Posts tagged with "BIG-Bjarke Ingels Group":

Placeholder Alt Text

Winners announced for this year’s Aga Khan Award for Architecture

Copenhagen-based Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG), London-based Zaha Hadid Architects, and four others have been named as winners of the 2016 Aga Khan Award for Architecture. The Danish architect claimed the prize for his Superkilen project in Copenhagen, Denmark, meanwhile Hadid for her design for the Issam Fares Institute at the American University of Beirut in Lebanon. The announcement was made in the capital of the UAE in Abu Dhabi earlier today. Awarded every three years, the prize has become a heavily cherished trophy since its inauguration in 1977 when Aga Khan established the award to recognize building concepts found in predominantly Muslim communities. For this year's award, a jury drew up a shortlist of 19 projects, born from 348 nominations. The prizes awarded are as follows:

Superkilen Copenhagen, Denmark Bjarke Ingels Group, Topotek 1, and Superflex Words from the jury: "A public space promoting integration across lines of ethnicity, religion and culture."

Bait Ur Rouf Mosque Dhaka, Bangladesh Marina Tabassum Words from the jury: "A refuge for spirituality in urban Dhaka, selected for its beautiful use of natural light."

Friendship Centre Gaibandha, Bangladesh Kashef Mahboob Chowdhury/URBANA Words from the jury: "A community center which makes a virtue of an area susceptible to flooding in rural Bangladesh."

Cha’er Hutong Children’s Library and Art Centre Beijing, China ZAO/standardarchitecture / Zhang Ke Words from the jury: "A children’s library selected for its embodiment of contemporary life in the traditional courtyard residences of Beijing’s Hutongs."

Tabiat Pedestrian Bridge Tehran, Iran Diba Tensile Architecture / Leila Araghian, Alireza Behzadi Words from the jury: "A multi-level bridge spanning a busy motorway has created a dynamic new urban space."

Issam Fares Institute Beirut, Lebanon Zaha Hadid Architects Words from the jury: "A new building for the American University of Beirut’s campus, radical in composition but respectful of its traditional context."

Placeholder Alt Text

Plans filed for $3.2 billion Bjarke Ingels-designed tower at Hudson Yards

New York-based developer Tishman Speyer officially filed their plans for the $3.2 billion, 65-story office skyscraper designed by Copenhagen-based Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG). Dubbed the Spiral for its continuous band of terraces, the tower will reach a height of 1,005 feet. BIG has been quite busy in New York—they just wrapped Via 57 West and The Architect's Newspaper has even heard they're being passed over for projects because clients fear their office is too busy. Though the plans filed with the city only call for 2.2 million square feet, Tishman Speyer is marketing the property at 2.85 million square feet in size; the project will also include 27,000 square feet of retail space on the ground floor. The Spiral is one of two towers in Hudson Yards already being considered by investment firm BlackRock (if the company decides to leave its Park Avenue home, according to a report by Crain’s New York Business). Back in 2014, Tishman Speyer paid $438 million for the two parcels of land where the Spiral will stand; the company also received a $170 million, 25-year tax abatement on the project later that year. When tenants of two townhouse apartments at 35th Street and 10th Ave. refused to move out, Tishman Speyer paid them a $25 million settlement to vacate the premises in order to move forward with their plans, instead of spending years in court battling it out against the now infamous tenant attorney David Rozenholc, according to Gothamist Tishman Speyer has received over $1 billion from international investors to move the project forward and the developer hopes to pre-lease a third of the building to cover the remaining costs of construction, as reported by The Real Deal. The company also purchased two additional parcels of land across from the Javits Center at 11th Avenue earlier this year, with plans to build another 1.3 million-square-foot office tower.
Placeholder Alt Text

Potential clients reportedly fear BIG is too BIG, pick smaller firms instead

This post is part of our years-long running Eavesdrop series (think page 6 for the architectural field). It's your best source for gossip, insider stories, and more. Have an eavesdrop of your own? Send it to: eavesdrop[at]archpaper.com.

Sources close to the juries for two recent invited competitions tell The Architect's Newspaper that in both cases, smaller firms—SHoP and OMA—were chosen over Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) because the jurors believed that the firm's top dog, Mr. Ingels himself, might be more focused on the WTC 2, the Google headquarters, the project formerly known as the Big U, and the Hyperloop. They are concerned that he might not have time to pay much attention to other, smaller projects. The suspicions may come as a surprise to Rem Koolhaas, for whom Ingels worked in his early career. 

Placeholder Alt Text

Inside Bjarke Ingels Group’s own tech-driven think tank

This article is part of  The Architect’s Newspaper’s “Passive Aggressive” feature on passive design strategies. Not to be confused with “Passivhaus” or “Passive House” certification, passive design strategies such as solar chimneys, trombe walls, solar orientation, and overhangs, rely on scheme rather than technology to respond to their environmental contexts. Today, architects are more concerned with sustainability than ever, and new takes on old passive techniques are not only responsible, but can produce architecture that expresses sustainable features through formal exuberance. We call it “passive-aggressive.” In this feature, we examine three components—diagram, envelope, and material—where designers are marrying form and performance. We also look back at the unexpected history of passive-aggressive architecture, talk with passive-aggressive architects, and check out a passive-aggressive house. More “Passive Aggressive” articles are listed at the bottom of the page!

BIG Ideas is an in-house think tank at the Danish studio Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG). It delves into three initiatives: simulations, product design, and conceptual ideas. The simulations are carried out by a team of experts in computationally derived methods of design. With this close collaboration, they solve the designs from BIG’s architectural department while addressing the sustainable and environmental needs of a project, maximizing its potential when they see fit. An example of its work can be seen with its ski-slope-sporting, smoke-ring-spouting Amager Bakke Waste-to-Energy Plant currently being constructed in Copenhagen.

The Architect's Newspaper senior editor Matt Shaw sat down with Jakob Lange, a partner at BIG and director of BIG Ideas. Lange has been working with Ingels since 2003, when the pair were both at PLOT, Ingels’s and Julien De Smedt’s now defunct studio. Shaw and Lange discussed the role of parametricism in realizing and optimizing the diagrammatic passive-aggressive schemes at BIG.

The Architect’s Newspaper: What setup is in place at BIG Ideas that allows parametricism and sustainability to go hand-in-hand?

Jakob Lange: We have engineers working in-house, which facilitates a continuous loop of iterations, creating a build-up of simulations that can then become parametric. This breaks away from the old-school way of calling up an engineer, where you can get bogged down by discussing fees while having to wait to get a result weeks later.

With this new setup, we can do this on a daily basis. Once the project is in the system, it takes two minutes to change the parameters and see what the output is—say, if we change the overhang of a building. Here we can see how much energy it uses if, for example, we just cantilever it a little bit more. We also look at how it changes the big picture, which can be addressed by building all this information into our system.

To achieve this, we’re collaborating with Dell Inc. We have a supercomputer that allows us to accelerate the amount of simulations that we can do. Prior to this, one of the limiting factors of doing very comprehensive simulations was computer power. Subsequently, this means that the quality of the results that we get out is much higher than what was previously possible.

Now it is very simple. The designers-architects send us an email with a link to the 3-D file and a little description of what they need. There may be a few questions back and forth—depending on how busy the guys are—but it’s done in a short time.

The engineers are actually based in Copenhagen, so those in that office can just simply walk up to them and ask. Some simulations are also difficult to set up, so they take a bit longer, but it is usually a very short back and forth.

As far as this diagrammatic idea of expressing sustainability as “fun” goes, how did that emerge in BIG?

It’s been in our DNA from the beginning. All projects, back from when Bjarke had PLOT, had to have an idea, an idea that we couldn’t just design a beautiful sculpture or something. And of course, very often one of the main idea-drivers is to solve a challenge. A climate around your building is always a challenge; say, if you’re in the Middle East or in Finland. Then, of course, we have this idea that making sure that whatever makes your building so nice is that you’re improving the life quality around your building.

So do the simulations end up altering the form of the building?

Oh yes, often. We did a facade for a museum in Marseille [France] that has louvers, but instead of using horizontal louvers, we used some that curved around with the building. Depending on the location of the sun, the louvers can also be angled individually to be most effective.

To do this, we made some parametric models into which we could feed the facade—no matter how organic it was—and it would generate the optimal angle and then space the louvers out onto the facade.

We are also currently doing a project in Amsterdam and we simulated a facade system. We set the simulation up and just let our supercomputer run all night. In the morning we had a wealth of data that was then compressed, giving us the final result. It really enables us to do some very, very high-quality simulations.

For more "Passive Aggressive" articles, explore: our feature article that features projects from across the world, how WORKac’s Arizona House revives the super sustainable Earthship typologyour brief, unofficial history of recent passive-aggressive design, and MOS Architects' Michael Meredith on sustainability.

Placeholder Alt Text

Procrastinate for hours on BIG-Bjarke Ingels Group’s website-turned-videogame

1980's video game addicts should stay away from the BIG-Bjarke Ingels Group website. The Copenhagen, Denmark-based international firm's homepage has long featured pixelated font and colorful icons representing their myriad projects. Recently, BIG teamed up with Danish website design firm Ruby Studio to add a playful spin on a layout that seems—at least in retrospect—ripe for a video game transformation. Inspired by the 1986 game Arkanoid, users can now slowly delete the firm's projects (complete with sound effects). Enjoy!
Placeholder Alt Text

See Iwan Baan’s stunning photos of BIG’s Via 57 West

Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG)'s Via 57 West seems to have already assumed an iconic status on Manhattan's west side. Look no further than the trailer for Marvel's Doctor Strange which—in addition to having 15 million views—prominently features the rental development in its opening setting shot. Tenants began moving into the building this past March; units range from studios to four bedrooms. Bounded by 12th Aveneu, West 57th Street, and West 58th Street, the development features a new pedestrian passageway that runs from north to south on the building's eastern border. (Just next door is FXFOWLE's The Helena; both the Helena and Via 57 are Durst Organization projects.) Residents primarily enter from the southeastern corner, and 45,000 square feet of retail space is spread across the ground floor. The building's interior courtyard is modeled on the proportions of Central Park; it features a path through a meandering garden that culminates in an open, tree-shaded plaza. As BIG's diagrams in the slideshow reveal, the building is a hybrid of a European-style low-rise courtyard building and a tower-and-pedestal typology. The building dramatically rises to 467 feet at its peak. A special system of rails, see at the edges of the building, will enable workers to clean Via 57's curved aluminum cladding. The building's amenities (including an extensive lounge, poker room, children's playroom, basketball court, swimming pool, gym, screening room, and parking) are located on the lower floors, absorbing the loudest ambient noise generated by the nearby West Side Highway.
Placeholder Alt Text

Five pavilions to open in this year’s Serpentine Pavilion and Summer Houses show

For the first time, the Serpentine Galleries has commissioned not a single pavilion but five separate structures by different architects for London's Kensington Gardens. For the past fifteen years, the summer pavilion has occupied a space between the gallery and West Carriage Drive in the park. This year, that primary pavilion was designed by Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) and the other four scattered behind throughout the park. The BIG pavilion is just that—big. It's a mini cathedral with a soaring interior vault that pushes the idea of a pavilion to its size limits, competing with Bjarke's former employer Rem Koolhaas/Cecil Balmond and their 2006 inflatable for height and scale. BIG claims that their pavilion is conceptually a “brick wall.” But rather than clay and bricks, the wall is erected from pultruded fiberglass frames/boxes (made by Fiberline) set back and stacked on top of each other. The wall is then “pulled apart” to form a cavity that houses events for the Serpentine's summer program. The unzipping of the wall turns the line into a surface, transforming the wall into a space. Hans Ulrich Obrsit claims that the pavilion, like the other before it, has already been sold and will be re-mounted in China and America. As for the other ‘back yard’ pavilions, they don't match the BIG project in scale or position, but they are every bit as fantastical as one would expect from a garden pavilion. The four are designed by Kunlé Adeyemi, Asif Khan, and my favorites in the show, Barkow Leibinger and 92-year-old Yona Friedman. The Barkow Leibinger structure is made of molded plywood over a steel frame and has four seating areas surrounding the central wooden core. It’s swooping and molded shapes overwhelm the other pieces in the garden. One hopes it is a rehearsal for the Berlin-based firm's securing the central Serpentine pavilion in the future. The pavilion by Yona Friedman is a typical-yet-thrilling Friedman space frame. It's so thin as to be nearly invisible until one is next to it and sees the Plexiglas images of his elevated La Ville Spatial (Spatial City) designs inserted into the pavilion's metal hoops. The Spatial City design consists of modular structures in which people could build their own hoses. This pavilion, which can be disassembled and remounted, was built with the help of young school children in London.
Placeholder Alt Text

Bjarke Ingels and Thom Mayne discuss architecture, cities, and public space

At a forum hosted by the New York Landmarks Preservation Foundation on May 5, Bjarke Ingels and Thom Mayne discussed the theme “Public Works” with architecture critic Nicolai Ouroussoff. Ingels and Mayne approached the topic from disparate perspectives: At 41, Danish architect Ingels is on a career high and bursting with projects on a variety of scales that he hopes will greatly impact their cities; Pritzker Prize­–winning Mayne, at 72, has an additional 30 years of experience that seems to have left him weary of making overarching, glowing promises. Mayne spoke first, discussing the trajectory of architecture over the course of his career: “Twenty years went by [in the industry] and the series of questions I was engaged with on large scale of public projects and the criteria changed: I was now allowed to operate in a world where the project had social, cultural, political, ecological, and infrastructural consequences,” he said. “It moved from thinking as a designer to thinking in terms of thought leadership and moving toward something more strategic.” However, Mayne concluded later in the lecture, current projects have been reduced back to an architectural scale rather than a civic one. He lamented the loss of his “client,” the public, and the ability of the city and developers to understand the public in terms of city making. Mayne, in particular, slammed the One World Trade Center, “What was ultimately built there was absolutely tragic, it was an embarrassment. The opportunities for rethinking what that space could be were enormous. [The Port Authority] never even looked at the all of the ideas that were available to them,” he said. Instead, Mayne turns to Europe for inspiration in the public space, the piazza concept in particular, and cites Dallas and Los Angeles as examples of modern American cities in terms of broadening work sites to connect with their surroundings and considering public spaces. He focused on fostering the “connective tissues” of a community and replacing starchitect-designed “disconnected icons” with continuous, thoughtful architecture. By contrast, Ingels discussed his U.S. public works in the greater context of contemporary architecture in a more positive light. “Social infrastructure was a term from the 70s that mostly referred to kindergarten, but now we mean it much more literally in terms of positive social side effects,” said Ingels. He discussed incorporating a Copenhagen-style courtyard into his W57 tower to introduce a much-needed oasis in Hell’s Kitchen and researching the Dry Line (A concept he likens to the “love child of Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs”), which will be 12 miles of contiguous waterfront protection to protect New York from storm damage while remaining “in close dialogue with community.” “The fact that privately-funded buildings and projects [in the U.S.] are taking responsibility is not a bad thing,” Ingels mused in response to Mayne's critique of the lack of city support for public works. Abroad, Ingels frequently referred to his Amager Bakke Copenhagen power plant, with its ability to transform waste into power, as one of his most socially oriented projects—not to mention the fact that it will also moonlight as a ski slope and emit non-toxic rings of smoke to raise awareness of carbon dioxide emissions. “If we can’t make a difference with our vote, then what we can do is move the world forward to something we believe in with what we do,” Ingels said. “Of course, I would love to only have philanthropic clients or well-funded states, but we can try to tackle the problems that we have through other means.”
Placeholder Alt Text

Bjarke Ingels Group’s design for Washington Redskins Stadium features large moat

Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) has released its design for a new stadium for the NFL’s Washington Redskins. The scheme offers a curvaceous, open-air seating bowl enveloped in a mesh-like skin—and surrounded by a moat.

A model of the stadium depicts it as a semi-transparent, wave-like structure that will also act as a performance venue for approximately 100,000 people. The general area will also become a recreational haven with parks and pedestrian bridges for tailgating fans.

“The one thing that everybody is…excited about is that the stadium is designed as much for the tailgating, as for the game itself,” Ingels said in a recent interview with 60 Minutes on CBS. “Tailgating literally becomes a picnic in a park. It can actually make the stadium a more lively destination throughout the year without ruining the turf for the football game,” he added.

The arena is designed to be used year-round. Images show people abseiling down from the arena and surfing on the moat. Meanwhile, during the winter, the moat doubles as a place for ice-skating and, as the renders imply, ice hockey too.

However, despite designs jumping from one recreation to the next, the exact location of the new stadium is currently unknown. That said, the Danish firm is considering sites in Prince George’s County, Maryland; Loudoun County, Virginia; and the District of Columbia. The team now plays at FedEx Field in Greater Landover, Maryland, but is headquartered in Ashburn, Virginia. 

Placeholder Alt Text

BIG among six firms shortlisted for the new Museum of London

The Museum of London has released a shortlist of six firms that will compete to design the museum at its new 269,000 square-foot location in West Smithfield, only a stones throw away from its original site at the Barbican. The new museum has a construction budget of $185-210 million.  The current building, designed by Hidalgo Moya and Phillip Powell in the 1970s, will become the new location for the London Symphony Orchestra despite protests from Leon Krier. Also shortlisted in the competition, which was organized by Malcolm Reading Consultants, were:
  • Caruso St John Architects (U.K.)
  • Hawkins\Brown(U.K.) with Asif Khan (U.K.)
  • Diener & Diener Architekten (Switzerland) with Sergison Bates Architects (U.K.)
  • Lacaton & Vassal Architectes (France) with Pernilla Ohrstedt Studio (U.K.)
  • studio Milou architecture (France) with RL&Associés (France) and Axis Architects (U.K.)
According to the competition website, almost 80 teams (formed from 140 firms) entered the initial stage of the contest. The entrants were whittled down on the basis of "relevant skills and experience, particularly, those involved with significant cultural projects which have had a truly transformational impact." The new site, part of Smithfield Market, dates back to 1879 but was closed in 1999. The interior boasts 16 ornate Phoenix Columns but has otherwise remained empty for a number of years. The competing architects and designers were tasked with "regenerating a nationally-significant landmark and creating new contemporary galleries." In doing so, the competition organizers sought a "memorable" museum with "charismatic identity" that combines historic Smithfield and modern design. Entrants also had to cater to the museum's enormous archaeological archive and projected increase in attendance figures (over 2.25 million visits per year, based on recent trends and the implementation of the CrossRail rail link). The six shortlisted practices will now be asked to produce concepts based on a more detailed project brief. Their proposals will be on display at the current building and a winner will be selected by a jury later this year. Other objectives for the new museum include:
  • Create contemporary interventions and additions where appropriate which are exemplary and visually stunning.
  • Reflect the site’s evolution from a place of physical exchange to a culture and knowledge exchange.
  • Address new ways of engaging digitally-minded visitors and representing London as the world’s most inventive, creative capital.
  • Reduce operating costs by improving the building’s operational efficiency and sustainability, with a target of the project achieving a BREEAM (UK LEED equivalent) Excellent rating.
  • Increase income generation and visitor dwell time through enhanced retail, catering and event facilities.
  • Ensure the experience of visiting and navigating the museum is equal for all.
  • Ensure appropriate technical, environmental and security requirements are met so that the new museum meets Government Indemnity Standards.
The museum aims to achieve planning permission, raise the necessary capital funds, and deliver the new museum in 2021.
Placeholder Alt Text

OMA unveils ideas for transforming RFK stadium property to an urban playground for the nation’s Capital

RFK Memorial Stadium would be torn down to create an urban playground along the Anacostia Riverfront for residents of Washington, D.C. and beyond, under plans by the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) that were unveiled at a citywide meeting last night. OMA partner Jason Long and associate Laura Baird of OMA’s New York office outlined two design proposals—"The Stitch" and a "North-South axis"—for a 190-acre stretch of riverfront known as the RFK Stadium-Armory campus. Currently, it's covered mostly with the 55-year-old stadium, the armory, and surrounding parking lots. The Dutch firm OMA, founded in 1975 by Rem Koolhaas and Elia Zenghelis, was hired last year by Events DC to explore ideas for the RFK stadium property after consultants concluded that there is no economically feasible way to renovate the building for continued use as a sports facility. Events DC is the District’s sports and conventional authority. The 75-year old armory would remain. Ideas in both proposals included a 20,000-square-foot arena for the Washington Wizards and Capitals, to replace the Verizon Center in Chinatown, or a 65,000-seat stadium for Washington’s NFL team, which has hired the Bjarke Ingels Group as its lead designer but has not settled on a site. There was also an option for no stadium or arena at all but other sorts of sports-and recreational facilities. Other ideas included playing fields, a field house, a water park, an aquatic center, art pavilions, a science center, a new home for the National Aquarium, and a sports complex comparable to Chelsea Piers in Manhattan. Also, hiking and biking trails, community gardens, a floating pool, a picnic area, a skatepark, an ice rink, an ecology lab, and an exercise park. There were short term and long range ideas. Two manmade islands just off the shoreline, Kingman and Heritage islands, could be made more accessible by a series of pedestrian bridges. OMA’s Long said that since the property is owned by the National Park Service and leased on a long term basis to the District of Columbia, the design team explored recreational uses consistent with the Park Service’s mission. But Long said OMA also wanted to use the planning effort to introduce a wider range of recreational, cultural, and entertainment offerings. OMA wants to show the potential for creating a new gateway to the nation’s Capitol, including taking advantage of efforts to clean up the Anacostia River and providing more public access to the water’s edge. He noted that the RFK property is just about as long as New York’s High Line and just about as wide as Central Park, two of the most popular and heavily-used urban recreational areas in the country. However, it has essentially been devoted to a single use for decades. “We wanted to be much more diverse, in terms of programming,” he said. “This site has the scale to be an amazing place in which the city could connect to the riverfront.” The design team did not provide construction cost estimates. The cost of an NFL stadium or basketball arena alone, experts say, could approach $1 billion. The difference between OMA’s two design options was the way buildings were set along the waterfront and how open space was used to connect them with the waterfront and the rest of the city. One option, called “North-South axis,” would use the site’s sloping topography to conceal a linear “plinth” that spans the length of the site and provides underground parking. On top of this plinth would be a multi-structure sports complex, with a retail promenade at street level. The linear sports complex could contain either the arena, the stadium, or no large sports anchor at all. A series of stairs and ramps would draw visitors down to the waterfront, which would be transformed with parks, fields and possibly an “urban beach.” The existing road network would be restructured to accommodate traffic while providing multiple access points to the plinth so parking is evenly distributed along the site. The second option, called “The Stitch,” builds on the site’s existing “funnel-shaped” road network by adding two pedestrian boulevards and weaving circulation access routes through an urban campus. The plan “stitches” together elements of culture, sports and recreation into three zones.  To the north, amenities include a sports complex, aquatic center, and farmers’ market. The central zone lines up with the National Mall and features a “grand plaza” for outdoor events. To the south would be a marketplace and retail-lined parking structures. Again, this option could accommodate the arena, the NFL stadium or no large sports anchor. Long said the OMA team was aware that the Bjarke Ingels Group has been designing a football stadium, but the two design teams have not meet to discuss how BIG’s design might fit onto the RFK site. One of the features of the BIG design, unveiled last month, was a moat around the stadium that could be used for kayaking and other activities. The football team is considering sites in D. C., Maryland, and northern Virginia. Nearly 400 people came to the two hour presentation at the Washington Convention Center and expressed a variety of opinions. There seemed to be no clear preference for one option or another, or whether a football stadium should go on the site. Audience members asked questions about a number of issues. They wanted to know whether the plan could be modified to include housing; how traffic flow and access from the Metro could be improved; how to make the site more walkable, and whether a beach would make sense with Washington’s  mosquito-infested summers and cold winters. One man suggested moving the National Zoo to the site and selling the zoo property in Woodley Park to help pay for construction. Long said OMA designers will take the comments into consideration as they refine their plans and analyze costs in preparation for a follow-up community meeting in a few months. He said he was impressed by the turnout and the “high level of discussion” about the preliminary design concepts. “It’s good that people want to hear more,” he said.  “It’s great that they want to push it to the next stage.”
Placeholder Alt Text

BIG’s just-revealed proposal for Two Penn Plaza includes an undulating frilly facade

New York's affinity for Bjarke Ingels' work looks set to continue as images have appeared online by the Danes' firm, BIG, for Two Penn Plaza. The project, in collaboration with developer Vornado, appears to reclad the tower with an all-glass facade that fans out at ground level. Prior to this, Two Penn Plaza has had a stale existence, seen by some as all too willing to fade into the urban background and be forgotten. New York Yimby even went so far as to describe it as an "architectural failure," considering its proximity to Penn Station, on which it makes a "particularly negative impact." This isn't the first time Vornado has attempted to mix things up in the area, either. According to The Real Deal, the developer initially set out to combine One and Two Penn Plaza, merging them into one 4.2-million-square-foot complex. This scheme too involved re-cladding the facade. A plan to redress One Penn Plaza is also in the pipeline. BIG, it turns out, has come up with two proposals—albeit not drastically different—that both make use of a glass facade. The most significant changes, however, concern the retail aspect of Two Penn Plaza. In the lower levels, floorplates have been realigned to make way for more space. Aesthetic alterations affect the street level the most, allowing for increased visibility to passersby. In terms of structure, BIG has chosen to fan the glass facade out over the sidewalk, enabling the building to act as a threshold to the space while also providing cover for pedestrians.