On March 15, after 12 years of planning and six of construction, the Related Companies will open the gates to its new $25 billion enclave [...] Besides being big, Hudson Yards represents something fundamentally new to New York. It’s a one-shot, supersized virtual city-state, plugged into a global metropolis but crafted to the specifications of a single boss: Related’s chairman, Stephen Ross — NY Magazine
New York's new Hudson Yards is a preview of what major cities may look like in the next few years. Upon first glance, the new complex oozes a distinct look. Some might call it progressive luxury design, others may think otherwise. However, the 12 year project has several people looking to stake a claim at the chance to live in new development. The complex is said to be a one-stop shop of amenities and luxury living, however, does the new complex belong in New York's urban landscape of historic grit?
According to New York Magazine's Justin Davidson, his feelings towards to the new structure is a response many are probably thinking. "I can't help feeling like an alien here, as though I've crossed from real New York, with all its jangling mess, into a movie studio's back-lot version. Everything is too clean, too flat, too art-directed." It goes without saying that since the project's announcement many have waited in anticipation of the new neighborhood. The new complex is advertised for a specific clientele, one who does not mind the hefty price tag of $2.9 million for a two-bedroom unit within in 15 Hudson Yards' premier residential building. Besides the lush residential accommodations, office space, restaurants, and a hotel Hudson Yards is making a statement.
Advertising for the new neighborhood flashes a theme of "blank-slate affluence" for 21st-century living. Several large architecture firms have contributed to Hudson Yards' overall design and construction. From Thomas Heatherwick and his famed "staircase", Diller Scofidio + Renfroand the Rockwell Group's gigantic residential building, to the lavish interiors designed by Elkus Manfredi the area was said to be a progressive and new addition to New York. However, based on the overall design of the buildings and shops said to be housed within the complex Hudson Yards is a playground fit for the affluent. According to Davidson, "instead of an organic extension of the midtown fabric, they produced a corporate city-state, branded from sidewalk to spire."
Regardless of where people may stand on the new neighborhood, the development is said to create more jobs and a "new, stress-free way of living," for those who can afford it that is. The concept of "urban living" for these developers is far from the common characteristics of New York City living. They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and for Hudson Yards, if that eye is attached to a billionaire, the new neighborhood is the place for you. What exactly is the brand Hudson Yards trying to sell? Is this the idyllic neighborhood luxury real estate developers have been dreaming of? Alternatively, is this merely another property development aiming to "brand perfectionism"?
I've walked through the area many times and I have a friend who lives nearby who got his apt through an affordable housing lottery. I think the buildings in this area offer obvious comforts, and the main one is space. There is space for recreation, rooftop common areas to hang out with friends, large lobbies to gather your things and wait for someone. There is staff to help with all sorts of random tasks. I do agree that it feels cold, tacky, and extravagant. I think the main problem isn't aesthetic, it's social and political.
All 8 Comments
Create more jobs: nannies, maids, janitors, doormen, window washers, .... all at severely discounted wages. U$A!
You mean Jobs that people want and need to support their families with? Nah, let’s just put everyone on welfare. That’s a much better way to live. We can pay for it with millionaire and billionaire taxes! But let’s also drive them all away...demonize them...and label the very thing we depend upon for financial support as immoral. Kinda making everyone an accomplice like being on a drug dealers payroll...But FREE STUFF FREE STUFF!!!!!Then when they are gone, and the bloated welfare state no longer has a funding
mechanism we can eat our pets save money on dog food. Socialism rocks!
Have your meds not kicked in yet ;-)
Bernie 2020
He should let 2 homeless families live in 2 of the 3 homes he owns...
Ah yes, because people that argue for more socialist politics are supposed to be and stay poor.
random - how much do you pay for health insurance?
Around $250 per month in total for two adults.
Multiply by 4+ for shit coverage with $7k deductible (each).
Better stay healthy then!
$250 sounds only partial, like you have an employer picking up the rest.
Miles, whats your point regarding insurance?
Thisisnotmyname, there's indeed like a 5/6% tax from the bruto earnings for employers to pay, so it's progressive, the more you earn as an employee, the more is being paid in taxes by the employer. Therefore making it affordable for all to pay their premiums, and people with lower income or on welfare benefits get different kinds of subsidies to help cover their costs for health insurance, rent or daycare. We also have state pensions for everyone over 67 years of age and a basic social assistance of 70% of minimum wage for anyone not able to provide for their own income. Bloody socialism ;-)
My point was specifically for the capitalist living comfortably in socialism.
And comfortable it is, really wish the US would be able to join us.
Where do you live randomised?
Here: https://youtu.be/-csGDoSSZyc & https://youtu.be/dBE2yiLEpho
This project is god awful, whatever your politics.
If it were public housing for low income and middle class people, it wouldn't be god awful.
Don't know if you've seen in up close, but it's cold and uninviting. Some people will like it like some people like the burbs, but the average person will prefer the older streets of midtown, my guess.
I've walked through the area many times and I have a friend who lives nearby who got his apt through an affordable housing lottery. I think the buildings in this area offer obvious comforts, and the main one is space. There is space for recreation, rooftop common areas to hang out with friends, large lobbies to gather your things and wait for someone. There is staff to help with all sorts of random tasks. I do agree that it feels cold, tacky, and extravagant. I think the main problem isn't aesthetic, it's social and political.
It’s not aesthetic of political....it’s technological. Our spatial organization is no longer tethered to specific geographies and urban forms for utilitarian and economically dominant functions. 21st century Cities are amenity driven, not utility driven. This is a major shift that is a result of technology and globalization.
Many in this profession see cities as the highest ideal in human settlement patterns rather than a temporary trend in our evolution. Imo, we are in the early stages of out growing cities (as we know them.)
With our environmental woes, social isolation, and constant gridlock, I don't think cities have seen their last days, I think their Renaissance has just begun.
Cities are the cause of our environmental detachment which is the mindset that allowed for our environmental problems to manifest for so long. Out of sight out of mind.
I don't think living in the middle of the Amazon is the best way to understand that our way of life is destroying it. Germs are out of sight, but I still believe they're there.
The mental and cultural separation between the seed and the plate is the root of the problem.
Thayer, Amazon tribes certainly live a life that is more directly connected to the ecosystem. Their culture and mode of survival depends upon its health. Factory farming is only able to go on for so long because it is so separate from where we live. If you’ve ever driven past one, you would know that the conditions are not the same as in a small agrarian town in the European countryside...or a tribal society that engages in subsistence farming.
Urban renewal for the wealthy. Most major cities have these bizarre moments of developer-driven fantasies - Portland Pearl District, Wynwood, even Soho are just a few variations on this theme. This is just the latest. I would argue that the major difference between this one and the others is that this has absolutely no pretense to authenticity which may actually make it the most authentic of the bunch.
This is a good point. NYC has started to become more like the luxurious neighborhoods of Tokyo. There's no faux bohemia pretense, no attempt at concealing the extreme wealth.
I always love when news articles ask tough questions IS THIS ETHICAL?! IS THIS THE NEW NORMAL?! IS THIS OK?! while weaving in choice elements of the ad copy of the topic in question "LUXURY DESIGN" "THE OBSERVATORY" "HIS FAMED STAIRCASE" "
I was reading an article about how e-scooters are sending people to the hospital and they felt the fucking need to insert the goddamn users manual on how to rent the fucking things.Pick a side, is it a goddamn advertisement or news?
So you want your news to dictate matters of morality? Lol. This is the problem. Our society has outsourced the role of family, community, and religion to the media and their political overlords. Systematically these social institutions have been degraded and undermined...Makes you think...maybe this is intentional....And that’s how you get secular state worshiping...
You've missed my point entirely and replied with an ad hominem non sequitur. Good job, little buddy.
I misread it? Your version of “tough questions” sound more like moral declarations when injected into news. Almost 100% if the time media is engaging more in confirmation bias than information gathering. My point is, why the fuck is my news paper preaching to me?
Yeah. Cool. Make your own comment instead of derailing mine with your bloviating.
there’s was a great Holl plan on the table that Ada Louise Huxtable praised as being the only one with vision — it had more housing, better park space, was less expensive (suspended deck) better architecture. Instead they went with the crony bureaucrats plan, endorsed by Bloomberg and his minions. Twice the price, half the quality. Lots of glass office space for Google, less flexibility.
Davidson wrote a column that was meh about the whole situation, so it’s convenient that he is mocking it now. Just like Kimmelman reversing on the PATH Hub, NYC critics are as shameless and political as they are design-ignorant. Do the Faux-populism! It’s hip!
Corruption is the biggest problem, and it’s reflected in how design comes last and not first in pop culture.
The other problem with this critique is it implies that these "luxury" towers are somehow the pinnacle of design. What could have been with the Holl proposal is a much more urban and less expensive development. There is an assumption here that this was the only way
NYT today reports the Hudson yards received $6b in tax credits including public cash to cover shortfalls, with more to come.
Bezos must be fuming.
But you are still in the city. When they have a pine tree forest on top with birds and all, then maybe.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.