Brookfield Properties
Architects Skidmore Owings & Merrill; Thomas Phifer & Partners; SHoP Architects and Diller Scofidio + Renfro; Kazuyo Sejima + Ryue Nishizawa; Handel Architects


Current design renderings (as of January 2012):
For those interested the company that made the CGI for Related is visualhouse (https://www.visualhouse.co.uk), the same studio that made Kingdom Tower's animation.

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1176.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1264.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1186.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1180.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1181.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port662.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port665.jpg



================================================================================================================

Older renderings:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/18/nyregion/BrookfieldFull.gif


Extell Development Company
Architect Steven Holl Architects

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/18/nyregion/ExtellFull.gif


Tishman Speyer Properties and Morgan Stanley
Architects Helmut Jahn and Peter Walker

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/18/nyregion/TishmanFull.gif


Related Companies
Architects Kohn Pedersen Fox, Robert A.M. Stern, Arquitectonica
Financial Partner Goldman Sachs

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/18/nyregion/KohnFull.gif


Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust
Architects FXFowle and Pelli Clarke Pelli

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/18/nyregion/DurstFull.gif



http://www.pbase.com/image/89165247.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89165248.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89165255.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89166590.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89166605.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89166621.jpg

Thanks to Krull and Kosi!

When pretend begin these projects? Are they under construction? Great for NYC!!!

They have gotta go with the Brookfield one:cheers:

Simply amazing proposals! I like Brookfield and the Durst Organization proposals the best. New York is undergoing its greatest construction boom in years!

http://www.pbase.com/image/89166605.jpg


This is reminiscent of Calatrava's WTC Hub.

Developer: Vornado/Durst
Architect: FXFowle architects


http://www.pbase.com/image/89193230.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193182.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193181.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193209.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193212.jpg

Developer: Tishman/Speyer
Architect: Helmut Jahn


http://www.pbase.com/image/89193214.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193219.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193216.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193221.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193224.jpg

Thanx Krull!

I like the Extell plan too.

It has triplet towers connected at the top at 1,240 feet tall. Then there's a 800 footer, and a few shorter towers too. Also, you have six 730 foot tall Sunslice towers with wind turbines in their crowns. The observation deck on top of the triplet towers may be the biggest ever. I hope that this or the Brookfield plan wins.


Vornado/Durst - glassy, slightly tapering skyscraper of 80 floors and 1,205 feet, plus at least another supertall and many other towers

KPF (Related) - a 74-floor and 1,080-foot diagrid skyscraper, plus over another dozen skyscrapers from 33 to over 60 floors

Extell - the triplet towers, with 90 floors joined at the top at 1,238 feet tall; this plan also includes a 800-footer, six 730-footers, and a few other towers too

Brookfield Properties (SOM) - contains a slightly curved 1,300-foot tall tower and some smaller supertalls, plus many other skyscrapers

Tishman (Helmut Jahn and Peter Walker) - 2x 3MSF towers at about 1,000 feet tall, and a second pair of towers that's a little smaller than the first, plus even more smaller towers closer to the water (mostly office.)

No matter what happens, NY wins. Even the worst plan in anyone's opinion will be an amazing addition.

This is so exciting!

Wow, inspiring design. Good for NYC.

NYV best city on earth!

One of the characteristics that I love most about NY is how little "centers" there are, how individual the skyline is, and this is the total opposite. It feels like a residential park kinda thing, more suitable for Shanghai or some far east city. I think it would look a lot better if all these towers were scattered through mid-town and LM. To me, all these towers are wonderful, I just don't concur with of them being clustered, it creates that Dubai effect where everything looks prefabricated and mechanical. Just my opinion.

Simply amazing - but i doubt any of these proposals will surface in the next decade. They have to go with Brookfields here - it is just splendid.
Cant wait to come back home - its not fair all these things happening in NY and im down under! lol.

This is incredible :eek:
Is this the same project proposed for Penn Station or are we talking about different projects?
Simply amazing :drool:

^^They are different.

WOW! :eek:

The area is simply BOOMING!

This is incredible :eek:
Is this the same project proposed for Penn Station or are we talking about different projects?
Simply amazing :drool:

This is a different project.

The project you are talking about goes behind this project at MSG and will have 2 to 3 supertalls.

Keep in mind that this project is only a part of the West Side megadevelopment.

There are still many NY supertalls that we have yet to see. The party ain't over yet.

^^Yeah. So the cluster that FromLA doesnt' like would soon just grow and murge with Midtown someday.

You all must understand that these proposals are intended to show the public/City the layout of the plan and massing of the towers. The actual design will be revised once a descision is met. The Brookfield/SOM and Vornando/FX&Fowle plans are the most anticipated proposals + aesthetically pleasing on the eye.

This MEGAPROJECT and the MSG site will be easily larger than the majority of cities on earth now including mores square footage than Paris La defense and London Canary Warf combined. This is sure and absolute Madness!!! :nuts:

NY IS GOING CRAZY! THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME TO RETURN HOME! This is madness!

When pretend begin these projects? Are they under construction? Great for NYC!!!

It is being discussed now as well as the other project adjacent to this one - Penn station redevelopment. It is on the other side of the same block.

It's great to know that construction may start as early as a year from now, but it may take till about 2026 to complete the entire West Side and ten years to build some of these props. This project is just a part of the West Side CBD. NY will constantly be building supertalls from about four years ago to 2020 and on. This month alone, we have seen 4+ new NY supertalls.

This is the last large piece of space on Manhattan, so there will be many, many more skyscrapers to come.

My fav is this one (SOM?)
http://www.pbase.com/image/89165247.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/image/89165248.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/image/89165255.jpg

2nd fav
http://www.pbase.com/image/89193230.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/image/89193181.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/image/89193209.jpg

You all must understand that these proposals are intended to show the public/City the layout of the plan and massing of the towers. The actual design will be revised once a descision is met. The Brookfield/SOM and Vornando/FX&Fowle plans are the most anticipated proposals + aesthetically pleasing on the eye.

Anyhow, this for the moment is already stunning. Grandiose.
Brookfield is the one to pick by far.


This MEGAPROJECT and the MSG site will be easily larger than the majority of cities on earth now including mores square footage than Paris La defense and London Canary Warf combined. This is sure and absolute Madness!!! :nuts:


Are you sure about this? Present day La Défense & Canary Warf maybe...? But both sites will undergo quite a bit of change in the coming decade. Comparing them to NY as a whole would be absurd, but comparing them together in ten years to this ONE area... even if every tower discussed at the moment eventually gets built... That might be 'a bit' too far-streching.

:bash: crazy, stunning, big, great designs... but above all SO MANY SKYCRAPERS IN ONE TIME:nuts::nuts::nuts:

Yet more supertalls for New York?? The city will hopefully reclaim its position above Hong Kong...

Are you sure about this? Present day La Défense & Canary Warf maybe...? But both sites will undergo quite a bit of change in the coming decade. Comparing them to NY as a whole would be absurd, but comparing them together in ten years to this ONE area... even if every tower discussed at the moment eventually gets built... That might be 'a bit' too far-streching.


Are you sure about this? The area will be one of the top four biggest CBDs in the US. Keep in mind that what you're seeing now is only a fraction of everything and the whole thing may not be wholly completed for over 20 years. I think it's more than likely that all of the new skyscrapers in the area would be enough to blow a combined future La Défense and Canary Warf away. From what I know, this proposal is only a section of the rail yards, plus there are three more supertalls and some more other 500-800' tall buildings proposed and approved in the area right now, and there will be many more. A block behind the superblock of this will hopefully be the superblocks of the MSG, which is another completely different project which should have two to three supertalls; I already know that an early version has a 1,240' and 1,340' towers to their roofs, and then there's also a massing elevation of a 1,600' tall building to the roof. It was clearly well over twice the height of 1 Penn Plaza. As the towers get closer to the Empire State Building, they get taller - from about 400 feet tall by the water, to as much as about 1,400 feet tall and perhaps even 1,550+ with any luck. This is all so big that it almost starts to blow away the the half of the LM skyline with the WTC. We're talking about at least four new supertalls, perhaps as much as seven or eight or nine - more than most cities on this planet will ever have; there are six proposed for sure now, but many more will come, and literally dozens of 500-footers and up. All I know is that you can sum this all up in one way: skyscraper mania.

Are you sure about this? The area will be one of the top four biggest CBDs in the US. Keep in mind that what you're seeing now is only a fraction of everything and the whole thing may not be wholly completed for over 20 years. I think it's more than likely that all of the new skyscrapers in the area would be enough to blow a combined future La Défense and Canary Warf away. From what I know, this proposal is only a section of the rail yards, plus there are three more supertalls and some more other 500-800' tall buildings proposed and approved in the area right now, and there will be many more. A block behind the superblock of this will hopefully be the superblocks of the MSG, which is another completely different project which should have two to three supertalls; I already know that an early version has a 1,240' and 1,340' towers to their roofs, and then there's also a massing elevation of a 1,600' tall building to the roof. It was clearly well over twice the height of 1 Penn Plaza. As the towers get closer to the Empire State Building, they get taller - from about 400 feet tall by the water, to as much as about 1,400 feet tall and perhaps even 1,550+ with any luck. This is all so big that it almost starts to blow away the the half of the LM skyline with the WTC. We're talking about at least four new supertalls, perhaps as much as seven or eight or nine - more than most cities on this planet will ever have; there are six proposed for sure now, but many more will come, and literally dozens of 500-footers and up. All I know is that you can sum this all up in one way: skyscraper mania.

Which tower is supposed to be 1600ft - the one on top of the today's MSG?

:eek:, that is unbelievable!!!
btw, is that the Con-Ed site?


Yet more supertalls for New York?? The city will hopefully reclaim its position above Hong Kong...

^^, you can be sure about that! :)

Brookfield Crowd Favorite in Race for West Side Rail Yards

by Matthew Schuerman
November 20, 2007


It was sometime late Wednesday, Nov. 14, that some of New York’s largest developers were told they had little more than 48 hours to prepare a public showing of their plans to transform the West Side rail yards, the largest available development site in Manhattan in decades.

They quickly reproduced compact disks, printed more color pictures, stuffed folders and packed up television sets. On Friday, their representatives got a look at the exhibit space—a little storefront across from Grand Central Terminal that Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials had found after scrambling themselves for a space that West Siders could easily get to. On Saturday morning, the five teams had two hours to set up.

The developers drew lots to see which wall they could use, and Brookfield Properties got a lucky number: the corner directly to the right as visitors walk in. The company’s plan, laid out in two huge architectural models, solves the problem of working with the two superblocks—each stretching from 30th to 33rd streets, on either side of 11th Avenue—by dividing them up somewhat with new streets or pedestrian thoroughfares. In so doing, Brookfield, which owns the World Financial Center in Battery Park City, violates the guidelines that the city and the M.T.A., the owner of the rail yards, set out for development.

But judging from the early reaction among visitors to the exhibit space, Brookfield has also gained a lot of fans, both via online message boards and among visitors to the exhibit, for a plan that they say looks the most like the rest of New York. (Brookfield is also the only bidder that has placed a company official at the showroom full-time to explain its exhibit to the public.)

“I’m looking for as much integration in the street grid as possible,” said Michael D. D. White, a 55-year-old lawyer from Brooklyn Heights who stopped by the storefront Monday evening. “I think people are paying more attention to focus on the experience that Jane Jacobs wrote about. She’s cycling back into fashion. I think we want to have an experience that is intricate and various and accounts for complexity.”

M.T.A.’s chief executive and executive director, Elliot (Lee) Sander, said at the Sunday press unveiling of the exhibit that the developers’ design would be one of three elements on which the agency would base its decision, along with the amount of money the bidder is offering and the feasibility of construction. But the M.T.A. has shied away from suggesting just how much weight each element will receive.

Steve Roth, chairman and chief executive of Vornado Realty Trust, one of the bidders, told The Observer that given what he expected to be a lengthy 10-year build-out, at an estimated construction cost of $10 billion to $15 billion, the M.T.A. can only afford to consider the strongest, most established companies. He would not elaborate, but clearly he thought that Vornado, a publicly traded company with $18 billion in assets, ought to be one of them.

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

The financial arrangements are still secret. (The M.T.A. hopes to use the money to plug a $1 billion hole in its capital budget.) The tenancies are a little clearer. On that front Brookfield, which has no tenant lined up, stands at a disadvantage to other bidders who can argue that having a client and potential revenue source will force them to stick on budget and in the black.

However, Ric Clark, Brookfield president and chief executive, sought to portray the lack of a tenant as a positive, and an indication that it would be willing to pay more for the site.

“We put no premium on having a tenant at this point in time. We’ve heard that others have landed their tenants by offering cost-minus deals. We think that leaves some of M.T.A.’s money on the table,” Mr. Clark said. “In North America, we have more head office tenants than anybody else. What we do is move people around as their businesses change. They buy somebody or they sell off a decision. We have confidence that we will land a tenant.”

Whether Brookfield’s urbanism, outlined by the architectural firms Skidmore, Owings & Merrill and Field Operations, will actually cost more to construct or cause more disruption is difficult to judge: the plan calls for buildings to line either side of 11th Avenue, in keeping with New York’s street walls. But the M.T.A. and the city’s Hudson Yards Development Corporation specifically called for parkland in that area in order to minimize construction over train lines, which run east-west through the center of the superblocks.

Regardless of the weight that the architecture will receive in the decision-making process, West Siders and politicians pushed hard to open the bids up to public view. And while they are realistic that the architecture of the buildings could easily change, they say that much can be learned.

“I expect there will be changes during negotiations with the M.T.A. and the city,” State Senator Tom Duane, a Democrat representing the West Side, said. “I’m assuming that the general vision of the architects and developers and their priorities will remain the same: the orientation of the buildings, the High Line, the commercial versus residential, the open space placement, the impact looking north from Chelsea and south from Clinton. But I am generally pleased that the process and display are open and will continue to be open as the process moves forward.”

In that sense, Tishman Speyer, which has recruited Morgan Stanley as both a development partner and building tenant, is the most corporate, with 10 million square feet of office space, compared to just about three million square feet of residential development. The design, by German architect Helmut Jahn and landscape designer Peter Walker, makes various allusions to Rome: A large plaza in the center of the commercial district is being called the Forum, while a series of broad steps leading down from it is called “the New York Steps.”

Vornado’s partnership with the Durst Organization boasts the greatest number of residential units, with 7,000 rentals and condominiums, an unspecified number of which would be affordable. That team will build a new headquarters for Condé Nast, a company that currently is housed in another Durst tower, 4 Times Square. While boasting numerous environmental features, the Durst-Vornado plan would dismantle some of the High Line, an abandoned elevated freight rail line that runs down to the West Village and that would otherwise be turned into a narrow strip of park.

An unusual bid by the upstart Extell Development Co. clocks in with about 5,500 apartments. Designed by Steven Holl with landscaping by Laurie Olin, Extell’s design is the conceptual opposite of Brookfield’s, with tall narrow buildings forced to the very edges of the site to be situated over terra firma. The rail yards would be covered not by a post-and-beam deck, but by a canopy that would rely on suspension bridge technology.

Finally, the proposal by the Related Companies centers around its potential tenant, News Corp., which would be able to consolidate its New York operations, including the newly acquired Wall Street Journal, in a two million-square-foot tower. Related’s chairman and chief executive, Stephen M. Ross, has used that tenant as a means to orient the rest of the plan—a large plaza in front of the News Corp. headquarters would be used to screen premieres by Twentieth Century Fox movies—and a way to talk about what sort of neighborhood News Corp. could turn the West Side into—a lively, multimedia, round-the-clock, flashy focal point.

Mr. Ross used much the same strategy in bidding on the Coliseum site at Columbus Circle, by recruiting Time Warner to join him, and he won, eventually building the twin-tower Time Warner Center. It would, on the other hand, be quite a statement about the future of liberal New York if Rupert Murdoch became the pioneer of the new West Side.

http://www.observer.com/2007/brookfi...ide-rail-yards

http://gothamist.com/attachments/jen/2007_11_bp4map.jpg

Are you sure about this? The area will be one of the top four biggest CBDs in the US. Keep in mind that what you're seeing now is only a fraction of everything and the whole thing may not be wholly completed for over 20 years. I think it's more than likely that all of the new skyscrapers in the area would be enough to blow a combined future La Défense and Canary Warf away.

You don't thnik by the time this is done CW and LD will have alot more stuff planned themselves? Canry Wharf has plans to atleast double it's size in the next 5 or so years (I would say, with the all the projects coming, it will be considerably more than doubled), think where it will be when this is completed in 20 years! Hopefully something will be done with the airport, and then much taller towers will be proposed too. I would take a guess at Canary Wharf being four times the size it is now in 20 years time. And of course I don't have to tell any of you what is going on with La Defense at the mo, I'm sure you all know already, it's hard to miss it around here.

I'm not too sure you can compare this with both La Defense and Canary Wharf combined, from 20 years from now. I do hope the best for this new cluster though. IMO the SOM one is better than the World Trade Centre Site.

^haha, funny that you didn't include the rest of my post.


Yes, JohnFlint1985, a massing by the city showed about a 1,600' tower (+/- 60 feet) to the roof right by 1 Penn Plaza and the other two supertalls of the new MSG plans.

Like I said, those supertalls will add to this new project, making this part of the skyline untouchable.


And whoever said something about the Con Ed site, there will be towers there, but that has nothing to do with any of this. I'm pretty sure that the Con Ed site had plans for two supertalls, but NIMBYs attacked it. That won't happen this time.

^haha, funny that you didn't include the rest of my post.

Umm, why should I have? That was the bit I was talking about. It was only a few posts above, so if people are that desperate, they can go and have a look if they want. The fact is, you don't know what will happen in CW or LD by 2027 when this will supposedly finish, sure, this could be better than them both combined, but you have no way of knowing that. You have no way of knowing how much floorspace there will be.

The part of my post which you didn't quote explained why it's likely that what I thought is true. Not like you would agree, but I can't force anything on anyone.



Quite frankly, to me, it doesn't matter which proposal wins because anything tall there will be an amazing addion to the skyline. I like them all, but would rather see the Brookfield or Extell version win. Also, I don't mind the other plan with the 1,205' tower. The others are very nice too, but I would like to see taller, even though they are big, and I mean big.

I won't agree because I don't know what Canary or La Defense will be like in 20 years time. I do know they both have massive expansion plans, that will lead to massive increases in floorspace.

See you here in 20 years then, and we'll see what happens:cheers:

Can we please stay on topic? :sly:

Yet more supertalls for New York?? The city will hopefully reclaim its position above Hong Kong...

with chicago closing in! ok not really. this project is very very impressive. wow

It's great to hear that Brookfield is ahead of the pack in terms of the public's opinion (and I agree, it's probably the best all around). Exactly how much of a voice is the public getting though? Will their opinion get consideration? BTW I know that their showing this in Grand Central Station, where exactly in the station are the displays?

I think it's more likely that Brookfield/SOM will win now. New Yorkers seem to like it the most, but not because of the tall buildings. It looks like they took the most time out to make their renderings and models look the best.

agree. also for me it is by far the best proposal. would fit perfect in the skyline

Here is another document - in pdf format with detailed plan and explanation block by block about the whole site
http://home2.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/hyards/hy_development_information.pdf

Another thing about the Brookfiel proposal. Although it seems that there is a lot of green in the southwestern part of the site plan, the green is ontop of a one story retail base, so it will be more pedestrian friendly than the site plan seems.

amazing, The brookfield seems to be the best one by far. The others are not tall enough or are to much of a mega-structure destroying the skylines' dynamics.

HOLY SHIT! amazing plans! GOGOGO NY!

Wow..

Brookfield is the best by far..

Chicago closing in? HARDLY! lol. Chicago is not even half the size or has even half the amount of proposals. NY is already over Hong Kong on skyscrapers No?

This is madness...I can't believe it. I'm stunned...

btw: NY, was, is, and will be the capital of skyscrapers just fot the quality of them. if we add quantity....it's even better!

Are you sure about this? The area will be one of the top four biggest CBDs in the US. Keep in mind that what you're seeing now is only a fraction of everything and the whole thing may not be wholly completed for over 20 years. I think it's more than likely that all of the new skyscrapers in the area would be enough to blow a combined future La Défense and Canary Warf away. From what I know, this proposal is only a section of the rail yards, plus there are three more supertalls and some more other 500-800' tall buildings proposed and approved in the area right now, and there will be many more. A block behind the superblock of this will hopefully be the superblocks of the MSG, which is another completely different project which should have two to three supertalls; I already know that an early version has a 1,240' and 1,340' towers to their roofs, and then there's also a massing elevation of a 1,600' tall building to the roof. It was clearly well over twice the height of 1 Penn Plaza. As the towers get closer to the Empire State Building, they get taller - from about 400 feet tall by the water, to as much as about 1,400 feet tall and perhaps even 1,550+ with any luck. This is all so big that it almost starts to blow away the the half of the LM skyline with the WTC. We're talking about at least four new supertalls, perhaps as much as seven or eight or nine - more than most cities on this planet will ever have; there are six proposed for sure now, but many more will come, and literally dozens of 500-footers and up. All I know is that you can sum this all up in one way: skyscraper mania.

Exactamundo my friend... this Megaproject along with the MSG proposal by SOM/Foster and the Hotel Penn, KPF tower at the base of One Penn Plaza will be more square footage than most cities on earth... numbers don't lie. Oh yea and we have the rest of Manhattan.... and the new WTC (14 million sq. ft)... nothing , nothng comes remotely close to NYC. It's simply where skyscrapers belong along with Chi-Town.

Happy Thanksgiving people...I'm stuffed. :cheers:

Stuffed with towers. The only bad part is the waiting.

They say the Brookfield one is in the $20 Billion range! That's more than the WTC + GS! I'm sure that they all cost at least $10 billion. Each plan has around ten to twenty new skyscrapers.


SOM+others:

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/7317/89193201nd3.jpg

Yes please! You can see the beams in the base of the tower to the right. I love that.

amazing!!
http://www.pbase.com/image/89165248.jpg

New york skyline gets a lot better...:banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::):):):dance::dance:

Stuffed with towers....
ahh, Ebola. Master of the segway

OOOO MMMM GGGGGG OMGOMGOMGOMGOMG

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/7317/89193201nd3.jpg

This plus the MOMA tower all I can say is DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING (remember Price is Right???)

That is one huge cluster of highrises. I guess there isn't a such thing called zoning laws in this project.

The laws are pretty lax.

Sorry if this Brookfield/SOM render has been seen before:

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339269/original.jpg

You don't thnik by the time this is done CW and LD will have alot more stuff planned themselves? Canry Wharf has plans to atleast double it's size in the next 5 or so years (I would say, with the all the projects coming, it will be considerably more than doubled), think where it will be when this is completed in 20 years! Hopefully something will be done with the airport, and then much taller towers will be proposed too. I would take a guess at Canary Wharf being four times the size it is now in 20 years time. And of course I don't have to tell any of you what is going on with La Defense at the mo, I'm sure you all know already, it's hard to miss it around here.

I'm not too sure you can compare this with both La Defense and Canary Wharf combined, from 20 years from now. I do hope the best for this new cluster though. IMO the SOM one is better than the World Trade Centre Site.


My point exactly.
Cheers man!


Ebola: you might be right, and good for NY if you are; but once again, given the information we have right now, I think you are asserting too strongly something which there is no way to affirmatively predict. I mean... 20 years! God! Dubai could almost be a mid-size skyline by then if they were to stop building after 2012 and say... if London keeps the rate it is on at the moment.
If, if, if...

Let's just see what goes ahead first with this project but let's also keep for later perhaps, the "NY WILL RULE EVERYTHING!!" kindda statements.


Wonderful render above :)

It certainly is, if the final towers end up looking like that then they will be the best looking modern Towers in New York IMO.

I love all these projects.

That rendering wasn't posted before Newcastle Guy. Brookfield's proposal is just so amazing.

this is a beauty

Stuffed with towers. The only bad part is the waiting.

They say the Brookfield one is in the $20 Billion range! That's more than the WTC + GS! I'm sure that they all cost at least $10 billion. Each plan has around ten to twenty new skyscrapers.

NY is unbelievable!!!!

Was the Extell plan the one using the skyscrapers to make bridges? Has that even ever been done before?

The skyscraper themsevles don't make the suspension bridge that holds up the park but instead the bases of these buildings.

well holy smoke, came on here to have a letch at the Moma Tower and what do you know, another huge scheme of truely pantwettingly exciting towers. Phew.

Wow....this one came out of nowhere....I love it...GO NYC!!!

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338576/large.jpg
Pic from NYguy

The Hudson Yards are only a piece of a giant puzzle. Here we can see the placeholders for the two other massive towers that will include 4.7 million sq. ft., and the MSG site that will have numerous other supertalls. NYC is BLOWING UP with scrapies.

What's that skinny skyscraper in front of the ESB? The one with the crazy-ass facade?

And yeah, the amount of both skyscrapers and supertalls here will be rising at a rate never before seen here. No one will be let down.

I think i've had just about enough of New York.

These proposals all look fantastic.....! The only reservation I might add is that the Empire State Building's location should be protected from overshadowing by similar sized or larger buildings......never thought that would ever happen but with buildings rising around the world twice it's height, preservation of the building including its New York icon position should be taken into account by any nearby project. New York is the city never finished.....and future developments will eclipse the E.S.B...as the W.T.C. did years ago but it still is New York's symbol. Guess this idea devalues property close to the E.S.B. ?

Not classy enough for New york, they look like freedom Tower regects! Theres 2 two many designs that have the building at an angle, shame they couldn't come up with something more.

Eh? Are you seriously saying this...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339269/original.jpg

...isn't classy enough for New York? It's a great design. Just because it isn't boxy doesn't mean it's not classy lol. Those twins are considerably better than the Freedom Tower...

Edit: I just realised, this is actually a very futuristic looking design, I hope to one day see it in the flesh if this is what gets built. I really like it/them.

A larger rendering of the top of 1 Hudson Place

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339271/original.jpg

View from the public viewing gallery

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339274/large.jpg

Thanks to NYGuy over at Wired New York.

I think they look better than normal boxes, but just think that the angle design has been done too many times before.

It looks great!

that view is killer

I think the designs fit very well into NYC. The city is evolving and is beeing transformed with each new tower no matter if 'classy' or futuristic.

The outlook from the public viewing gallery is great :banana:

:rant:" Horrible! ".... and, not just for NYC. :rant: Because If NYC approves It, Every other so-called " progressive " city in America will want Something like It.

Awesome!! this project seem like an european city, NYC needs this kind of projects!

:rant:" Horrible! ".... and, not just for NYC. :rant: Because If NYC approves It, Every other so-called " progressive " city in America will want Something like It.

Are you serious?? To break it down so people understand what is taking place.. For about 110 years give or take NY & Chicago have been continuously adding to their skylines ( far longer than anywhere else) and still are. During that 110 year span both have hit these phenomenal climaxes evident at the turn of the 19th/20th c., 1910's, late 20's/early 30's, late 60's throughought the 70's, 80's, and if you haven't noticed Chicago is in the middle of one such climax and NY is approaching a significant building boom. The thing that baffles me about your statement is every other "progressive" city in America wanting it. Many of which do not have the means nor the need to create it. This is just what NY needs and it's just right for NY.. what do we want now? A sunken train yard forever? Should we leave the westside as is? Say no to more office space, housing, cultural centers, and green space and yes! To a barren wasteland of neglected buildings and a train yard.. Come on now the wheels keep turning here.. and this project like the rest in NY ( sans the Mcsams) are just a sign of the times. I never lived through the art deco era and watched as the city transformed then.I never watched as the corporate box took over. I can barely remember caring when the boom of the late 80's was going on.. but I'll bet this will be better than all of them and I can't wait for everything to start to unfold as it appears we haven't seen anything yet. When every so called " progressive city" in America can propose something like this with the intention of carrying it out, then I'll be impressed, matter of fact when every booming city across the globe can continue doing what they are doing now even 10-20 years from now, I'll be astonished.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339274/large.jpg

Thanks to NYGuy over at Wired New York.

WOW! The Veiw Is gonna be BEAST
But in the time this goes up, they forgot to add the New WTC complex, then this view will be INCREDIBLEY AMAZING

Eh? Are you seriously saying this...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339269/original.jpg

...isn't classy enough for New York? It's a great design. Just because it isn't boxy doesn't mean it's not classy lol. Those twins are considerably better than the Freedom Tower...

Edit: I just realised, this is actually a very futuristic looking design, I hope to one day see it in the flesh if this is what gets built. I really like it/them.
ALL I can say is WOW

So the idea of linking such close towers with escape bridges seems to have gone.

:rant:" Horrible! ".... and, not just for NYC. :rant: Because If NYC approves It, Every other so-called " progressive " city in America will want Something like It.


BEWARE [of idiocy]



People say that the thing between the two skyscrapers looks like the new station at the WTC, but I don't think so; it's quite different and more open.

a very beautiful design
congratulate NYC :cheers:

I can't believe there's still room in NY for skyscrapers... crazy!


Those buildings dont look great though... are they final designs?

I can't believe there's still room in NY for skyscrapers... crazy!


Those buildings dont look great though... are they final designs?

No they're still in the selection process.

Amazing towers, these 2 at the top of this page. :shocked:

I'm going to be controversial and say I don't like the Brookfield proposal - it looks too much like something in Dubai or China. It doesn't compliment the New York skyline enough. I think of New York as having a certain look from the golden age of skyscrapers and this competes with that too much.

Your 'golden age' is over. Of course newer buildings are going to clash with the old, but that is the beauty, when you see the two together. Just look at London, with a tiny church with the massive Swiss Re Tower behind it. Makes for a fantastic juxtaposition.

These towers are very modern, even futuristic. And I think they look too classy for Dubai. These belong in more of a world city, such as New York. They are really nice, elegant towers, sleek towers. NYC is lucky to have them, if they are infact the chosen design.

I think it is too expensive to build them like the 'golden age' as you put it. I may be wrong but the materials used during that time are alot more expensive. Besides I'd rather have the variety we are getting nowdays. There are tons of art deco and neo classical and beaux arts skyscrapers all around the island. What we need now is the glass. It will all blend in just fine. The island has blended pomo with modern and brutalism and art deco, why not this?
The buildings probably won't look similar to what is being proposed in the Brookfield bid or any of them. Out of the layout, however, I choose Brookfield. Just looks better than all the others put together. Durst was growing on me but I really don't like that wedge of light idea. Brookfield is the only one that doesn't provide that scene.

fuck me! these towers are great.

These are really good news: another new super-cluster for NYC, besides the second edition of the WTC! :cheer:
And I think the design for Hudson Yards is among the best ever in the whole Big Apple. :applause:

I hope it will raise in a view years. Together with other projects like 366 10th Avenue (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=550258), Hudson Yards will totally change the neighborhood near Conventionel Center. And the midtown skyline gets closer to the Hudson River, as one also can see from the u/c River Place II Towers (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=538040) further to the North.

On the thread of the last-mentioned buildings, I found the following GoogleEarth Shot from NYGuy's pbase account:
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/86781190/original.jpg
Hudson Yards should be the two Brookfield towers to the right, right?

^^ I think its the whole 13MSF development with maybe those two Brookfiels towers, but maybe they are more related with the Penn station /MSG development? :)

Wow....this one came out of nowhere....I love it...GO NYC!!!

Not really. This has been around for a couple of years. As of 2007 this project is approved.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/hyards/eis.shtml

^Well I guess some people weren't expecting every plan to be so tall and to have such an impact.

^Well I guess some people weren't expecting every plan to be so tall and to have such an impact.

In a way we will see an alternative Midtown being built in the years ahead of us. As of today midtown is mostly 50s-60s towers. Mostly a box shape buildings. So these will be a fresh new change. I think that the Brookfield proposal is something between Paris and China tendencies in skyscraper building today. But the addition of park and eventually Penn station, Javitz center expansion and new MSG will make it completely unique.

On the thread of the last-mentioned buildings, I found the following GoogleEarth Shot from NYGuy's pbase account:
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/86781190/original.jpg
Hudson Yards should be the two Brookfield towers to the right, right?

The two Brookfield towers are a different, independent development. The Hudson Yards project is the 13 msf one over the railyards, (boxed in).

Keep in mind though, that all of the developments to the north of the railyards are also known as Hudson Yards developments because of the rezoning plan put in place a few years ago.

It's been a very busy year for reviewing skyscraper designs and proposals in New York, and there's still more to come. Here's a look at some of the largest developments and proposals that will change the face of Manhattan...


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89680057/medium.jpghttp://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89680093/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89680057/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89680093/large.jpg

Stunning, hope this will be approved, will do NYC a lot good! :cheers:

You know what would be awesome?!!....if they would approve all of these proposals and build every single one. That would be amazing!!!

Build them!! Build them!! Build them!! :dance: :dance:

where is the Wide Tripple-Tower planned? i saw it already, but i can't remember

Wide Triple Tower... I think that's the Extel proposal. You could see it on the previous page.

yes, i know it is on the previous page.....the reason why i ask ^^

Nice overview from NYguy.

I must say I dont like that trplie thing but the other towers are truely amazing.
NY is and will be the leading city for highrises. :cheers:

Nice overview from NYguy.

I must say I dont like that trplie thing but the other towers are truely amazing.
NY is and will be the leading city for highrises. :cheers:
Skyscrapers ;)

My pick is Brookfield - simple, but beautiful. No need for something crazy looking.

Brookfield would set this apart from the pack. The other proposals seem like they would fit in well, but they're not exciting.

Some have already been posted, but my review of the models from last week...

Now that I've finally gotten over to the models, I can say that overall my
views were accurate and have only changed slightly, with Related moving
closer to Vornado for second place. (With some shifting of bulidings, and
break up of the "valley", they could actually move into second).

I'll work my way from the bottom of the bunch, to the top.

The Extell proposal is just too not-like-New York, and those "sunslice" towers
just don't do it. But the triple tower, which I call the "collonade" is an interesting
idea which would be fine if built elsewhere. I kind of like it...:)

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337611/medium.jpg_http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337658/medium.jpg

A closer look at Steven Holl's 10th Ave tower

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337689/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337611/large.jpg


The Tishman/Morgan proposal is a horrible one as well. The buildings were presented
as they are for a reason. Given the reaction New York had to the various early and
later WTC proposals, I can't believe that they would present this proposal with
the intentions of building something far more "grander". It's the most artificial
looking, even more so than Extell's. But it calls for about 10 million square feet
of space, so even if it does come with 3 msf pre-leased, that's 7 msf of space left,
more than most of the other proposals. The resentment will be strong against this one.

Still, its a little of the WTC meets Rockefeller Center meets Times Square.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337737/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337769/large.jpg


There was a seperate, street level cut-out model which gave more details...which
brings me to the point of the High Line being preserved in all of the plans.
We can now get excited about that aspect again.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337790/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337809/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337825/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337839/large.jpg


Didn't care for the Related model that much. But if they could somehow bridge the
northern portion with the sourthern portion of the site, it could probably work.
Still, seems like a wasted oppurtunity there.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337909/large.jpg


Vornado chose to create their own version of the High Line down the center
of the site. Still, here's a look at the residential towers along 30th Street...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338208/large.jpg


The tallest is nothing too spectacular

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338251/medium.jpg__http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338335/medium.jpg


Neither is the rest of the site

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338231/medium.jpg


However, as seen with some of the other Hudson Yards district developments, you
get the idea that it doesn't have to be...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338269/medium.jpg


The Girasole

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338296/medium.jpg

And finally, here is my favorite of the bunch, Brookfield's. This one is the rare combination
of best site plan, and best skyscraper proposals. There were two models on hand.

First, the Manhattan model...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338534/medium.jpg


The ESB and NY Times...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338555/large.jpg


Bonus shot of Brookfield's 9th Ave site plan...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338576/large.jpg


From here, you get an idea of the developments proximity to Penn Station and its
related developments. There is no doubt in my mind that the same pedestrian
rush that you see from the 40's and 50's to Penn Station will be seen from here.
Still, the 7 line extension is badly needed to connect the west side with the rest of the city.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338595/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338620/large.jpg


And here you see why this is the best plan for New York. It's the most natural
extension of the rest of the Hudson Yards district. In fact, any one who didn't know
better would find it hard to believe that the railyards were there in the first place.
I also love the way the cultural center ties the Hudson Boulevard Park together
with the High Line park.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338641/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338692/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338716/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339261/large.jpg


I love the slender residential towers along 30th St and the High Line. The hottest
developments in the city are around the High Line, and I have no doubt these
towers would be as well.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89338796/large.jpg


The more skeletal view. Imagine walking along the High Line to a terminus of these towers
and looking up. A little Hong Kongish, but it would be fantastic. (This is my current desktop view)

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339170/large.jpg


One and Two Hudson Place

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339196/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339219/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339241/large.jpg

___________________________________________

Resized renderings:


Not your average Manhattan Plaza...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339266/large.jpg


A good start on these towers...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339269/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339271/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89339274/large.jpg

I really like 1 & 2 Hudson Place the way they are. I hope they don't change too much.

They all look great. Another cluster for the king. These clusters alone can blow away most skylines. Even the related and Tishman are rather large. The Tishman plan would be like having another WTC.

This is like adding the LA skyline to Manhattan.

This is like adding the LA skyline to Manhattan.

:lol:, at least downtown LA.

...which is pretty much all it has in terms of skyscrapers. But still one hell of an addition.

love it

Good stuff NYGuy. I agree with most of what you said.

Beautiful! Definitely, a great addition to NY's (already brilliant) skyline...

I agree, Brookfield's is the most seductive...but because it incorporates every major high-rise cliché of our time, it looks just like something you'd find in the rest of the world, perhaps Kazakhstan or Shenzhen. The architects involved were of course some of the first to innovate these formal moves (twist, rounded, zig-zag, bridge, crystal) during their early years teaching and submitting competition entries, but at this point they are over-used tropes, and it's really too late for NYC to play catch-up. Besides, the way Brookfield slaps two condos right in the middle of the park negates the opportunity to have a sweeping (wind-swept?) green space come down from the north and then bend west to the water. Instead you have two parks, which is fairly generic.

Although it is kind of off-putting, Tishman Speyer's proposal is the most intelligent, to me. The towers split to preserve the view from NJ of the Empire State Building (which none of the other proposals do, not even Brookfield's, even though it seems to), there is a kind of brutal circle marking the point where the two parks meet, and the residential towers have an interesting cantilevered relationship to the Highline. If the tower membranes had been better articulated, this proposal would clearly be seen as the most urban, pity they weren't. Pity they didn't throw in some arbitrary curves to make it seem more "up-to-date" as well.

I agree, Brookfield's is the most seductive...but because it incorporates every major high-rise cliché of our time, it looks just like something you'd find in the rest of the world, perhaps Kazakhstan or Shenzhen. The architects involved were of course some of the first to innovate these formal moves (twist, rounded, zig-zag, bridge, crystal) during their early years teaching and submitting competition entries, but at this point they are over-used tropes, and it's really too late for NYC to play catch-up. Besides, the way Brookfield slaps two condos right in the middle of the park negates the opportunity to have a sweeping (wind-swept?) green space come down from the north and then bend west to the water. Instead you have two parks, which is fairly generic.

Although it is kind of off-putting, Tishman Speyer's proposal is the most intelligent, to me. The towers split to preserve the view from NJ of the Empire State Building (which none of the other proposals do, not even Brookfield's, even though it seems to), there is a kind of brutal circle marking the point where the two parks meet, and the residential towers have an interesting cantilevered relationship to the Highline. If the tower membranes had been better articulated, this proposal would clearly be seen as the most urban, pity they weren't. Pity they didn't throw in some arbitrary curves to make it seem more "up-to-date" as well.

View on the Empire State Building will be obscured only if you look directly across from NJ side. (Like directly across 33-34th street) So if you step aside a little bit - the whole problem is solved and you will have a row of buildings all the way from West side up to the 34 & 5th avenue with Empire State Building in the end.
As for Park - you should also see that another park which will extend all across Hells Kitchen at an 90 degree angle all the way up to the 42 street will be connected to this one here. So the amount of Green space is very large even with this building in the middle.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/11/24/arts/design/24huds.395.jpg

You can see on this picture that after 2 city clocks you have a building standing on top of the rail road yards - so park has to end there anyways - instead it turns left and continue all the way up to the 42 street.

http://www.observer.com/sites/all/themes/observer/MidtownMap0424_G.jpg
16 & 17. Hudson Yards

http://www.metropolismag.com/webimages/2911/2-siteplan.jpg

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/hyards/hy_development_information.pdf

More detailed info

Reminds me of comcast, only even curvier. I prefer it to Chicago Spire. Hopefully it'll get built.:) NYC I envy you:) Toronto's long overdue for somthing like this.:bash:

I like the Brookfield one the most, its an emazing dense cluster.....its like another city within the city.....I hope this will get build.......or why they dont choose Fosters former WTC design twin tower and build them there with smaller towers surrounding it....this would be the perfect solution IMO!

Just to remeber this is an image of the Foster proposal for GZ! And imagine now this one in midtown....AMAZING!

http://www.thecityreview.com/wtcfost1.jpg

Dont like it at all, dont look like New York, more like a suburb in Europe.

Boring .:ohno:

I like Brookfield, too.

I'd like to point out that no matter which plan wins, NYC will be gettting at least three new supertalls and as many as six or seven for just this project alone.

-The Tishman one has two 900 foot tall twins and two 1,100 foot tall twins, plus many others.
-The Brookfirld plan has 1x 1,300, four towers over 900 feet tall, a 1,020-footer, and a 800 footer, plus MANY others.
-The Extell one has the triplet towers that are 1,240' tall and a 800' tower and half a dozen well over 700 feet, plus others.
-The Related/Goldman plan has an amazing 1,100' tall tower and 2 towers over 960 feet tall, plus MANY other skyscrapers.
-The VORNADO/DURST plan has the 1,200 foot tall tower and three over 800' and one over 900' tall, plus many other skyscrapers.
-That 1,000 foot tall res. tower and the 760+-footer by Holl and others are going up too.


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/90554012/large.jpg
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/90554083/large.jpg

No matter what happens, there will be at least be one 1,100-foot-tall tower (to its roof) and a s**tload of other skyscrapers. At most, there will be a plethora of supertall skyscrapers and other towers. It's a third WTC.

^^^^
great news :)
exactly what I expect from New York :cheers:

Eat your hearts out:

The base is utterly amazing, like Freedom Tower's and it has things in common with the WTC.


http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/2678/hudsonyards6hudsonhalljt4.jpg

Skyline views:

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/2206/11211hd8.jpg

Wait till the area to the left and right of this gets more towers, and wait till some taller supertalls go up behind it...
http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/4035/capturepg6.jpg


ALL of the plans are very amazing. Whine all you want, it's all still mind-blowing, even the massive double twin pairs of Tishamn and Extell triplet towers. Supertalls will CONSTANTLY be u/c here till 2020 and beyond.

amazing plans! I like the Vornado/Durst plan. I'm very glad to see 4-5 supertall (1000+ft ) rise up!

Fantastic...
Any idea when one of these plans will be approved? Or not?

It hides the view to the Empire State! :(
But great plans, it´ll sure give NYC that "futuristic" skyline we always see in movies!

It hides the view to the Empire State! :(
But great plans, it´ll sure give NYC that "futuristic" skyline we always see in movies!

Yeah, it does hide the ESB, but only from New Jersey. Nobody cares about New Jersey anyway...

wow! really futuristic! and it's in new york of course! amazing!

Yeah, it does hide the ESB, but only from New Jersey. Nobody cares about New Jersey anyway...

Somehow I do care about NJ, but it only hides it if you view ESB directly across the Hudson. So if you move to the side a little bit you will still see everything.

From Crain’s: Developers with Anchor Tenants Have the Edge
Posted on December 17, 2007 by katieatthehighline
Crain’s New York Business reports today that the three developers who have lined up anchor tenants for the rail yards site, Related, Durst/Vornado and Tishman Speyer, have an advantage in the eyes of the MTA.

Crain’s’ Theresa Agovino reports:

The three leading contenders have each bid about $1 billion for the yards, sources say, and all have the deep pockets to finance the project. But insiders say the MTA may push for the three to join forces so it can keep all the tenants and avoid disappointing any of the politically connected developers. The MTA plans to make a decision in the first quarter, although that deadline could be extended, according to a spokesman for the agency.

“I think they will try to get us all to work together, if possible,” says an executive at one of the developers.

While it’s apparent that the rail yards site will look different from any of the proposals unveiled in November, it’s hard to picture how a collaboration between the three frontrunners might pan out. The new rail yards would be new mega-corporate district developed from scratch, housing Conde Nast, News Corp and Morgan Stanley, and a host of architects and planners with competing visions.


3 bidders take lead at rail yards
The three development teams that have lined up major tenants are the front-runners in the high-stakes competition to develop the Hudson Rail Yards.

Tenants bring credibility and increase the ability of a developer to obtain financing, giving The Related Companies, a joint venture between Tishman Speyer and Morgan Stanley, and a partnership between The Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust the inside track. Extell Development Co. and Brookfield Properties are considered long shots.

Companies covet the parcel, which is owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, because the 26-acre site is the last large development site in Manhattan. The size of the site will allow the builder to create an entire new neighborhood and leave an enormous legacy in the city.

The three leading contenders have each bid about $1 billion for the yards, sources say, and all have the deep pockets to finance the project. But insiders say the MTA may push for the three to join forces so it can keep all the tenants and avoid disappointing any of the politically connected developers. The MTA plans to make a decision in the first quarter, although that deadline could be extended, according to a spokesman for the agency.

“I think they will try to get us all to work together, if possible,” says an executive at one of the developers.

Not possible, insist others. Forging partnerships would be overwhelmingly complicated by the conflicting concepts and designs for the site. For example, Related views the site as a media industry center, anchored by its tenant News Corp. Meanwhile, Tishman Speyer/Morgan Stanley says that the area is perfect for constructing the large buildings with megatrading floors desired by financial firms. Morgan Stanley plans to erect its headquarters at the location.

The Durst/Vornado venture has Conde Nast Publications as a tenant, so a partnership with Related might make sense. But some real estate executives worry that if Related or the Durst/Vornado partnership wins the Hudson Yards bid, there’s a risk of one or two developers having too much control of an area. Vornado and Related are already partners in developing Moynihan Station nearby. Others counter that such a scenario would give the neighborhood more cohesion.

Those conflicting views illustrate how difficult a decision will be. One fact is certain: Once a developer is selected, the plan will be revised to address concerns and possibly add portions of other proposals.

Center stage

News Corp. will sponsor activities such as concerts and movie screenings that will draw the public to the site, says Stephen Ross, Related’s chairman. “News Corp. activates the space,” says Mr. Ross.

He says that programs at the site would be broadcast around the world, putting New York’s waterfront at center stage.

Still, some don’t relish the “Neighborhood by News Corp.” concept, suggesting Hudson Yards shouldn’t be a corporate branding opportunity, especially for a figure like the company’s controversial chairman, Rupert Murdoch.

The Durst/Vornado bid also comes with a tenant, but Conde Nast isn’t the proposal’s strategic focus. “We’ve envisioned parks surrounded by buildings.” says Rafael Pelli, an architect working on the project. “We worked hard not to think of this as just an office complex.”

The plan calls for more residential space than any of the other contenders’ plans. An elevated walkway and a proposal for an airport-like people mover to ferry individuals from Penn Station to the site using existing underground tracks are other features of the bid.

However, the plan wouldn’t keep all of the High Line, the now-defunct rail system that rings the yards. Retaining the entire structure is a major community objective, so there would be pressure from activists on the Durst/Vornado team to alter its plan.

The Tishman Speyer/Morgan Stanley proposal also doesn’t retain the entire High Line, so it would face the same lobbying effort. Affordable housing is also very important to the community, so activists may push the MTA to demand that Tishman Speyer/Morgan Stanley add more units. Of the major contenders, it is offering the fewest residential units with 3,000, including about 300 designated for affordable housing. The partnership says it is flexible.

Jerry Speyer, chairman of Tishman Speyer, says it is important to recognize that the project can play a key role in keeping companies, especially those in the important financial services sector, in New York in the midst of an office space shortage. The partnership’s plan calls for more office space than any other. Morgan Stanley would build a 3 million-square-foot tower, and Mr. Speyer says a similar structure could also be erected for another financial services firm.

Although considered long shots, the Extell and Brookfield proposals were lauded by some community members for their public benefits. Extell’s plan offers more public space than any other. Brookfield’s proposal, which strays from the MTA’s guidelines, was praised for blending into the neighborhood.

DEVELOPERS’ COMPETING OFFERS

DEVELOPER Brookfield Properties
TENANT None
OFFICE SPACE 6.3 million sq. ft.
RESIDENTIAL SPACE 4.4 million sq. ft.
PUBLIC SPACE 15.4 acres

DEVELOPERS The Durst Organization/Vornado Realty Trust
TENANT Conde Nast Publications
OFFICE SPACE 5.4 million sq. ft.
RESIDENTIAL SPACE 6.4 million sq. ft.
PUBLIC SPACE 15.6 acres

DEVELOPER Extell Development Co.
TENANT None
OFFICE SPACE 5.8 million sq. ft.
RESIDENTIAL SPACE 5.6 million sq. ft.
PUBLIC SPACE 19 acres

DEVELOPER The Related Companies
TENANT News Corp.
OFFICE SPACE 5.7 million sq. ft.
RESIDENTIAL SPACE 5.3 million sq. ft.
PUBLIC SPACE 15 acres

DEVELOPERS Tishman Speyer/ Morgan Stanley
OFFICE SPACE 10 million sq. ft.
RESIDENTIAL SPACE 3 million sq. ft.
PUBLIC SPACE 13 acres

A part of me does want Tishman to win. It would be like building another WTC in terms of office space, what really makes a city powerful. No matter who wins, again, NY wins. I think it's 100% stupid to say that nothing will be picked and no towers will go up.

Yeah, it does hide the ESB, but only from New Jersey. Nobody cares about New Jersey anyway...

ahahahahah so true!

wonderful project for NY..good to see NY boom again!it certainly needs something futuristic like this!IMO the brookfield proposal is the best one,but whichever wins it will be great for NY!:okay:

A part of me does want Tishman to win. It would be like building another WTC in terms of office space, what really makes a city powerful. No matter who wins, again, NY wins. I think it's 100% stupid to say that nothing will be picked and no towers will go up.

Oh I am positive something will be picked. But given overwhelming support for Brookfield it is not fair to pick another one. So i got a bit upset by the above article. Of course there is nothing personal about it - it is only business. but.... my voice is for Brookfield for its higher tower, nicer park and much more futuristic look

Fantastic...
Any idea when one of these plans will be approved? Or not?

Sorry but I'm asking the question again.
So? Any idea anyone?

Man, that's a big letdown. Brookfield is just a long shot? That sucks:( Of those three that are being considered, Durst's is the only one I really like. But I have a sneaking suspicion that Tishman will probably take this because of how much office space it has... but it certainly doesn't have the most impressive design...

Bravo NYC!!!! Wonderful project.

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/2206/11211hd8.jpg
^^goodness!!!!! it's beautiful!!:okay:

they've to build the brookfield one!!!!

I like the project, but I wish they'd change the buildings up. These all have kind of the same look. Part of what makes NY so amazing is the diversity of the architecture. I like the supertall, but the rest.....ehh..

they've to build the brookfield one!!!!

without source please quit posting shit like that.:)

with this project built NYC will again has the crown of skylines but IMO to share with the than Dubai.....

IMO Dubai and NYC are the best cities in the world.....

that rendering above is amazing! grrr i wish they would pick brookfield AND use the buildings already in the proposal

I like the mid to top portions of all the buildings, but there is a lot of Dubaism in the design of the lower parts of the towers IMO.

Man, that's a big letdown. Brookfield is just a long shot? That sucks:( Of those three that are being considered, Durst's is the only one I really like. But I have a sneaking suspicion that Tishman will probably take this because of how much office space it has... but it certainly doesn't have the most impressive design...

Don't despair - it may turn out to be what we both want. Who knows :)

Am I the only person who doesn't like any of these plans? I don't want to be some sort of stickler of architecture, but they all seem quite ugly and uninspired to me. Everyone seems to be pro-Brookfield, and I am just inquiring, do you guys genuinely like it? or are you just choosing the best out of the lot? Just curiosity, I am not attempting to "rattle" any "sabers," nor attack anyone's taste in architecture. Despite my personal views on the project, however, I can definitely say I am happy for such a project in New York.

Am I the only person who doesn't like any of these plans? I don't want to be some sort of stickler of architecture, but they all seem quite ugly and uninspired to me. Everyone seems to be pro-Brookfield, and I am just inquiring, do you guys genuinely like it? or are you just choosing the best out of the lot? Just curiosity, I am not attempting to "rattle" any "sabers," nor attack anyone's taste in architecture. Despite my personal views on the project, however, I can definitely say I am happy for such a project in New York.

Out of what is proposed it is the best in my opinion. As for how much possibly better it can be - is rather infinite since everyone has a different taste. One thing I like about it - it is not a typical NYC box type skyscraper - it is something fresh and new. Also the idea of the 2 parks connected at an angle intrigues me as well. Finally you should understand: first - the place looks very ugly now - so anything that can be built here is a plus; second NYC has virtually ran out of space to build anything so this large complex development is unique. I expect that sometime in the near future - skyscrapers will be built in Brooklyn rather than in Manhattan. due to lack of space.

Developer: Vornado/Durst
Architect: FXFowle architects


http://www.pbase.com/image/89193230.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193182.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193181.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193209.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193212.jpg

Developer: Tishman/Speyer
Architect: Helmut Jahn


http://www.pbase.com/image/89193214.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193219.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193216.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193221.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/89193224.jpg

Thanx Krull!

IT`s so beachan, don`t looks like planet earth.

Out of what is proposed it is the best in my opinion. As for how much possibly better it can be - is rather infinite since everyone has a different taste. One thing I like about it - it is not a typical NYC box type skyscraper - it is something fresh and new. Also the idea of the 2 parks connected at an angle intrigues me as well. Finally you should understand: first - the place looks very ugly now - so anything that can be built here is a plus; second NYC has virtually ran out of space to build anything so this large complex development is unique. I expect that sometime in the near future - skyscrapers will be built in Brooklyn rather than in Manhattan. due to lack of space.

Fair enough, thanks for responding.

This is the grandest project on Earth.

Where is this exhibition of renderings?

wow, this is a really neat project.

wish all of these can be come ture..

Where is this exhibition of renderings?

I think it is already done with

I, too, would like more diversity. I don't like highrise superblock developments as much as it is b/c of the fact that the buildings often look way to similar. The Brookfield on is great, I like it a lot, but it's better if there could be more diversity in materials and colors. I think the shapes are great and diverse, but even if they're shaped way different, if they're the same color and look similar in that regard, the project will be underwhelming. But I'm holding out for more renderings, hopefully these issues are addressed. All of the sketches have this effect, so maybe it's just like that for the early renders, or maybe that was criticism that was already brought up.

I like the mid to top portions of all the buildings, but there is a lot of Dubaism in the design of the lower parts of the towers IMO.

I agree. There is extreme wasted urban space on the ground with this project on the parts of most of the design teams. Taken straight out of "futuristic" yet very poorly planned 1960s/70s design. There will be little use of the park space at the ground level here with what looks like little to no reason to use it. Retail space seems to be broken up, which is why many places fail to develop consistent foot traffic in the first place. Hopefully a lot of the fanciful designs at the ground level will be redesigned with intelligence.

The winding sidewalks design remind me vaguely of the way Independence Mall in Philly is cut up into useless portions. It's no wonder why even that park is not used to its potential.

This is amazing!

The SOM project is the best by far! :drool:

Anyone know when a final decision is going to be made? These look awesome.

with this project built NYC will again has the crown of skylines but IMO to share with the than Dubai.....

IMO Dubai and NYC are the best cities in the world.....
Hong Kong has more 90m + tall buildings than NYC and Dubai put together.
http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/st/sr/

^^ not the quantity counts IMO the quality is much more important........and emporis should change their rules in the skyline rankings.......its too aged....!

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a21/jogiba/blackforestok4.jpg
http://www.dubaiforlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/dubai-aerial-photos-23.JPG
http://www.diserio.com/hkpano.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?s5

http://starphotohk.com/hk-place/2007/20071220-UnionSquare01-960.jpg

dude wtf those pictures have to do with this thread, cretin ^^^^


I come here to see any news about Hudson project, not look at Dubai or hong-kong, have some respect :ohno:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a21/jogiba/blackforestok4.jpg
http://www.dubaiforlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/dubai-aerial-photos-23.JPG
http://www.diserio.com/hkpano.jpg

http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?s5

http://starphotohk.com/hk-place/2007/20071220-UnionSquare01-960.jpg

Nice commieblocks and most of the lights are on ugly ass buildings.

Hong Kong has more 90m + tall buildings than NYC and Dubai put together.
http://www.emporis.com/en/bu/sk/st/sr/


This is SSC. Most of those 90m+ buildings are crap and/or not even skyscrapers to begin with. Why people call buildings under 600/500' skyscrapers is beyond me. Perhaps they think they can get away with claiming that they have the most.

NY has still the Most Towers over 200m ( and that counts more than 90 highrises :lol: ), and i'm not sure if dubai will break this record in the future because of all the new projects in NY ^^

i love this bridge!:
http://www.pbase.com/image/89166590.jpg

NY has still the Most Towers over 200m ( and that counts more than 90 highrises :lol: ), and i'm not sure if dubai will break this record in the future because of all the new projects in NY ^^

I just checked and NYC had 49 over 200m ,Hong Kong 43 and Dubai 21.

Dubai and NY will have 60+ in the next 10 years...will be a small race :D

Dubai and NY will have 60+ in the next 10 years...will be a small race :D

yes but ONLY NYC with have NEW YORKERS, the culture, the vibrant street scene...

all others are imitators [except Chicago! we've had our own version for 100 years now]

"planned" cities with no street life may as well be suburbia to me

Whatever they do with Hudson Yards...it needs to be dense and have an integrated street life.... I hate huge plaza with parks... NYC has Central Park.... keep it livable

Any news???

Yep. I saw a thing on the Hudson Yards on the news but I didn't hear anything, but I was able to find an article. Seems that Brookfield is dropping out:(

http://gothamist.com/2008/02/27/west_side_rail_1.php

And then there were three. Tishman also dropped out too because their fiscal benefactor didn't wanna be a part of it.

GO GO MYSPACE. All of the plans have supertalls.

wow...looks like something i would see from the Chinese or from the of Dubai...like the idea....could this be possible?

Physically? Yes very possible is it really going to happen? I'm not getting my hopes up.

Tishman Speyer Wins Right to Develop Manhattan’s Far West Side With $1 Billion Bid

The Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) announced today that Tishman Speyer Properties, owner of such landmark properties as Rockefeller Center, the Chrysler Building, and the Hearst Building, has won the right to build on the West Side Rail Yards with a $1 billion bid. The 26-acre site located between 30th and 33rd Streets from 10th Avenue to the Hudson, is the largest remaining undeveloped site in Manhattan.

Tishman’s proposal, which is designed by Chicago architect Helmut Jahn and New York-based Cooper Robertson with landscape architect Peter Walker, will bring a taste of Rome to Manhattan, with a masterplan that includes elements that are takes on the Roman forum and the Spanish Steps. The plan calls for five office towers with 8.1 million square feet of space, 3,000 residential units, 13 acres of open space, a new public school and a 200,000 square foot cultural center. As part of the plan, Tishman will preserve the Highline, an elevated disused rail line that runs from Chelsea to Mid-town, which is to be transformed into a linear park.

http://worldarchitecturenews.com

http://worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/2088_1_Tishman1.jpg

ЗЫ. Джон, если не трудно, глянь плз мой русский перевод в ветке "зарубежное строительство", в секции России, на предмет ляпов.

Can't see Romen elements here, but at street level, it looks great.

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/2954/tishmasterplancopyfk7.jpg

Romen?

By the way, there are now two threads for the same project.

I am going to miss m big hole in the ground where you could see out to the sky from trains before going under the river.

- Andy

Almost everything you see in this thread isn't being built since the final Tishman masterplan was picked.

By the way, I was right when I said that I though the height of the towers in the TS Masterplan was being downplayed to prevent certain groups of people from moaning and whining. I don't know if they'll stick to the planned heights, but of they do, in terms of height massing, it will be like getting two Citigroup Centers AND two John Hancock Centers in midtown... so let's hope they keep that part of the plan or decide to improve upon it.

man why did they choose that one?

What are the hights of those buildings?

the heights of the original plan:

2 x 336m
2 x 275m

News:

It's great how both the PA and the MTA held meetings thursday to get things moving along on both the WTC and Hudson Yards developments. A great day in the development of the city.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/nyregion/23yards.html?ref=nyregion
M.T.A. Approves a New Deal to Build at West Side Yards

By CHARLES V. BAGLI
May 23, 2008

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority unanimously approved a tentative billion-dollar deal with the Related Companies on Thursday to build a 26-acre, $15 billion enclave of office towers, residential buildings and parks over the West Side railyards.

Related will spend tens of millions in the next several years, including $11 million in fees paid on Thursday and an $18.8 million down payment later this year, as well as millions in architectural and engineering fees. But those are relatively small sums for a $15 billion project.

Related would not have to commit the bulk of the money until construction begins. The platform over the railyards itself is expected to cost about $2 billion. The earliest that work can begin is in late 2009 or early 2010, according to the deal.

This is bad news once again mayor bloomberg has fuck us. Where is Durst their project was the best. They took eight steps backward with the hudson yard. I'm crossing my finger hoping this one fall through too. This suppose to rival the WTC but with this choose it doesn't even come close.

It was the MTA that chose this developer not Bloomberg. lol

Sill disappointed over the decision:(

Related was also not my favourite....but we'll see what the future brings, the design is probably not final...so i'm still optimistic :)

I hope so, I mean this:
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/89337909/large.jpg

It's just so bleh... The supertall is good, that should stay the same, but everything else is so not outstanding. Not that their designs are bad, but for a project this big it just doesn't bring anything new to the table. Not to mention that street level-wise it's the worst. It's pretty bland IMO.

Looks good, nice variety of buildings there.

the style is more classic like brookfield...that's not bad IMO

Yeah, they have the best looking supertall, but from the front it only looks like it has a few floors because a slice of the front is used as a giant garden, I recall.

the main problem for me with the related design is the big space in the middle, hope that will be changed

Of all the proposals Related probably had the most secure financing. Considering the economic situation that was likely a big factor in choosing them. As for the buildings themselves, a lot of what will actually be built will depend on whether they secure a large anchor tenant early in the process. If they do then the design will likely proceed from the needs of that tenant. As such we could end up with a very different proportion of residential/commercial space. They will likely want to have at least 30% of the commercial space not leased by the anchor tenant. Thus if the tenant demands lots of space they may need to add more commercial space. Conversely they may decide that 5.5 million square feet is too much considering the nearby Brookfield development that may compromise much of the new westside Class A commercial space.

Personally I think that as the economy improves they will add more commercial space.

they should develop it into smaller parcels... blah

they should develop it into smaller parcels... blah

Unfortunately, since building here requires a huge amount of money in infrastructure before any buildings are built this city has to let a single developer do the project. If the city had the Financial Resources and wanted to spend them on a single project to pay for the infrastructure then the project could be broken up. Otherwise no developer would want to spend the money on infrastructure for a small piece of pie. It's estimated the infrastructure before any building started is at least one billion dollars!

The MTA should have different developers for each building. I would like to see Durst supertall built they had the best supertall. Related supertall doesn't look super let alone tall lol.

i want the whole Brookfield plan :sleepy:

Will we know that never going to happen. Let just move on with what we got for right now.

The MTA should have different developers for each building. I would like to see Durst supertall built they had the best supertall. Related supertall doesn't look super let alone tall lol.

I agree.

other render for the related proposal:

http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.showprojectbigimages&img=1&pro_id=2353

http://img58.imageshack.us/my.php?image=23531hudson1biger0.jpg

thats a nice render, thanks for the share!

Cool render. I like the bridge. It fits thew towers very well imo :)

Is it an actual bridge or just a IDK what it would be called:lol: Like an extension or something like that? It does look good.

Pfft, we're going to get a whole bunch of whiney comments like, "Whaaa, but I wanted XXXX's plan to win! This plan's supertalls suck!"

Be happy we're getting a supertall(s), and know that the plan is bound to change, hopefully getting bigger/taller and better.

I really think Related has by far the best supertall, it's just that buildings aren't as tall as people want/as other plans', therefore most people here will bash it to death and pretend it's the worst thing ever like a bunch of babies. We just have to wait and see where this heads. The only one winning is New York; I'm sure things will turn out for the best.

More renders from Related site

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/2.jpg?t=1211769757

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/3.jpg?t=1211769816

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/4.jpg?t=1211769845

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/1.jpg?t=1211769905

I had'nt noticed the cobble stone streets in the third render. Thanks for those...

the bridge is a pedestrian bridge across west side hwy

thats one of the only things i like about it lol, the dinky pedestrian bridge!

More renders from Related site

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/2.jpg?t=1211769757


if that's the current masterplan, it will be fine :cheers:

wow they look awesome :)

i dont see what people are complaining about, the project plan is gorgeous

if that's the current masterplan, it will be fine :cheers:

the current yes, but maybe not the final

You people need to quit sucking up to these people. You guys want everybody to say how much they love these buildings. But thats not going to happen, some of us like them other of us hate them. I bet you say I luv this trash pitt, if they put one there lol.

My only changes would be to add a little height to the two tallest commercial buildings and to remove one of the residential buildings that are isolated in the park and move those residences to another residential building on the perimeter that would now be a supertall. Outside of that it is a fine plan to me.

More renders from Related site

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/2.jpg?t=1211769757

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/3.jpg?t=1211769816

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/4.jpg?t=1211769845

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/1.jpg?t=1211769905

They look fine to me, I was never a huge fan of the Brookfield plan, so this is a little more of the style I was hoping the lot would employ.

You people need to quit sucking up to these people. You guys want everybody to say how much they love these buildings. But thats not going to happen, some of us like them other of us hate them. I bet you say I luv this trash pitt, if they put one there lol.

I bet if the current plan was the one with the tallest builgings and all of the other plans were smaller with the smallest one winning and people liked it you'd be saying the same stuff. Of course we all want more, but would you rather have a dozen skyscrapers or nothing at all? There will be plenty of other supertalls in the same area and at least the current plan has the best backing with the best chance of going bigger, while the others had poor backing.
Not one person here would be whining if Related were the only team to show up and present their plan. Just pretend the other teams never existed. Besides, there's not much to judge the current plan from. This is all at such an early stage that saying things like, "it sucks" is an unmistakable sign of an idiot.
Just because the last big plot of land is being developed and isn't getting buildings as big as people wanted to see there doesn't mean NY will never get buildings as tall as people who love it want it to get.

You and I know this is suppose to be the mega project that rivals the WTC. This has been stated for months, after this there will be no more mega project in Manhattan. I could careless about the height of these buildings, what I want is a kick ass design. If you going to market it as the next WTC, then make it like the WTC or don't make it at all. And calling someone a idiot because they don't agree with you is a little childish don't you think. But enough with this back and forth, we got what we got and theirs nothing we can do about it. I just want them to get it done and out the way.

Well seeing a few of the more detailed renderings, I really like the look at the street level.

This design doesn't impress much

for me this doesn't fit in very well with the rest of the NYC skyline. It sits very awkwardly with no other highrises close by, plus (I dont know if this is just the intension of the render or not) it stands out too much against the reds and browns of the buildings in the background, whereas if you take the World Trade Centre buildings as another example they fit in much better despite having a glass facade. Hope that makes sense.

I like the plans and I like that there is variety with the designs of the towers. But I do hope we can see renders of an urban public space as part of this. I know parks are important as well as utilizing the waterfront, but I do think a high quality urban public space that is more human scaled should be an important part of these plans.

for me this doesn't fit in very well with the rest of the NYC skyline. It sits very awkwardly with no other highrises close by, plus (I dont know if this is just the intension of the render or not) it stands out too much against the reds and browns of the buildings in the background, whereas if you take the World Trade Centre buildings as another example they fit in much better despite having a glass facade. Hope that makes sense.

This is obviously not the final design, it's just the massing and layout of the site... however it's certainly better than the Tishman design.

for me this doesn't fit in very well with the rest of the NYC skyline. It sits very awkwardly with no other highrises close by, plus (I dont know if this is just the intension of the render or not) it stands out too much against the reds and browns of the buildings in the background, whereas if you take the World Trade Centre buildings as another example they fit in much better despite having a glass facade. Hope that makes sense.

I'm sure the area will change. A lot of those reds and browns will probably make way for bigger buildings (at least in the direct proximity of the Hudson Yards) There's also a few more supertalls that will probably be constructed in the same area.

Well, if it's true that this is just a layout of buildings and has little to do with design, and I am sure it is, then I am also sure that there will be lots of changes, and just maybe the buildings were shown as short so that people don't complain, helping Related to win the bid, knowing that they would later explode the heights and sizes of their towers. It happened with other competitors. HY is bigger than just the part they were bidding for and buildings of any height are possible for the area.

any more news? has a developer been chosen yet

i like almost all of these designs, i hope they start hurying up with this project

if that's the current masterplan, it will be fine :cheers:

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa155/jwalas/2.jpg?t=1211769757
PERFECT... BUILT IT! :)

Looks interesting... Are they going to built those towers ^^ ?

Still not sold here. This will make the 7 line totally packed during peak hours, as if it needs to be more full of people. Also this will clog the 8th ave line (A,C,E). I also still am VERY curious as to how they will will support these huge heavy buildings over what is essentially a below grade rail yard with little space between tracks for support structures. I think it would essentially be a mega-truss situation similar to what's under the pan-am building, but i think even that situation hasn't much in common with the west side yard, because with GCT there are platforms and spaces between the tracks for workers to go and was engineered originally to work with building above. The yard on the other hand has very little space between and one platform used to crew trains.

-A

well this has to be done. Theres nothing left in manhattan. On the other hand there so much room left in nyc I say feel the whole city up with skyscrapers. Lets get it done.

Ok, just build a 400 storey monolith over the yard. :banana2:

- A

Still not sold here. This will make the 7 line totally packed during peak hours, as if it needs to be more full of people. Also this will clog the 8th ave line (A,C,E). I also still am VERY curious as to how they will will support these huge heavy buildings over what is essentially a below grade rail yard with little space between tracks for support structures. I think it would essentially be a mega-truss situation similar to what's under the pan-am building, but i think even that situation hasn't much in common with the west side yard, because with GCT there are platforms and spaces between the tracks for workers to go and was engineered originally to work with building above. The yard on the other hand has very little space between and one platform used to crew trains.

-A

If I had to guess I'd say that part of the platform construction would include the relocation of certain tracks to allow for the construction of mega columns that would hold up transfer trusses that would support the buildings above.

If I had to guess I'd say that part of the platform construction would include the relocation of certain tracks to allow for the construction of mega columns that would hold up transfer trusses that would support the buildings above.

The problem is, that mid-day all of LIRR's yards are full. I am pretty sure that they cant afford to have even one track taken out, because it would reduce capacity at one of their 2 most important stops & what is effectively their main terminal.

Now, if there was a big honkin' truss box constructed to above street level & fastened to bedrock around the perimeter that might work, but any large building is going to need very strong anchors to keep from blowing over in a breeze. Lotta people i suspect don't realize how huge this yard actually is. It can hold ~35 full length trains and is 2 "long" blocks long & 3 blocks wide and i believe about 30 feet below grade. Not all of it is at the same level.

Does anyone know how 11th avenue crosses the yard? Can its support system be used to hold a tallish building up? I fear its construction may be based on spanning a distance vs both that & supporting huge load.

- A

I'm not quite sure why everybody is so concerned about how the buildings will be supported. Obviously the design group knows how it will be done or else they wouldn't have made the proposal. Architects and Engineers are very competent despite what everyone thinks and they certainly wouldn't miss such an obvious major point. Quit trying to second guess them and just enjoy the proposal. Hopefully it will become reality and you can see how they plan on supporting the buildings.

And by the way the bridge supports are obviously nowhere near strong enough to support the buildings.

Glass is getting SO over done. I'm getting so sick of seeing every single big development all glass. How boring. MIX IT UP!

Glass is getting SO over done. I'm getting so sick of seeing every single big development all glass. How boring. MIX IT UP!

i wonder how people felt in the 1930s when all the buildings had the same type of Facade. Maybe the same? I Think NYC could use some more glass in Midtown and the General Area. I mean Lower Manhattan is getting it in huge amounts because of the WTC but Midtown has a few like the New Bofa, hearst, bloomberg, and time Warner. i don't Think its being too overdone in NY though

Glass is getting SO over done. I'm getting so sick of seeing every single big development all glass. How boring. MIX IT UP!

its nyc it's mix up has been for over 60 years. All I got to say is I could careless what they put there. As long as it big, tall and looks good. I say build it.:banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:

I'm not quite sure why everybody is so concerned about how the buildings will be supported. Obviously the design group knows how it will be done or else they wouldn't have made the proposal. Architects and Engineers are very competent despite what everyone thinks and they certainly wouldn't miss such an obvious major point. Quit trying to second guess them and just enjoy the proposal. Hopefully it will become reality and you can see how they plan on supporting the buildings.

And by the way the bridge supports are obviously nowhere near strong enough to support the buildings.



I don't even want stuff to be built there. How am i second guessing something when no one has even explained how they will do it?

It's called asking questions to get information. Try it sometime! :)

- A

I don't even want stuff to be built there. How am i second guessing something when no one has even explained how they will do it?
It's called asking questions to get information. Try it sometime! :)- A Well guess what, the design engineer for the project is not going to come on this forum and tell everyone how he's going to do it. Since he's not willing to provide the information anything people right here is just a WAG and totally irrelevant. We could just as easily discuss what kind of dog the design owned and could probably come closer to being correct! :bash:

Well guess what, the design engineer for the project is not going to come on this forum and tell everyone how he's going to do it. Since he's not willing to provide the information anything people right here is just a WAG and totally irrelevant. We could just as easily discuss what kind of dog the design owned and could probably come closer to being correct! :bash:

Have you ever even been to nyc? Or the west side yards area?

- A

Have you ever even been to nyc? Or the west side yards area?- A
Yes, and I feel this project would be a definite asset for the area and for New York as a whole. Most of that area is very bleak and having the in the area would certainly improve the waterfront and the area as a whole. I think building it over the rail yards is a good solution since it won't mean destruction of large blocks of older buildings.

They are only building over the section west of 11th ave according to this.....

http://www.mta.info/mta/news/hearings/wry_draft_scope.pdf

- A

Hey, just a question, i don't expect anyone to truly know the answer, but i want to ask it anyway. How will New York City deal with the sea level rise associated with Global Warming, besides trying to cut CO2 emmissions on a preemptive level? I ask because I see that this project is very close to the shoreline on Manhattan. Will they put Levees all the way around the borders of the island? I wonder what the long term strategy is here?

^^ I guess you could ask that about any question for about any coastal city.

Hey, just a question, i don't expect anyone to truly know the answer, but i want to ask it anyway. How will New York City deal with the sea level rise associated with Global Warming, besides trying to cut CO2 emmissions on a preemptive level? I ask because I see that this project is very close to the shoreline on Manhattan. Will they put Levees all the way around the borders of the island? I wonder what the long term strategy is here?

This project sits on top of a well below grade rail yard.

As far as preventing? People need to stop the nonsense & do anything and everything they can to curb their carbon output. Even that innocent cup of coffee you have in the morning uses heat from a wall outlet, and a cup from where made of what, and how did it get to the place you bought it from the growing regions near the equator? People need to connect the dots even the ones they might not fully understand, or feel comfortable about such as driving less, being more selective when purchasing, admitting that we are fully if not mostly responsible for the current trend in climate change. Be willing to vote for people who they may not share 100% views with, but know will take care of the changes that need to be made in various policies & spending patterns. Shareholders also have leverage to make companies change policy. Old buildings to be demolished should be 100% re-used of all components, aside from toxics, heavy metals etc. Expand nuclear, wind, and solar power. Put a solar panel and a mini-turbine on every house. Do the things that we all know deep down need to be done. IF that happens, things might not hit the fan. If we do too little or nothing, we will still careen over the cliff of worsening patterns of change that come too quickly and chaotically to adapt to, leading to extinctions and huge losses of biodiversity which will land the earth, be us here after all of that or not, in a much worse situation than before we arrived.

I ride a bike, use trains, and walk. I don't own a car. I encourage people to properly inflate their tires, take loads out of their vehicles that don't need to be there, plus purchase safe reliable efficient vehicles in the first place. I explain to people the benefits of changing their lights to CF and LED, of taking shorter showers with shower heads that work to improve output pressure but reduce water usage. I ask people why they drive or fly vs taking the train. I buy organic & encourage others to. I have 80% CF bulbs in my house, the rest are too niche for the moment to be replaced. I also tell people to buy diesel vehicles, and used/pre-owned whenever possible, because a used car isn't taking more, it's all ready built & there.

Builders need to use 100% recycled materials, and renewable materials, and eco-friendly and efficient practices in their construction plans.

It's like basketball. The first version had a basket with no hole in the bottom. Needless to say scores stayed pretty low till they figured out the game would work better if they didn't need to climb up & get the ball after each goal.... Same thing with methane and carbon dioxide emissions. Simple solutions.

- A

^^I'm sorry, I'm not giving up my coffee!:ohno: :cheers:

Don't worry, there are many ways an average person can save energy without having to give up one's little daily luxury or having to pay lots of money. All the little things one can do add up to quite a lot if enough people do them. You know, little stuff like turning the TV off instead of just putting it in stand-by mode.