clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Yardsmania: From 'Grim Referendum' to 'Damning Indictment'

New, 16 comments

When the details of the five bids for the Hudson Yards were released back in November, Times architecture oracle Nicolai Ouroussoff slammed the process as "a grim referendum on the state of large-scale planning in New York City," before anointing Extell's Steven Holl-designed proposal as the only one worth a lick. Now that Tishman Speyer has been selected by the MTA as the winning developer, it's not surprising that Ouroussoff is singing the same tune, though the lyrics are slightly different. Today, he writes that the Hudson Yards are "a damning indictment of large-scale development in New York," while still singing the praises of Extell's bid. Ouroussoff's take is that the Hudson Yards will be a depressing office park cut off from the rest of the city via a wall of skyscrapers that some people will have the misfortune of living in, and it's an opinion that most people would probably agree with. Meanwhile, in a Times news analysis, Charles Bagli writes that the final architecture will probably look nothing like the current plans anyway, and perhaps not even Tishman Speyer can navigate the minefield that will accompany this ten- to twenty-year build-out. Folks, this is going to be a fun next couple of decades. Join us, won't you?
· Profit and Public Good Clash in Grand Plans [NYT]
· For Railyards, the Hard Part Is Still Ahead [NYT]
· Yardsmania: OK, So Now What? [Curbed]