Ratnerville Update: Frank Gehry's Latest Revealed

1.

They sure have my support, finally something interesting coming to Brooklyn.

2.

Fantastic! This will become an instant landmark. Atlantic Yards might even become this century's version of Rockefeller Center. If Olin Partnership does a good job with the landscape, this could really become something special.

3.

holy crap! there's nothing close to it in North America.

4.

I think the foreshortening, showing only half the site, and the fake green roof on top of Target are pretty convincing, don't you?

No one will ever suspect that I'm an evil genius determined to flood Brooklyn's failing sewers in the raw waste of 15,000 new residents and 30,000 drunken fans!!! BwaHaHa!

5.

wow that looks amazing! that part of brooklyn does need something right now the emptyness looks ugly.

6.

Why is everyone so upset about this? Looks good to me. Looking at the press release it says there will be affordable and market rate housing. That made me laugh - so its a given that market rate isn't affordable!

7.

C'mon people!

Don't let the shiny, sparkley plexiglass model and fancy-starchitect-parading fool you. It is a hulking, thoughless, badly proportioned developer monster in Gehry drag.

It might be 'interesting' and different from the usual bad buildings we've grown accustomed to, but this is not right. This is mediocre architecture at best.

8.

Looks like a mishmash of half-developed ideas. But you're right, #7, the sparkly aspect of it will fool lots of people blinded by the name Gehry.

9.

wow - not too bad. as long as they don't slap on the ugly zebra-glass going up on gehry's IAC building in chelsea, this could be really cool. it's a vast improvement over the first set of designs that gehry developed.

while i think ratner should be pilloried for the messes that are atlantic terminal and atlantic center, i'm cautiously optimistic he may (finally) get it right with atlantic yards.

i don't have an ounce of support for Develop Don't Destroy and others who are anti-tower and anti-height. the rail yards, the pc richards and modells are blights on the neighborhood and density and towers are EXACTLY what the area needs.

i do, however, think that parking should be scaled back to the absolute minimum.

10.

Oh yes yes, whats current on site is perfectly worth saving. Much better then this? Give me a break!

11.

Like moths to a flame.

12.

I rent nearby and I think it looks great. It will be a welcome addition to that area. I'm not generally enamored with mega-projects, but if there has ever been the right place for one, its here--a vacant, blighted area directly above the biggest mass-transit hub in Brooklyn.

I probably won't be able to afford to live there, but I do believe in the law of supply and demand....and we need supply!

13.

what the hell is this crap?

it looks like something i saw under construction in Mumbai three years ago.

14.

This is a joke, right? That thing looks like it's already decaying and in danger of collapse. What is that mass of scaffolding at the point of the triangle?

15.

gehry-smerhry! looks like a multi-million dollar shanty town to me. sorry 1 hansom pl, meet your ugly kid sister.

16.

Looks great, and not out of context at all. Let the few unemployed punks bitch and moan all they want. This speaks for itself.

17.

there will never be another bilbao, as soon as people can get over that we'll all be better off. if they have this much money to spend, there are plenty of other architecture firms that are more concerned with design then merely creating a physical signature.

18.

gerhry-smerhy: looks like a multi-million dollar shanty town to me. 1 hansom pl, meet your ugly kid siter

19.

Jesus, what the hell does everyone have against this thing for anyway? I'm no huge Gehry fan, but at least they're going after this with serious gusto. With this many people hoping for a screw-up, there is more than enough people on the clock making sure that you're probably not going to get one. And spare me the out-of-context argument. Would you rather have unthought, "mini developments" like the Target complex or PC Richards (mmmm....dryvit) pop up here and there instead of one cohesive plan? This area soooo needs a facelift, and not some half assed municipal theme-park attempt New York's so good at screwing up. That's why Bloomy's for this, private investment gets it done.

20.

Very BKLYN!

21.

Is that a catapult at the base?! Look out Dan!

It looks like Gehry is applying the same style he applied at MIT. In person it's terrible.

http://images.google.com/images?q=Gehry%20MIT&oe=UTF-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

This is just heaping bad on bad. There are enough reasons to oppose this project without Gehry. He's just making the situation worse. Gehry should not be allowed to touch buildings people use.

22.

You people are nuts. It looks like the innards of an air conditioning unit. Unless he's riffing on the prototypical Fedders Building, I say frak Frank Gehry.

23.

well put, #16

This is just the architectural equivalent of a logo handbag.

With this kind of budget and acceptance of innovative design, there is a real opportunity to see some sensational architecture in a part of Brooklyn that needs it.

This Gehry circus is incredibly unsophisticated and only reinforces that Ratner is just trying to distract us with some shiny, shiny in order to get what he wants.

24.

You people are nuts. It looks like the innards of an air conditioning unit. Unless he's riffing on the prototypical Fedders Building, I say frak Frank Gehry.

25.

Will - Heaping bad on bad? You are crying wolf. Keep your rhetoric in reality please.

26.

I prefer this. but then I like disorder over order. trash over keepsakes. shanty towns over landmarks. enjoy brooklyn.

27.

@22 Crying wolf?

28.

looks cool now, but the real thing will certainly be less dramatic, eh?

29.

Wow! Frank Gehry takes a giant dump on Prospect Heights.

30.

This building looks like it hurts. Crumpled, pained, hunched, and damaged are words that come to mind. I have actually liked some of Gehry's buildings, but this is hideous, and it's also too big.

31.

ugly building.

32.

21, did you just use a Battlestar Gallactica term?

33.

a couple of preliminary observations:
http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2006/05/view-from-park-slope-huge-and-wheres.html

http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2006/05/street-walls-would-be-modest-on-dean.html

34.

"We're trying to understand what is Brooklyn, what is the body language of Brooklyn, and trying to emulate it"

That would be the raised middle finger, judging from that first rendering.

35.

It looks like an ass vomited.

36.

28, yes I did.

37.

By all means, let's discuss asthetics so as to avoid getting a whiff of the corruption behind this Ratner land grab.

38.

I'm not against putting up a tower there, and I'm not against the Nets stadium. (I think it will increase our property values.) But that thing right there is ugly as Hillary Clinton w/o makeup. Hell, it's uglier than the proposed Freedom Tower (and that thing is ugly.)

I hate that any piece of sh!t architecture gets called "innovative" just because it looks weird. Eff Frank Gehry.

39.

I know next to nothing about architecture per se but I work in several other creative design fields and it seems to me that one of the earmarks of great, innovative design is the degree to which it is influential; how and to what extent it informs and alters work that follows in its wake. Otherwise, it's a fad. Which is Gehry?

40.

This looks wonderful! Bring it on!

41.

I've always thought that Gehry's design process (in his more recent buildings) consisted of Gehry crumpling up a sheet of paper in random fashion, picking up the crumpled ball and handing it to one of his associates who then transforms it into construction documents.

His designs, save for the one or two landmarks, are completely of the moment and will, IMO, not be considered timeless works of architecture. Rather, they will appear as dated as avocado/brown tinted kitchen appliances seem to us now.

I'm all for innovative and progressive development at the Atlantic Yards - I just don't personally like this lemming-like adoration of a hack architect.

42.

Gehry is definitely a FAD.

This building is going to be perceived as worse than those glass residential towers (Astor Place) that NY is growing to loathe.

I don't think this means that Brooklyn needs retro new urbanism - but some good design that inspires (and even influences!) deserves to be here.

43.

Gee, #19, i guess you liked MIT Building 20 better?

No seriously, "in person" you don't like Gehry's MIT Stata Center, but if you understood the context there you might like it better.
Linking the Alumni Pool to Vassar St. is itself a good thing.
It's a very large building but there are also a lot of really cool 'wasted' (that is, non-programmed) spaces inside.
Personally i love it, and compared to the new Broad Institute building across the street it's got a lot more personality.
- ex-MIT researcher moved to the BK

44.

wait, where's the arena?

45.

The good thing about Gehry's buildings is the interior spaces (see Bilbao, Disney Music Hall). So if you need a curving, bulbous facade to accomplish this, fine. But why create curvy apartment buildings? The interior is still a series stacked floor plates. Must we be made to feel like we are living in a cartoon?

46.

So after this is built, what project will you (few) idiots bitch about next? Maybe you can stop the Calatrava transit center from being developed. Or perhaps you can endlessly complain about the Silvercup Studios project. It must be exciting to have so much progress to fight against!

47.

i posted comment #9 above as well. i think this isn't so bad, but i definitely agree that there are 10,000 architects (and starchitects) out there who should be given a shot at this site. give frank one of the buildings, but mix up the rest.

one thing i don't understand AT ALL is how the design above related to the propaganda piece i received in my mailbox last week. that piece showed a hugely deceptive green space at the corner of flatbush and atlantic, not a tower.

don't get me wrong, i like the tower, im just trying to square the two images.

i'm also trying to get a handle on how the non-flatbush buildings have changed... they appear to be much less gehry'd and more conventional. that worries me greatly, especially since i don't trust ratner as far as i could throw him.

48.

why design a building that looks like its collapsing?

sick and sad.

new york is turning into a zoo of architectural freakdom.

49.

So the body language of Brooklyn is that we're wiggly and melting?

That design is still huge and fugly.

50.

It doesn't matter anyway. This is just the hotshot architectual rendering for the press, the one that will be reproduced again and again. When the developers start seeing what it will cost, they'll trim and turn curves into edges and what you'll get at the end will be some half-assed version of this, much more angular with less variation and in cheaper materials.

That's either good or bad news for you, depending on your viewpoints.

51.

that is SO UGLY. holy crap.

52.

While Bilbao is an amazing building, Gehry's more recent works are mere variations on the theme(park). (Yes, I stole that pun from Michael Sorkin, et. al.)

Gehry makes great sculptural buildings. And these sculptures make great statements. But sculptures and statements do not make great cities.

I do like aspects of the the Stata Center at MIT (particularly some of the interior spaces) but think it does a horrible job relating to the street, one of the most important aspects in urban design. The exterior spaces often suffer at the hands of the interiors.

And what troubles me is that Gehry is not particularly talented at urban design yet he is being handed 22 acres to play with.

53.

It'll end up looking like Astor Place!

54.

For the record, a "rendering" is a 2d illustrated depiction of a building. A model is a model. At least get the terminology right if you're going to trash what you're seeing.

55.

Render this, Poindexter.

56.

Ha! Good one.

57.

That model is hideous. Gehry does not equal good.

58.

Looks like a vertical shantytown.

59.

I wonder if, like the Sculpture for Living mentioned by #33, the completed structure will sport a banner touting the only positive comment in a New Yorker review that totally pans it?

Not that I feel it should be any taller, but the tower terminates so abruptly that it looks like it's already had a good twenty stories lopped off...perhaps a stab at solidarity with its considerably less tricked-out neighbors?

60.

it looks like a transformer stuck half-way between a garbage truck and a helicopter.

61.

shit someone put that thing too close to the radiator and it got all melted.

62.

Anyone ever seen Gehry's museum on U Minnesota campus? It didn't age well. In fact it looks like a big turd now. So will this in 20 years. God I think Gehry is the single biggest sham going in urban development.

63.

52: let's see your idea for what should go there. Don't hide behind Calatrava.

64.

"No seriously, 'in person' you don't like Gehry's MIT Stata Center, but if you understood the context there you might like it better."

Wha? Huff thinner much? This is the kind of horseshit that has ruined architecture, and given us broken-looking buildings that people who don't have to live/work in will tell us are "art."

I'm not against the downtown Brooklyn plan, but jeez, this is awful-looking.

65.

Let's face it, no matter what he conjured up, people would disagree with it. Everyone has different tastes. That's what makes the world go round. As such is the case on sites like this and Brownstoner, there is a such thing as good new construction and not everything has to be a preserved brownstone with original detailing. There are other styles out there. Some like modern. Some quirky. Everyone just needs to relax. It would be a pretty boring world if all the streets were just row after row of brownstones, as pretty as some of them can be, why can't we get past the fact that there is a way to integrate the new with the old?

66.

i've taken dumps that look better than that.

67.

Is it just me, or does it look like they have significantly changed the traffic pattern going up Flatbush and down Atlantic? Flatbush looks to be pretty narrow at that intersection and it curves in an odd manner.

68.

at otr

I've not been IN the Strata Center, perhaps it's nice inside, I hear Gehry does nice interiors, but he clearly lacks any skill at exterior street level design. The center at MIT looks like a housing project out of the twilight zone and comparing it to other crappy architecture does not make it good. It's uncomfortable to walk down it's street even in daylight. If he makes this anything like what is at MIT, he will absolutely kill street life.

I think putting the emphasis on exteriors here is very important since one of the major points of debate is the relationship this proposal has to the existing neighborhood, and the exteriors are what most will have to live with.

I think it was a PR disaster for Ratner to have selected Gehry, this is just a domain in which Frank flails, IMHO. You want to throw a wrench in the opposition to this project get Rem Koolhaas in here! He is an amazing designer. He makes Gehry look like a one trick pony.

69.

First, for the people that say the area needs good architecture, I LAUGH at you. Brooklyn is full of amazing architecture with history behind it, over a century old! Brownstones, sandstones, museums, etc. We don't need giant glass and steel buildings in the neighborhood to save our dreary architectural lives. The only thing that stands out in that area as bad architecture is Ratner's Atlantic Center... and yes PC Richards.

70.

ok, the one thing i think it has going for it is that although it is a huge development, the piecey-ness of the structure breaks it down visually, and creates a texture.

that is, it is in sharp contrast to the monolithic monstrosities of, i.e., upper west side: cpw/97-ish. ok, so yes, this is the gaudi-gucci-print-cladded version of good scale, but i think all in all its massing is to be commended.

but the facade, having very little resemblance to the area around it, is troubling. its going to stick out like a sore thumb. it has no regard for the area's history which is what defines brooklyn.

so eh, could be better. could be worse.

71.

gehry's work is entirely a-contextual. if this was 5 blocks away, 5 boroughs away, or 5 states away it would look the same. this project can be developed, and it can be bold and modern, but it doesn't need to be metallic coleslaw to do so just to get a wow factor. if you want gehry, go buy a bracelet at tiffiny's

72.

This is going to be next year's architectural version of Uggs. Okay maybe a couple years, but not much longer. It's amazingly not-timeless.

73.

GUTTER...GUTTER...GUTTER!!!

74.

i'm an architect, and i like some of gehry's work, though not all, and find the majority of it to be pretty banal anymore. this isn't really doing it for me - it's way too restrained. if it were even less contextual it might be an improvement, in my opinion. i mean, if you want a gehry, you may as well go balls-out. personally, i'd rather have the underberg back.

75.

welcome to toontown, maybe i can visit daffy duck on floor 26.

its too bad starchitects arent more concerned with important things like street interaction or beauty instead of flashy exterior form, i thought modernist architects were strict followers of the 'form follows function' doctrine, though apparently not lately: theyve just followed in the footsteps of Michael Graves.

so was gehry on acid or shrooms when he designed this deformed, ugly and impractical design?

76.

Although this architectual rendering looks as if it's a building about to collaspe - there is somthing strangely attractive about it.
Unfortunately - do not see any real plan to address the traffic congestion?
Brooklyn needs an infrastructure that can keep up with it's growth!

77.

The NIMBYS of Develop Don't Destroy must be so pissed. I hope they get stuck with this piece. Should have left well enough alone.

78.

I'm not anti-development, I'm not anti-high rise, I'm in favor of increased housing density at public transit hubs -- BUT the Ratner plan to build 16 high rise buildings is completely out of scale with the surrounding communities. Ratner has already gotten away with building the ugliest and most useless shopping mall I've ever been in. Now he's going to be entrusted with a 22 acre site???

79.

I'm all for it. A genius archtect AND our own team? Get with progress guys and while you're at it, read "The Fountainhead"

80.

#54 Bklynjace: i adored working in and otherwise using (ahem... R&D pub) the Stata Center, thank you very much.
Taking a new route through it is a nice distraction on a rainy day, especially when high on solvent fumes.

To Will: Vassar St. never had any life.
It's a thoroughfare that connects Mass. Ave to the Longfellow Bridge and East Cambridge.
The 'street life' is around back (as is usually the case at MIT). The passage between Bldg 56 and the Stata Center is beautiful, busy, and makes perfect sense both on its own and in how it connects with the other campus outdoor spaces.
Now, i love onNYturf... but you put up the *worst* view of that building i have seen. Not really fair... from that perspective, i don't like it either.

Oh and i'm not defending the Atlantic Yards design or Gehry, only the Stata Center.

81.

it is a ugly pathetic piece garbage.

the only thing it has going for it is "shock value"
and that is wearing off fast when every architect on the block (e.g., art for living at "Astor Place") is trying to shock the crap out of everyone.

disposable architecture.

the few people who are carrying on about how wonderful it is, must be one guy trying to provoke a reaction.

82.

*WTF*... This design is the perfect punchline after that insulting and insane starchitect babble about "emulating the body language of Brooklyn."

83.

I am not against development on this site. The area is a blight and needs to be upgraded. But not this. The building is still too big,and looks like something a drunk built with an erector set. In short, it's fugly. The entire project is out of scale with the neighborhood, and needs to be scaled back yet again. Let's build, but do it better than this.

84.

Most importantly, where is the open-air ice skating rink around the roof of the stadium? It was glorious.

Thumbs down.

85.

fuuuuuuuck that. This load of junk needs to be blown up. Someone hurry and steal the model so we can use it as a voodoooo doll for the real building.

"oooops there goes that piece of ornamental shit"

86.

How long is it going to take before we as a society can admit that Frank Gehry designs ugly buildings? Take for example this building here: Ugly... dogshit taco ugly.

87.

#67:

I noticed the same thing, Flatbush Ave looks to be cut off, or directed, or something. It looks like a plaza is jutting out into the intersection. Chalk it up to an LA-based architect working on a NYC site.

I like the building though... everyone who says "it looks like it's collapsing" etc etc must have a pretty rigid idea of what architecture should be.

88.

Not just ugly, but horribly deformed and fugly.

Half the opposition would go away if they got an architect with some sense.

89.

BUY NOW! That way you'll never have to look at this monstrosity from your livingroom window.

If they want a "brand name" why don't they just take on building Frank Lloyd Wright's never-built mile high skyscraper (other than the fact that his envisioned nuclear powered elevators and flying cars haven't been invented yet)

90.

As the development works it's way up Atlantic towards Dean the buildings become more townhouse and brownstone looking; the heights of the buildigns drop and align like Brooklyn brownstones due. it's only the arena and towers arounnd it that are "Gehryesque" for lack of a better word. You're only viewing the models at the entrance to the arena- Flatbush and Atlantic. You're not viewing the entire development. It's actually very cool.

91.

It's a trash heap. What does that say about Brooklyn (and Marty Markowitz, when can we vote him out?)

92.

wow...this will look just perfect on the corner of Flatbush and Atlantic....oh wait, it won't.

will the sun ever be seen again on Carlton Ave.?

93.

I think "trash heap" pretty much sums it up.

94.

I'd say 99% of comments in favor of this pile of crap are from Ratnerettes.

95.

I have to wonder how many of those rabidly in favor actually live in the surrounding neighborhoods? I'll bet that the bulk live in entirely different boroughs/cities/states.

96.

Am I 100! Gutter needs to award me a prize!

97.

Dammit!

98.

but...its so shiny

99.

looks like crushed up beer cans dressed as a "designer development". But what do I know? I love East German minimalism.

100.

I did it! I did it! I am the 100th!

I think the shiny crumpled box will look sweet.

But that massing... I think even Michael Graves could do better.

101.

it seems to me that it's one of the few open spaces in the city that can accomodate something this chunky and monumental, perhaps because of the way the streets intersect and allow you an open view of the whole building. That's definitely a plus, so I say: bring it on!

102.

It looks like two ugly, gigantic robots somehow managed to get drunk and have sex, then the female ugly gigantic robot got pregnant and had a ugly, gigantic robotic abortion in the middle of Brooklyn, and this is the ugly, gigantic unwanted discarded robot fetus.

103.

Look at the Ratner PR folk at work, clogging up the comment thread.

104.

rat-lings butt kissing and brown nosing and fawning over this ugly monstrosity of a piece of garbage.

105.

Looks like the bomb hit it already. How can they consider a buildng with so much glass given the threat of terrorism

106.

Re 84 - you said the worst view of the building - but coming up Flatbush from the bridge or coming out of the subways/LIRR - that is the first view people will see - that intersection is like the Times Square of the area. Also these are the pictures Ratner provided. It is unspeakably hideous and damages the feeling of the neighborhood completely. It will be the laughingstock of Brooklyn.

This might be something that will rally people against the project.

107.

bitch my mouth and call me your sister!!!!!!!!!!!!111

108.

Where are the f*&%ing cars supposed to go? Who is supposed to inhabit this beast, where will they lunch and shop? Wait 'til the inhabitants get a load of Ratner's "malls" nearby, with their non-existent customer service and exploitative floor plan, which renders the consumer subservient to the needs of the retailers.

On top of that, this will kill Brownstone Brooklyn. Where is the "game night" overflow supposed to go? In Seattle they built a stadium right in the middle of a residential area. The result is a complete cultural disconnect, and a hulking monolith that sits empty 70% of the year.

What about the issues surrounding the shadow this thing will cast and the propensity of Gehry's favorite materials to roast in the sun and force pedestrians to cross the street to pass by? If it's anything like the fiasco that befell the concert hall in downtown LA, we're in a world of hurt. Please don't build this thing. Who needs it?

109.

maybe what there doing with the 14 townhouses on state st. would be a great
idea for filling that space

110.

@16, You need to get on a loudspeaker and blast your comment in the ears of all the opposers to this project, LOL. The Buildings are different, so what! The Benefits outweigh the so called ugly looks. Good Point!!!!

111.

Wow, seems like this is reminding me of 200 Beekman. Lots of glass. It looks ugly.

Visiting... For now at least...

112.

if they cut off the top part it wouldn't look that bad...

but yeah, as it is it looks like shit

113.

domingo veintinueve julio 2007

Buenos dias,

Pues muy interessante el arquitecto el construye los favellas(shanty town) como en brazil pero el construye en vidrio yacero,muy interessante,?no?
pues...

114.

sic y acero

115.

Hold on to your hats... this will be a beauty, a tourist draw, a sculpture and a truly functional building. Remember how they laughed at Gaudi?
Gerhry has the ability to create buildings and art as one. We should all be thankful to those who hire him to create masterpieces.