daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Supertalls

Supertalls Discussions of projects under construction between 300-599m/1,000-1,999ft tall.
» Proposed Supertalls



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 19th, 2014, 10:53 PM   #141
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fabio1976 View Post
To update the title about the height and the numbers of floors.
There is no thread for the Hotel portion for 35 Hudson Yards to change. This hotel will be part of this tower (35 Hudson) that will be aprox 10-20 floors.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 19th, 2014, 11:05 PM   #142
erbse
LIBERTINED
 
erbse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: McLenBurg
Posts: 43,228
Likes (Received): 57880

I pity that this tower apparently gives up its setbacks.

This would be so much better (make it a supertall, I don't care, but give it some structure!):

http://www.hudsonyardsnewyork.com/Co...-dv-113012.jpg
__________________
GET FREE!
D W F


🔥 Tradition doesn't mean to look after the ash, but to keep the flame alive! 🔥
erbse no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 19th, 2014, 11:19 PM   #143
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,482

From that angle that design looks like
__________________
Check out my band, Till I Conquer!

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
ThatOneGuy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2014, 12:32 AM   #144
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

I like the old design too but at certain angles it looked huge and fat. I'm happy with the redesign. It's sort of like our version of the Washington Monument along the Hudson River.

Maybe... if they put a monument in the atrium of the hotel portion of Henry Hudson they can renamed it the Hudson Monument Tower??


@nycgovparksorg (flickr)
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2014, 04:41 AM   #145
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

I thought the whole thing moving it away from the setback approach was that the bottom layers made the building too bulky... I don't care about traditional Manhattan streetscape in the case of this tower, because with the hotel added on it just looks more unwieldy. Clean icon, clean look.. why couldn't they incorporate the hotel within the structure. Now it looks like it has a tumor growing on its side! Related got it right with the transforming rectangular to cylindrical update, and now in the name of crass commercial considerations are going to really take away from such a nice tower.

Even when they added a small base it was done organically, not taking away from the sheer visual awesomeness of the tower. Now I still love the Equinox but it really would be a treasure standing alone... I thought and still think the hotel part of the tower should be within the actual building. It's going to take a whole lot for me to get into this new tweak and for the time being at least it's to me decidedly not for the better.
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2014, 10:18 PM   #146
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
I think it will make more sense in the context of the completed Phase II. I imagine it will relate directly to some facet of the West Office Tower (which we know has a rectangular plan) the way that many great skyscrapers use setbacks as a way to reference their neighbors.

From the plaza side, you will be seeing the cylinder dead on, and it's set back, creating an airiness that's appropriate to the plaza. But from the 11th Ave and 33rd St. sides, the hard angles of the addition should match the West Tower and 55 HY on the opposite sides of the street. That'll give it more of a sense of a traditional Manhattan street wall canyon. I think it's smart, and also fits with Related's "changing from every angle" philosophy.

yea I agree! If it's done right I think it will be fine. As Marshal pointed out standing within the entrance from the high line or even in the public square itself, you will not see the hotel and that is where the max effect will be as far as viewing it. Viewing 35 Hudson from the West you will not even see the hotel portion either because it will be blocked eventually by the Phase 2 towers. Viewing directly on11th avenue is where the hotel portion will be viewed in its full glory and yes it will give that sense of that traditional street wall canyon which is not a bad thing imo.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2014, 12:45 AM   #147
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

agreed. god knows we had seen a slew of different looks for this tower and I don't expect anything different up until vertical movement. lol. I'm just going by the latest model display of the project.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2014, 06:24 AM   #148
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

I'm trying to get on board with it but I did like the cleaner look better. Like has been said though it will not be until it finally goes up that we will know exactly what we'll get there. I'm sure seeing it rise and soaring in the skyline that alone will get me really jazzed again. It's just that I see a design I like, it frustrates me when there are significant changes made but that happens a lot in building, so I'll try and just roll with it!
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2014, 05:32 PM   #149
j-biz
rasorio caelum civitatem
 
j-biz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,309
Likes (Received): 2793

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordArthurWellesley View Post
The latest model on display in Las Vegas:

Cross-post from the 55HY thread. I am devastated.
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
j-biz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2014, 05:47 PM   #150
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

Quote:
Originally Posted by j-biz View Post
Cross-post from the 55HY thread. I am devastated.
I was fine with the base, it was unobtrusive... a few posters whose perspectives I generally really find valuable are okay with the hotel addition but it just looks like TOO much is going on. It takes away from the beauty of the Equinox tower itself.... surely there is a more organic way to integrate the hotel into either the Equinox or the first phase Hudson Yards development? Please?????????
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2014, 06:15 PM   #151
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

It's not that bad. I kinda like it but understand what you guys are saying. I would not be opposed if they could somehow integrate with either 55 or 35 Hudson w/o making the hotel addition.

With that said, the Hotel looks to be pretty even with the OHM building which is aprox 375feet tall.

I can now say unofficially the height for 35 Hudson will be ~ 1080'.
__________________

citybooster liked this post
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2014, 06:50 PM   #152
Ghostface79
Registered User
 
Ghostface79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,536
Likes (Received): 4604

I would be really disappointed if this is what the tower ends up looking like. It looks completely disjointed, kinda reminds me of that horror on 57th street to a lesser degree. What bothers me is that they had the perfect design right before that, if they're bent on integrating the hotel, just make it taller in that cylindrical shape, it's already barely shorter than 30HY so what's the difference if it's as tall or slightly taller? Or if they want a larger base, just go back to the first design, it wasn't as good as the previous one but at least it was coherent, this one is absolutely not.
I understand the street grid argument but this is NYC, some diversity is always welcome, especially when it's a great design, which the previous one was.
But I'm not gonna be alarmed by it (yet) cause I doubt this is the final design change we'll see.
__________________

citybooster liked this post
Ghostface79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2014, 10:34 PM   #153
UTEPman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 50
Likes (Received): 32

I like that new design. It's unique
UTEPman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2014, 11:31 PM   #154
aquablue
BANNED
 
aquablue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,750
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordArthurWellesley View Post
This is still a work in progress, as are 50 and 55 HY.
How do you know?
aquablue no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2014, 11:10 PM   #155
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

I looked at the master plan featured in a link in a post for 55 Hudson and I am so frustrated ... at first we have this gorgeous rectangle to cylindrical winding tower with no bottom base... then we get a pretty unobstrusive several story base that blends in well. A bit less great but great nonetheless.

Now we see from that tacky Las Vegas exhibition they want to add that tumor.. er, hotel externally rather than do the smart thing and incorporate it with the condos.. hotel on lower floors, condos above 20 stories or so. I don't care what some say about better or forming a typical Manhattan streetscape, this is a totally different in that what you have is a gorgeous architectural gem and it would just take so much away from the structure. I really hope that Related thinks twice... remember that picfrom the confrerence of two Related guys overlooking the model of the first phase of Hudson Yards? My expression wouldn't have been a smile but a shocked "wtf" hand over mouth seeing just how awful the new extension looks and changes the character of the tower completely.

The earliest incarnations of the tower had a cascading setback quality that while very nice in many ways also made it look too bulky and bottom heavy. The reworked model after that, which is seen on that Hudson Yards link overview, was tremendous in making the tower sleeker and gorgeous. Even adding a five or six story base that pretty much blended in with the tower's aesthetics didn't hurt the essential awesomeness of the Equinox. But looking at everything and seeing the current plans not shown on that link from the Las Vegas exhibition to develop the hotel as a side add on pretty much destroys the reasoning for the reshaping the original setback model to the sleeker, clearly best one.

As been advised it's still an ongoing process and the final structure may not be decided but clearly, this hotel extension does the Equinox no favors. Tell me honestly, guys... you think it's the best render?
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 5th, 2014, 11:49 PM   #156
MarshallKnight
Registered User
 
MarshallKnight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: From the Bay to L.A.
Posts: 2,340
Likes (Received): 3585

I understand where you're coming from. It's less "pure" this way I suppose, but in my mind also less of a sculptural abstraction. I guess I was in the minority, but I really disliked the most stripped-down square-to-cylinder version. That felt like a pillar to me. This -- with the multiple setbacks, a clearly defined base that adheres to the rule of thirds, with the slim tower portion rising out of it -- feels like a skyscraper in the classical sense. The shapes and textures are modern, but the basic breakdown of the form would be at home in the 1920s-30s golden age of NYC skyscrapers.

Ultimately, it's just a matter of what you're looking for. I prefer this because it's more formally traditional, less abstract -- but it's totally valid to prefer the opposite.
MarshallKnight no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2014, 12:13 AM   #157
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarshallKnight View Post
I understand where you're coming from. It's less "pure" this way I suppose, but in my mind also less of a sculptural abstraction. I guess I was in the minority, but I really disliked the most stripped-down square-to-cylinder version. That felt like a pillar to me. This -- with the multiple setbacks, a clearly defined base that adheres to the rule of thirds, with the slim tower portion rising out of it -- feels like a skyscraper in the classical sense. The shapes and textures are modern, but the basic breakdown of the form would be at home in the 1920s-30s golden age of NYC skyscrapers.

Ultimately, it's just a matter of what you're looking for. I prefer this because it's more formally traditional, less abstract -- but it's totally valid to prefer the opposite.
I'm not going to criticize your preference either, most great skyscrapers transition and don't just go from top to bottom, but I really liked it in the Equinox's case. I also certainly had no problem when they did add a base, and saw that as the most reasonable compromise... it flowed with the aesthetics of the building, wasn't intrusive or anything. I just think this takes the organic flow of the tower and ruins it... I actually loved the setback, bottom heavy one and it took a bit but I really got into the rectangle-cylindrical one, even with the base. This just makes it look tacky, just takes attention away from the form of the building. But ultimately it's up to Related, and even this incarnation will have its fans. Just hard for me to get so into it when in my preference they had attained an iconic structure for the new New York City skyline. We'll just have to wait and see what they finally decide the Equinox will look like... but to me if they wanted to not have such a bottom heavy look like the original, at least it looked organic and purposeful. The hotel could be included in the tower itself... this just seems gimmicky and non organic. The original had a flow, this just .. doesn't.
__________________

MarshallKnight liked this post
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2014, 12:49 AM   #158
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

Anyone who thinks Related is some Great Patron of Architecture should see the banal crap they're building in Miami...
__________________
We are floating in space...

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
desertpunk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2014, 01:16 AM   #159
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

Quote:
Originally Posted by desertpunk View Post
Anyone who thinks Related is some Great Patron of Architecture should see the banal crap they're building in Miami...
Well, it's Miami. They seem to really want to build soething great for New York in HY. Until this unfortunate revision they were doing a good job of bringing a very commendable architectural vision... maybe they can make a version of this Equinox in Miami. Doesn't belong here.. though I don't have any illusions they are so above the clouds they can't and don't build more regrettable developments. This one is so high profile, so great in complexity and scale for the New York City area however.
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 6th, 2014, 06:06 PM   #160
rlw777
Registered User
 
rlw777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 300
Likes (Received): 469

I was under the impression that this was the latest version. From Curbed December I might add that it is the version shown on the HY website which I guess was updated pretty recently as it has the 55 HY design in the renders.

rlw777 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
35 hudson yards, equinox tower, hudson yards, new york, nyc

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu