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 27 of 128 FirstFirst ... 172324252627282930313777127 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 405 of 1906

Thread: Hudson Yards

  1. #391

    Default

    I'm not impressed with any of these proposals. I like the buildings at the far east and west side of Brookfield's proposal and hate the buildings in between. I'm reminded of SOM's own horrible WTC proposal.





    Simply put the site plan on all of these sucks!

    I also would not award any contract to Brookfield. There predecessor Olympia and York went bankrupt in part because of there ambitious plans for the westside, in addition to other far-reaching schemes they proposed to do what is now being proposed today. There control over the 9th Avenue railyard stems from the Olympia and York days and they are yet to do anything with that site, further control of this site would create more competition with themselves and I can forsee them not developing either site.

  2. #392
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    219

    Default

    The FXFowle architects masterplan's (Vornado/Durst) tallest is 80 floors and 1,205 feet according to Curbed!
    KPF (Related) is 74 floors and 1,080. It looks small in the skyline from what I've seen.
    The triplet towers from Extell were 1,238' tall.
    The SOM one (Brookfield Properties), which I think looks best, is 1,300 feet tall.
    And the Tishman one by Helmut Jahn and Peter Walker has 3MSF in one tower, says Curbed, but no height yet. I guess it's at least 900'.


    I'd have to agree with most people. The FXFowle and Rafael Pelli and SOM plans are the best.
    Last edited by Ebola; November 19th, 2007 at 07:52 PM.

  3. #393

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stern View Post
    Simply put the site plan on all of these sucks!
    I knew the site plan was the worst thing coming in, so I was braced for that. However, the Brookfield proposal is the absolute best in bringing those railyards into the "fabric" of the rest of Manhattan. Not an easy thing to do given the site plan and the complications of the railyards.

  4. #394

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
    I We're choosing based on what we see here and now. If one could be changed, that means they all could be changed.
    It should be chosen based on what is most likely to withstand inevitable changes.

    I'm not going to choose until I see the models.

  5. #395
    Forum Veteran TREPYE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    2,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stern View Post
    I'm reminded of SOM's own horrible WTC proposal.


    I actually never saw this.
    Whooaaaa is that bad!

  6. #396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stern View Post
    Simply put the site plan on all of these sucks!
    To varying degrees, a function of the cost of the decking. Extell takes the extreme approach, pushing buildings to the periphery, the center of the railyards spanned by a truss system, over which is a large park.

  7. #397

    Default

    The Brookfield plan looks solid to me. I like that they're proposing towers of various heights and widths (and styles if you can trust those to be delivered). The plan seems to become a part of the city more than any of the other proposals. One of the other development teams described their proposal as an island unto itself (paraphrasing), which I think is exactly what the Hudson Yards shoud NOT be. Brookfield places their towers in sensible spots to create unforced connections with the rest of the city. I also like that Brookfield and its designers chose not to create the strong east-west axis seen in the rest of the proposals with its park space. There's a planned north-south boulevard already planned for the area, so why create another park of that type intersecting it? I'm glad they chose to break up the park space.

    Overall, I'd describe the Brookfield plan as more organic feeling, more urban, and more varied than any of the other proposals.

    Worth mentioning, though, is Peter Walker's landscape architecture for Tishman Speyer. It looks beautiful.

    The park for Vornado/Durst with the winding, elevated walkway is kind of ridiculous with the Highline running along the edge of the site. They created an axial park and an raised walkway when both of those things (or similar) are already going to be offered nearby. Does that really add to the neighborhood?

  8. #398
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    219

    Default

    For some reason now, I'm starting to like the Extell plan with the 90-story triplet towers connected by a deformed thingy at the top, over half of a dozen clone towers, several more different towers and whatnot. Is something wrong with me?

    Any chance that they'll, meaning any team, stick to the height +/- 50' and basic design if they actually win? It would be sick to see the something like the SOM design winning and eight months later having to decrease the heights by a few hundred feet because Nimbys found something to whine about or because of money trouble. I guess that goes for every skyscraper in capitalist countries with real morals.

    I'm not sure if some of the towers we have seen today are fillers or not. With the early WTC plans, when Danny won the design contest, the 600'-900' slanted roof diagrid towers were actually what was supposed to be built, if I recall correctly, until the plans changed.

  9. #399
    I admit I have a problem
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    North Koreatown
    Posts
    532

    Default

    The worst site plan is Related. A 3-block podium along the east side would wall off the rest of Midtown. No thanks!



    I visited the exhibit today and will return to fill out my comment card

  10. #400
    Senior Member Dynamicdezzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Queens, New York
    Posts
    261

    Default

    I stopped by there after work. I was not nearly impressed with the models and renderings of any of the bids excluding Brook's. The majority of the ppl there (when I went) were crowding more around it than any other.

  11. #401

    Default

    Maybe Hudson Yards needs the Libeskind "spiral".

  12. #402
    The Dude Abides
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC - Financial District
    Posts
    4,418

    Default

    I think every site plan has to be evaluated against the context of the MTA's site plan:



    I said it a long time ago: the plan tries too hard to micromanage every aspect of the site, and overall is not suitable to truly urban development. There's too much green space (especially of the open grass field variety), and not enough streets.

    The MTA has already said that the best financed plan, which most likely will not coincide with the best designed plan, will win the competition. Just looking at the proposals, I notice a few of them try very hard to follow the plan's prescriptions (Durst/Vornado and Tishman/Morgan Stanley), while others pack in more buildings and alter the green space accordingly (Brookfield and Related). I wonder how large an impact the proposals' adherence to the MTA's site plan will have on who gets picked, in the case there are two clear front-runners.

    Something that's been bugging me is how some proposals show plans for buildings to be constructed further up Hudson Park Boulevard (north of the yards), while others don't. Does this matter at all in the competition? Does the winner get first dibs on those northern development sites?

  13. #403
    Incredible Sulk aural iNK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    141

    Default

    I was thinking that they may have included those buildings as a way to make the proposals seem more in scale with the rest of the area. Without them, some of these clusters would stick out like a sore thumb.

  14. #404

    Default can someone explain physics of extell proposal

    OK, architectural engineers can now start giggling at me, but don't you need suspension cables to build a suspension bridge? I get that a skyscraper could anchor a suspension bridge, but I don't see how it could do that without cables hanging from the skyscrapers, and you don't see that in the Extell renderings.

    Also, on a more practical note, wouldn't this design only work if you simultaneously build every building that serves as an anchor for the bridge?

    Despite my misgivings I give them credit for an ingenious idea -- that's better off in Queens. My suggestion is build skyscrapers on firm ground surrounding the Hudson Yards and lay a rebuilt Javitz center, and midrises over the Sunnyside railyards.

  15. #405

    Default correction

    Last sentence in previous post - I meant I think Extell should build high rises surrounding the Sunnyside Yards and lay a rebuilt Javitz center over there. Extell's method is probably more economical for a big wide area like Sunnyside than building platforms if it works. I still don't get the lack of cabling, but cabling could be done artistically in Queens to connect with the industrial and bridge history of Queens so that might not be bad.

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