NEW YORK | 418 11th Ave | FT | FLOORS

[NYguy]

https://www.archpaper.com/2021/10/co...-hudson-yards/

Could Adjaye Associates’ first supertall tower rise in Hudson Yards?





By Jonathan Hilburg
October 15, 2021

A team competing to fill Site K, a vacant full-block plot of land directly across from the Jacob K. Javits Center in Manhattan between West 35th and West 36th Streets, has unveiled a scheme for a tower that, if built, would be Adjaye Associates’ tallest to date.

The proposal was presented before the Empire State Development Corporation on Thursday, which issued the RFP and will ultimately select the winning project for the site.

If built as The Peebles Corporation team is proposing, then Hell’s Kitchen would be the new home to the tallest tower in Hudson Yards and the third tallest in all of New York City, narrowly edging out 111 West 57th Street. Adjaye Associates has designed a 1,500-foot-tall skyscraper that cantilevers as it rises from a multistory base, flipping the typical massing of the stepped tower upside down.

Similar to the firm’s 66-story 130 William further down in the Financial District, Adjaye Associates has proposed integrating and playing with the traditional arch. Vertical stone bands would wrap the facade of the building in parallel, with arched tops (or upside-down arches for the bottom) capping each blocky segment of the tower.

The motif continues to the base, too—Patch got its hands on additional renderings and they show inverted arches stretching all the way down nearly to ground level. From the images released thus far, it appears a heavily flecked concrete is being pitched, which lends the facade a pixelated effect when viewed from afar.

If The Peebles Corporation gets its way, the Site K project would be the city’s first majority Black developed, designed, and constructed projects. As Patch points out, the McKissack Group, which has been tapped as the construction firm of choice, is “the oldest minority/women-owned design and construction” firm in the U.S.

The Empire State Development Corporation has not released an estimate for when it will disclose the winning proposal for the site. AN has reached out to Adjaye Associates for comment and will update this article accordingly.

[MAC123]

how tall was 130 william?

[NYguy]

If built at this height, the Hudson Yards area skyline north would balance out nicely with 700-900 ft towers.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by MAC123

how tall was 130 william?

800 ft.

https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...d.php?t=216289



https://www.archdaily.com/917320/adj...ork-city-photo

[Drcastro]

I just don’t understand the urge to design towers that actively make people uncomfortable.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Drcastro

I just don’t understand the urge to design towers that actively make people uncomfortable.

Tall towers in general make a lot of people uncomfortable. Even people who live in midtown Manhattan, which I don’t understand.

[MAC123]

Originally Posted by Drcastro

I just don’t understand the urge to design towers that actively make people uncomfortable.

Do you mean the cantilevers? That's their appeal. They're made to look like they'd fall over in a strong breeze when in reality they are perfectly structural sound.

Why do they design them like that? It depends. Sometimes it's for aesthetics, sometimes it's zoning, sometimes it's just clever engineering to get around the site's inherent limitations.

Besides I don't think it really matters all that much, there are lots of things in NYC that might be considered uncomfortable. In fact, some people from around where I"m from would consider it uncomfortable living in NYC (or any big city like it at all). Though I consider their reasons for this to be stupid at best and I heavily disagree them.

[MAC123]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Tall towers in general make a lot of people uncomfortable. Even people who live in midtown Manhattan, which I don’t understand.

Lol I think construction, in general, makes Nimby's uncomfortable.

[chris08876]

There's going to be a lot of towers rising in this area, so they better get use to the construction. We still have Phase II of HY yet to start.

[MAC123]

Originally Posted by chris08876

There's going to be a lot of towers rising in this area, so they better get use to the construction. We still have Phase II of HY yet to start.

Yep, then there's also East Midtown and a few scattered big ones.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by MAC123

Lol I think construction, in general, makes Nimby's uncomfortable.

And they won’t be happy that the Adjaye proposal doesn’t include affordable housing. The site is given a max 24 FAR, though no more than 12 can be residential. However, there is no requirement or preference for housing on this site, nor should there be.

[NYguy]

Google site view…

[NYguy]

The design as presented is an early version, presented for the RFP. If selected, I’m sure there would be more refinement.

I would like the crown to have a more distinctive touch, like the base.







The design also shows that you can have multiple terraces without setbacks.

[MAC123]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Google site view…

That grey box is being incorporated into the design yes?
Also it's interesting to look at the spiral and the rest of HY from the ground, see them and know how tall they are while at the same time know they'll be dwarfed by what's going to be built here.

[Zerton]

I love the details and material of the columns but I’m not really sold on the overall massing. Why cantilever over your own site? It’s unnecessary structure for no reason other than “cool” aesthetics. It blocks sunlight into the lower floors on the west facade. No opportunity for terraces. Just nonsensical imo.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by MAC123

That grey box is being incorporated into the design yes?

Yes, it's shown here on the left....

Originally Posted by Zerton

I love the details and material of the columns but I’m not really sold on the overall massing. Why cantilever over your own site? It’s unnecessary structure for no reason other than “cool” aesthetics.

Cantilevers happen, and have been happening for quite some time. This site in particular has reasons for the cantilever, as shown on the previous page. Of course, you can cantilever, and still place your larger floors at the lower levels. But what is the point of design, it you can't design to your vision? Why must your tower have to look like everything else to fit other people's comfort zones?

[Barney Greengrass]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Cantilevers happen, and have been happening for quite some time. This site in particular has reasons for the cantilever, as shown on the previous page. Of course, you can cantilever, and still place your larger floors at the lower levels. But what is the point of design, it you can't design to your vision? Why must your tower have to look like everything else to fit other people's comfort zones?

I agree with Zerton, cantilevers can be lovely when done right, perhaps it's just the renderings on this (they always tend to exaggerate) but this one has the childishness of "look Ma, no hands!" rather than form follows function. It appears unstable and if the official renderings are correct, mars the view of the area imho. That said, the details are gorgeous and it doesn't need a post-trendy, played-out "off kilter boxes" aesthetic to be stunning. There's a difference between clever and arrogant, I certainly wouldn't be upset
if it's built, more disappointed at the missed opportunity.

I don't know about anyone else, but the only time I want to see a building that appears unstable is at an amusement park or World's Expo.

[BK1985]

Originally Posted by Zerton

I love the details and material of the columns but I’m not really sold on the overall massing. Why cantilever over your own site? It’s unnecessary structure for no reason other than “cool” aesthetics. It blocks sunlight into the lower floors on the west facade. No opportunity for terraces. Just nonsensical imo.

Can you explain how this specific cantilever blocks sun into the west facade? I don’t understand how you’ve come up to that conclusion.

[Barney Greengrass]

Originally Posted by BK1985

Can you explain how this specific cantilever blocks sun into the west facade? I don’t understand how you’ve come up to that conclusion.

At mid-day when the sun is at a high angle the overhang will cast a shadow down the west facade, but only for a short period and likely a net benefit in the summer. I don't personally see that as a problem, but I am curious how they plan to keep snow and ice melt from becoming a nuisance. I imagine they'd use a heat trace system to insure no grisly icicle deaths from on high.

I actually have experience in that realm as I've spec'd heat trace systems for buildings at ski resorts, but of course none of the overhangs were quite this lofty.

[BK1985]

Originally Posted by Boerumer

At mid-day when the sun is at a high angle the overhang will cast a shadow down the west facade, but only for a short period and likely a net benefit in the summer. I don't personally see that as a problem, but I am curious how they plan to keep snow and ice melt from becoming a nuisance. I imagine they'd use a heat trace system to insure no grisly icicle deaths from on high.

I actually have experience in that realm as I've spec'd heat trace systems for buildings at ski resorts, but of course none of the overhangs were quite this lofty.

Midday the sun would come from the south/southwest depending on the time of the year which would probably cast a shadow on about 3 floors of each section that there’s an overhang since the highest angle that sun ever gets to be in NY is about 74 degrees ( I don’t know the dimensions of the building yet enough so this is just an estimate) either way it’s a pretty silly argument against the presence of a cantilever considering that there’s a building going up directly south of this proposal.