / Conde Nast: FXFowle and Rafael Pelli

    11 11.34%
  • Extell: Steven Holl

    8 8.25%
  • Related / Goldman Sachs / NewsCorp: Kohn Pedersen Fox, Arquitectonica and Robert AM Stern

    8 8.25%
  • Tishman Speyer / Morgan Stanley: Helmut Jahn

    6 6.19%
Page 11 of 128 FirstFirst ... 7891011121314152161111 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 1906

Thread: Hudson Yards

  1. #151
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Phila / Connecticut
    Posts
    521

    Default

    So all these buildings will have to have setbacks?


    I'm not good at this stuff lol.

  2. #152

    Default

    Check this out PHL guy, it helped me. http://www.tenant.net/Other_Laws/zoning/zontoc.html

  3. #153
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Phila / Connecticut
    Posts
    521

    Default

    Thanks^


    So there are still chances for 70-80 floor towers on the far West. That's good to know. 20 years from there there could be a stadium and lots of tall buildings.



    Oh yea, what was the answer to the Orion thing? is that part of this development. 604 feet, 184m, 58 floors is already a 4th of the way up.

  4. #154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PHLguy
    Thanks^


    So there are still chances for 70-80 floor towers on the far West. That's good to know. 20 years from there there could be a stadium and lots of tall buildings.



    Oh yea, what was the answer to the Orion thing? is that part of this development. 604 feet, 184m, 58 floors is already a 4th of the way up.
    You'd need a pretty big site to get that tall. I'm sure you could possibly have a 10 story base and have set backs to the buildings. I bet someone close to TSQ could file for like a FAR 20-25. Personally, something like the Citigroup Center would be good, only up to 80-100 floors.

  5. #155
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Phila / Connecticut
    Posts
    521

    Default

    I'm sure some of the sites will be sizable.


    and no you don't need that big of a site, look at Chicago's waterview tower!

  6. #156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PHLguy
    I'm sure some of the sites will be sizable.


    and no you don't need that big of a site, look at Chicago's waterview tower!
    I think it goes without saying Chicago, a different city, has different requirements. Also Chicago has large sites for large-developments while New York is hindered by the fact it has a grid system, dividing sites into smaller lots.

  7. #157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stern
    I think it goes without saying Chicago, a different city, has different requirements. Also Chicago has large sites for large-developments while New York is hindered by the fact it has a grid system, dividing sites into smaller lots.
    Also, Chicago's (from what I can imagine) real estate is not as expensive. So developers can assemble large plots of land. Also, it's probably not as hot of a demand. Have you seen photo's of the west or south sides? They're literally ghost towns!

  8. #158
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Phila / Connecticut
    Posts
    521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stern
    I think it goes without saying Chicago, a different city, has different requirements. Also Chicago has large sites for large-developments while New York is hindered by the fact it has a grid system, dividing sites into smaller lots.


    Yea, I was just making a point in general. A Building of that size could probably be in play for the sites if done right.

  9. #159
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Phila / Connecticut
    Posts
    521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alex ballard
    Also, Chicago's (from what I can imagine) real estate is not as expensive. So developers can assemble large plots of land. Also, it's probably not as hot of a demand. Have you seen photo's of the west or south sides? They're literally ghost towns!

    If that was always the case NY would never see supertalls again, Is that what your saying?



    PS. Sorry for the double post.

  10. #160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PHLguy
    If that was always the case NY would never see supertalls again, Is that what your saying?



    PS. Sorry for the double post.
    In the short term, that will prove itself a hinderance. However, when people realize that the 1961 zoning law is killing Manhattan, I think those small plots will prove themselves very useful.

  11. #161
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Phila / Connecticut
    Posts
    521

    Default

    I still havent figured out if there are still 80 floor towers allowed on the sites, I assume so.

  12. #162

    Default

    Perhaps if you would read, and stop asking repetitive questions, you would.

  13. #163
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Phila / Connecticut
    Posts
    521

    Default

    I am reading I just keep getting confused.


    And yes I'll admit that I'm obsessed, I think that area of the city desparetly needs supertall buildings.

  14. #164

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PHLguy
    I still havent figured out if there are still 80 floor towers allowed on the sites, I assume so.
    There are no height limits in most of Midtown or Downtown. You could build a 200 floor building if you wanted to. Of course, very tall buildings make no economic sense.

    Who cares about the number of floors in a building? Floor heights vary widely among buildings. If you like tall buildings you should care about building height not floor count. Regardless, the mania to build tall is a characteristic of second rate cities with inferiority complexes. Ugly cities like Shanghai and Taipei reach for the clouds, while fantastic cities like Paris and London have tough restrictions.

    Cities like NY don't need tall buildings, though I still look forward to seeing some new towers on the West Side.

  15. #165
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Phila / Connecticut
    Posts
    521

    Default

    There were 80 storey buildings proposed though...all i was wondering is if something like that still has a chance, It seems this has gotten more complicated than it really is.

    NY will always be an ecxellent city with a great skyline but to keep up with the ever growing world and stay in the top 2 or 3 skyline cities it should build tall and continue to do so.

Similar Threads

  1. Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 383
    Last Post: July 3rd, 2014, 05:21 PM
  2. Pier 57 - Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: December 17th, 2013, 04:00 PM
  3. Pier 64 - Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: June 23rd, 2013, 08:07 PM
  4. Pier 45 - Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: July 10th, 2012, 10:58 PM
  5. Replies: 573
    Last Post: May 11th, 2012, 05:40 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software