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 26 of 128 FirstFirst ... 162223242526272829303676126 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 1906

Thread: Hudson Yards

  1. #376

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by krulltime View Post
    If I had to pick from best to last, then...

    1. Brookfield
    2. Vornado/Durst
    3. Related Companies
    4. Extell
    5. Tishman/Speyer
    Matches my choices. These are my final judgments (yeah, its final early) in order of preference:

    Brookfield 1st

    What can I say? Everything done right, even skyscraper placement. The public areas between the towers brings to mind the Wintergarden at the WFC. Closest in layout to the site plan.


    Vornado/Durst 2nd

    Two strong companies together, it would seem to have the best chance. The design and layout of the development would be tops, were it not for Brookfield's own proposal. However, I don't like the way those towers sit on huge, blocky podiums. As a bonus, they included the Girasole with their model! And it beefed up their own development. Very smart!


    Related 3rd

    An "ok" proposal. But in third place simply because the Extell and Tishman proposals are horrible.


    Extell 4th

    Steven Holl may have a nice design for the 10th Ave tower, but this complex is so not New York, you have to wonder what they were thinking. Maybe they'll build it in China. Extell has other west side developments in the works, so don't count them out. Just not here though.


    Tishman 5th

    What can I say? I expected a bit more from what would seem to be a strong team. We're talking the future of New York, and they came up with this stale plan? No thanks. It rates behind Extell's proposal, and that says it all.

  2. #377

    Default

    More from curbed.com, more of Brookfield's proposal.


    They should stop this bid/competition before someone gets hurt!





  3. #378
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Not sure who came up with that "atrium" or whatever ^ but it's bad knock-off Calatrava

    I'm confused about what we're seeing -- and what the public is supposed to be responding to during this two week public review period ...

    If the renders of buildings that we're seeing are merely "place holders" then does that mean that the heights / massing shown are somewhat exact but that the facade treatment is undecided?

    Or is it even less than that and what we are judging here is the arrangement of buildings / open space / site plan ?

    Or is everything still up for grabs and changeable?

    Please advise

  4. #379
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Big Guns Spend Sunday Selling West Side Plans

    NY OBSERVER
    Matthew Schuerman
    November 19, 2007


    Diller Scofidio & Renfro

    Probably never had so many of New York’s real estate elite crammed themselves into such a small space as happened Sunday afternoon at the press preview of proposals to develop the Western Rail Yards: Steve Roth, Stephen Ross, Jerry Speyer and his son Rob, Ric Clark, Gary Barnett, Steven Holl, Helmut Jahn and Rafael Pelli. S.I. Newhouse even dropped by, very casually dressed, as proof that if Mr. Roth’s bid won, he’d move Condé Nast west to 10th Avenue.

    They all crammed themselves into a vacant storefront on West 43rd Street to show of their versions of New York’s future: towering buildings that will pack some 30,000 residents and workers into a six-square block area along the Hudson River, between 30th and 33rd streets. The architectural models themselves costs tens of thousands of dollars; the bids, submitted last month, ate up a few million, according to a number of developers.

    Not surprisingly, the five teams talked a lot about how their particular plan creates a vibrant new neighborhood -- this, after all, is the retail version of the plans. No financials were disclosed, and the point is to try to curry favor with the public to create a popular favorite. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority -- which, with the Bloomberg administration’s input, will choose the winner in the next few months -- has got to pay more attention to how much money each team is offering, when they’d be able to pay it, and how likely they’d get it done.

    “There are two or three of these that are done by teams that are really competent,” said Mr. Roth, “and in the end I think it's going to be the financial part of the deal that is going to differentiate them.”

    Each of the plans profess to save the northern section of the High Line and promise to provide at least some affordable housing. The tallest buildings would stretch 1,000, 1,100, even 1,300 feet into the air. (The Empire State Building now clocks in at 1,250 feet.) The cost, according to a number of the developers, will likely come in between $10 billion to $20 billion, with completion anticipated in the early 2020’s.

    There were also plenty of wild and creative ideas, like, from Brookfield Properties, Diller Scofidio & Renfro's towers (pictured above) that are joined by a quarter-mile running track; mechanisms to reuse sullage for irrigation; patent-pending technology to create a better platform over the rail yards; a movie screen on which 20th Century Fox could premiere new films; and so on.

    The exhibit of the five proposals, which includes architectural models, displays and videos, will be open to the public every day for the next two weeks, from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., starting today (with the exception of Thanksgiving). The address is 335 Madison Avenue, although the storefront is really located at the northwest corner of 43rd Street and Vanderbilt Avenue. Comment cards will be available for visitors to give input.

    The Real Estate will post synopses of the five designs throughout the day.

  5. #380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lofter1 View Post
    I'm confused about what we're seeing -- and what the public is supposed to be responding to during this two week public review period ...

    If the renders of buildings that we're seeing are merely "place holders" then does that mean that the heights / massing shown are somewhat exact but that the facade treatment is undecided? Please advise
    They are place holders in the sense that the designs aren't finalized. However, its nothing like the WTC where different architects will design the buildings and come up with completely different schemes. These are the architects' designs, and some are detailed right down to their heights (although, as always, that's open to revision also).

    Some extra bits from curbed.com

    Developer: Vornado Realty Trust/Durst Organizatin
    Architects: FXFowle and Pelli Clarke Pelli
    Biggest building: 80 stories, 1,205 feet tall

    Developer: The Related Companies
    Architects: Robert A.M. Stern, Kohn Pederson Fox, Arquitectonica
    Biggest building: A 1,080 ft, two-million-square-foot News Corp headquarters

    Developer: Extell
    Architect: Steven Holl Architects
    Biggest building: A 1,238-foot-tall, three-million-square-foot triple-headed super tower thingy

    Developer: Brookfield Properties
    Architects: Skidmore Owings & Merrill, Thomas Phifer & Partners, ShoP Archiects, Diller Scofidio + Renfro, SAANA, Handel Architects
    Biggest building: 1.9 million total square feet and ~1,300 feet tall

  6. #381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
    I'm not so sure the designs will look completely different. There's a BIG difference between this and the WTC. And that's because the architects here are the actual architects of what will be built. Secondly, there will be no fighting among secondary architects that force compromised visions. So while there will inevitably be differences, we can lean heavily on what we see here.
    Certainly not the same politics as the WTC but much like the Canary Wharf the master plan architects will probably get the main building or two but other office towers will probably be different based on prospective anchor tenants needs. As for the residential portion, I'd expect those designs to be farmed out based on whether they end up as rentals, condos, hotels or what.

    Furthermore, this will be a more spread out phased implementation, again unlike the WTC, more akin the Times Sq. redevelopment. Architectural trends will change and the buildings will to a great extent also over that type of time period.

    This wil not be the World Financial Center but more like the rest of BPC in implementation IMO.

  7. #382

    Default

    Just saw the models, defintely a Brookfield no1 durst no2 job.

  8. #383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMGarcia View Post
    Furthermore, this will be a more spread out phased implementation, again unlike the WTC, more akin the Times Sq. redevelopment. Architectural trends will change and the buildings will to a great extent also over that type of time period.

    This wil not be the World Financial Center but more like the rest of BPC in implementation IMO.
    Obviously this will be a phased development, but I don't expect to get something so dramatically different built that we won't recognize it as such. I also don't see how the MTA can use a "mix and match" approach with the 2 railyards.

  9. #384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alonzo-ny View Post
    Just saw the models, defintely a Brookfield no1 durst no2 job.
    Did you add commentary? I think I'll have to go just for that (and to view the models of course)..


    curbed.com

  10. #385

    Default

    The representative from Brookfield informed me that their design is what will be built if it is selected.

  11. #386
    Forum Veteran TREPYE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    2,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lofter1 View Post
    Not sure who came up with that "atrium" or whatever ^ but it's bad knock-off Calatrava
    Since when is a "knockoff" of one of the great architects of our time bad??? I relish anything merely resembles his great work which this does...


    This is beautiful! Looks like a cool place to go hang on on a rainy summer day.

  12. #387

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lofter1 View Post
    If the renders of buildings that we're seeing are merely "place holders" then does that mean that the heights / massing shown are somewhat exact but that the facade treatment is undecided?
    The NY Observer article you posted seems to answer some of your questions.

    With twenty years to complete the project, the closest thing to certainty is the site-plan, since the decking is the first order of priority, and its construction depends on the placement of buildings.

    Who's to say what a building slated for construction 8 years from now will look like, or whether an anchor tenant won't go bankrupt.


    Londonlawyer: What did you expect the Brookfield rep to say, that they're going to build something different? And what exactly did he mean by their design?

  13. #388

    Default

    I agree with Lofter. The "knockoff" looks goofy.

  14. #389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by londonlawyer View Post
    The representative from Brookfield informed me that their design is what will be built if it is selected.
    It's what I suspected, but glad to hear if from a source.

  15. #390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TREPYE View Post

    This is beautiful! Looks like a cool place to go hang on on a rainy summer day.
    It's a "wintergarden" for the west side...

    As far as whether or not these proposals get built as is, well of course there will be pessimists who insists these thing won't get buit for 50 years (remember the WTC pessimists). All I can say is, the future remains open for all possibilities, yet there is no reason to doubt here.

    But that's all irrelevant at this point. We're choosing based on what we see here and now. If one could be changed, that means they all could be changed.

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