View Poll Results: What proposal would you like to see built for Hudson Yards?

97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Brookfield: SOM, Field Operations, Thomas Phifer, SHoP Architects and Diller Scofidio & Renfro

    64 65.98%
  • Durst / Vornado / Conde Nast: FXFowle and Rafael Pelli

    11 11.34%
  • Extell: Steven Holl

    8 8.25%
  • Related / Goldman Sachs / NewsCorp: Kohn Pedersen Fox, Arquitectonica and Robert AM Stern

    8 8.25%
  • Tishman Speyer / Morgan Stanley: Helmut Jahn

    6 6.19%
Page 51 of 128 FirstFirst ... 4147484950515253545561101 ... LastLast
Results 751 to 765 of 1906

Thread: Hudson Yards

  1. #751
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    in Limbo


    West Side Railyards Project Gets New Push From Mayor

    Published: May 10, 2008

    Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said on Friday that he would push to revive a $1 billion deal to develop the railyards on the Far West Side of Manhattan as he met with the developer whose negotiations with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority had collapsed.

    “The plan isn’t dead by any means,” the mayor said in London, where he was also meeting with local officials. “Hudson Yards is the most exciting opportunity New York has.”

    The mayor has made development of the Far West Side, including the railyards owned by the transportation authority, a priority since taking office in 2002, but his plans have been repeatedly frustrated. The breakdown of talks on Thursday between the developer, Tishman Speyer, and the authority loomed as an especially bitter setback, since just days earlier officials had said the deal was almost ready to be signed.

    Officials of the authority agreed to meet again with the developer on Monday, but they made it clear that Tishman Speyer would have to alter what they described as an 11th-hour demand that would have changed the basic economics of the deal.

    “I’m not going in with an expectation,” said Gary Dellaverson, the authority’s chief financial officer, when asked about Monday’s meeting.

    “They’ve taken a position which I’ve articulated to them was quite clearly unacceptable. They’ve asked to meet, therefore I’m meeting with them.”

    Negotiations on the deal had been dragging on for weeks longer than anticipated after Tishman Speyer was chosen in March from among several bidders vying for the right to build a complex of office towers and apartment buildings on concrete platforms over the railyard. Then last week, officials reported progress and set a deadline of 5 p.m. Wednesday to complete the agreement.

    But on Tuesday, according to Mr. Dellaverson, the developer began to raise issues with a key part of the agreement. It was not until Wednesday, however, in a series of phone calls with Rob Speyer, the developer’s lead negotiator, who was traveling in Europe, that Mr. Dellaverson said he came to understand that Tishman Speyer was trying to change the basic terms of the deal.

    “It came out of the blue,” Mr. Dellaverson said. “I did not expect it and I conveyed to the proposer that I felt as though they had wasted an awful lot of the M.T.A.’s time.”

    Officials at the authority said the developer wanted to put off closing the deal until the city had finished rezoning the western portion of the railyards. The rezoning process was expected to take at least 18 months and a delay would have meant the authority had to wait longer before beginning to receive payments.

    But it also meant that if the rezoning failed to match the developer’s plans, Tishman Speyer could have walked away from the entire deal, leaving the authority to begin the process all over again.

    “It involved a free warehousing of the deal for 18 months,” said H. Dale Hemmerdinger, the authority’s chairman. He said that changing the deal in such a fundamental way took it beyond the basic terms that the authority’s board had authorized and would have been unfair to other bidders, which had been told that such an arrangement was not allowed.

    “They went outside the bounds that were set up that we could live within,” Mr. Hemmerdinger said. The authority gave the developer a day to reconsider and then on Thursday afternoon informed it that the deal was off.

    Robert Lawson, a spokesman for Tishman Speyer, said he was not able to provide details of the talks with the authority.

    Meanwhile, Mayor Bloomberg insisted on Friday that there was still room to negotiate.

    “My hope is that the state government, really the M.T.A. in this case, can get together and solve the problems they have and that Tishman Speyer has, so that they can come together,” Mr. Bloomberg said in London.

    He said that he would “see if the city can do anything it can to get that project back on track” and reaffirmed the city’s commitment to developing the area, which includes providing about $2 billion in financing for the transportation authority to build a westward extension of the No. 7 subway line.

    “It’s going to get done,” he said. “And the No. 7 line is going to get done.

    And it will be so far along before I leave office that nobody is going to be able to stop it.”

    After making his comments, Mr. Bloomberg met with Mr. Speyer and his father, Jerry I. Speyer, Tishman Speyer’s chief executive, who flew in from Italy. Representatives for the mayor and the developer refused to provide details of the meeting, which took place at the mayor’s apartment in London.

    “We still hope to be able to complete this deal and reach an agreement that satisfies the needs of everyone," the Speyers said in a written statement.

    If a deal cannot be worked out with Tishman Speyer, the authority could seek to reopen negotiations with other developers who had bid on the project.

    In a related development, Assemblyman Richard L. Brodsky proposed that a new state authority be created to buy the railyards from the transportation authority for $1 billion and take charge of development in the area. It would come up with a master plan and find builders for individual parcels over time.

    Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

  2. #752


    this just in from curbed:
    Yardsmania: The Collapse Is Complete —The MTA just issued this press release: "The MTA met today with Tishman Speyer. Despite the best efforts of both sides, a final agreement could not be reached. The MTA has now re-entered discussions with other interested developers and remains committed to timely development of these unique and valuable parcels of land on Manhattan's Far West Side." That's all, folks.

  3. #753
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003

    Default Just Bring In Durst And His Lined Up Tenants !

    Bloomberg News Tishman Speyer and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority failed to reach an agreement to develop the Hudson Yards and the MTA says it has re-entered discussions with other developers for the project.

    In a statement, the partnership between The Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust, which was the second runner up in the competition for the site, said it would be interested in pursuing a deal.

    The breakdown comes despite an attempt to salvage the deal to develop the Hudson Rail Yards, the city promised developer Tishman Speyer that it would pay for any cost overruns to extend the No. 7 subway line to 33th Street and 11th Avenue., a real estate source says.

  4. #754


    Great news from Durst should have been selected in the first place. He has a tenant and a great design!

    Hudson Yards deal declared dead

    Hudson Yards
    By James Kelly

    The MTA has declared a $1 billion deal with Tishman Speyer to develop Hudson Yards dead, despite a last-ditch effort today to revive it.

    "The MTA met today with Tishman Speyer. Despite the best efforts of both sides, a final agreement could not be reached," the agency said in a statement. "The MTA has now re-entered discussions with other interested developers and remains committed to timely development of these unique and valuable parcels of land on Manhattan's Far West Side."

    Tishman Speyer, which requested a final meeting with the agency yesterday, said in a statement attributed to Rob Speyer, president, that it "negotiated in good faith with the MTA for the last several weeks regarding Hudson Yards and could not come to a final agreement that was satisfactory to both of us. This morning we informed the MTA that we are withdrawing from the process immediately so it can proceed in another direction.

    "We appreciate the MTA's commitment to develop Hudson Yards into a great place for New York and wish it the best as it pursues other alternatives. We want to express our gratitude to Mayor Bloomberg for his extraordinary efforts and leadership through this negotiation to facilitate a deal."

    The Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust, whose joint bid finished second to Tishman's, said today that they remain interested in pursuing the massive rail yards.

    Jordan Barowitz, a Durst spokesman, said, "Hudson Yards is an interesting and exciting project for New York City, and we'd be interested in resuming discussions on the project's development. The MTA has called us. They called us this morning."
    He declined to give any other details.

    Last Thursday the MTA's chief financial officer, Gary Dellaverson, said the negotiations broke off after Tishman insisted on changing the terms of their March 26 agreement. The change Tishman requested would have slowed payments in annual rent and fees to the cash-strapped MTA for the 26-acre site, the Times reported last week.

    The city tried to allay concerns about funding for the extension of the No. 7 to Hudson Yards by assuring Tishman that it would pay for any cost overruns, Crain's reported. MTA spokesman Jeremy Soffin told The Real Deal last week that the proposed deal included penalizing the MTA for any delays to compensate Tishman if the 7 extension didn't happen on schedule. He said that under the structure the MTA proposed, Tishman would get "rent holidays" -- periods during which it would not have to make agreed-upon payments to the MTA, which would still own the land -- "depending on the length of delay."

    The deal's collapse will likely lead to the MTA getting less money for the property, which stretches across 11th Avenue between 30th and 33rd Streets.

  5. #755


    MTA = FAILURE!!!

    The only buisness they know how to get done is fatten their upper mangement wallets.I don't see them completing this or any other development anytime in the near future.

  6. #756


    Developer Says Condé To Rejoin Rail Yards Bid, But Condé’s Not Talking

    by Eliot Brown | May 15, 2008

    One of the remaining bidders for the West Side rail yards, a team of the Durst Organizaiton and Vornado Realty Trust, said it is expecting that S.I. Newhouse’s Condé Nast will remain part of its bid as an anchor tenant.

    “We expect that Condé would be our partner,” said Durst spokesman Jordan Barowitz.

    However, Condé, which began a new search for space after Tishman Speyer was named the winner over the Durst/Vornado team in March, did not make clear its plans, as a company spokeswoman, Maury Perl, declined comment.

    In the original Durst/Vornado bid, Condé expected to take about 1.5 million square feet on the rail yards, a move made easier given that its 4 Times Square headquarters is owned by Durst.

    But after the bid fell short (Tishman was announced the winner but failed to ever sign an agreement before its deal collapsed in recent days), Condé began talking to other potential landlords. And, according to a real estate executive, the firm is still in discussions to go to a Ninth Avenue site owned by Brookfield Properties just east of the West Side rail yards.

    If the Durst/Vornado team is able to keep Condé as an anchor tenant, it would certainly enhance its bid with a sense of certainty that Tishman Speyer lacked given its anchor tenant, Morgan Stanley, dropped out of the bid.

    As for the other remaining developers, an Extell Development representative has said the company expects to rejoin the effort to win the rail yards, and Steve Ross’ Related Companies is considering a bid, according to a person familiar with the company.

    © 2008 Observer Media Group

  7. #757

    Default Worst Hudson Yards news ever?

    So, who's ready for about the worst HY news imaginable?

    Without further comment (except a NOOOOOOOOOO):

    From the Observer:

    Related, M.T.A. Said to Reach Deal for Rail Yards [UPDATED]

    by Eliot Brown | May 18, 2008

    The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has reached a tentative deal to award development rights for the West Side rail yards to the Related Companies, according to a person familiar with discussions. The deal for the 26-acre site on Manhattan’s West Side comes less than a week after the M.T.A. broke off talks for the property with Tishman Speyer, the major development firm that was announced the winning bidder in late March.
    Related, one of the city’s largest developers and the owner of the Time Warner Center, seemed to be a leading contender earlier in the process until its anchor tenant, News Corp., failed to commit to the site.
    Ultimately, Related only sought to win the rights to the western half of the site, effectively taking itself out of the contest as the other bidders did not want to share.
    After the deal with Tishman Speyer collapsed, the M.T.A. began looking back at its other remaining bidders—Related, a joint venture of the Durst Organization and Vornado Realty Trust, and Extell Development Corp.—and last week passed around a draft of the designation letter that was to be signed with Tishman Speyer. Such a quick turnaround suggests the terms of the Related deal—or at least the structure spelled out in the designation letter—are likely similar to those of the Tishman deal.
    Unlike the Tishman Speyer bid, Related’s proposal submitted in February relied heavily on residential. According to a summary of the bids from the M.T.A., Related called for about 4.6 million square feet of commercial office space four buildings, accompanied by more than 5,000 apartments. Tishman Speyer, by comparison, called for about 3,200 units of housing and five office towers totaling more than 8 million square feet.
    An M.T.A. spokesman did not return calls seeking comment, and a spokeswoman for Related declined to comment.

  8. #758


    at least its not extell though

  9. #759


    I wonder how Related's design will change now that they've lost News Corp.
    Last edited by Eugenius; May 19th, 2008 at 05:28 PM.

  10. #760


    MTA just doesn't get it.

  11. #761


    There's no point in judging the Related design, since it was centered on an anchor tenant, News Corp, which has dropped out.

  12. #762
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003


    selection number two without a tenant either! amazing

  13. #763


    I cant believe how blatently obvious it is to go with Durst.

  14. #764
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    NYC - Downtown


    CurbedWire: Hudson Yards Murdochville Redo Special

    Monday, May 19, 2008
    by Robert


    The "conditional selection" of Related Companies/Goldman Sachs to
    develop the Hudson Yards after the Tishman Speyer deal fell apart was
    formally announced this afternoon by the Governor, Mayor and MTA Direcector.
    The MTA Board will be meeting on Thursday to approve the "Murdochville"
    deal. If one didn't know the messy history of the plan to date, it would
    have appeared by the releases being sent around that Related was the
    first choice all along. Doom and gloom, be gone. The Governor was quoted
    as saying that "This agreement highlights the resilience of public-
    private partnerships in the face of the national economic downturn that
    we are experiencing." Mayor Bloomberg, on the other hand, said that
    "Today’s announcement that the MTA will award Related Companies, in
    partnership with Goldman Sachs, the development rights for the West Side
    Rail Yards is great news for the City. Despite the setbacks of the last few
    weeks, we are certain that Related and Goldman will realize this tremendous
    opportunity to develop what is really the only large parcel of undeveloped
    space left in Manhattan."

    Here are the details about the related proposal for the Eastern Rail Yard and
    the Western Yard (the latter being the stumbling block with Tishman Speyer):

    Eastern Rail Yard: "The 13-acre Eastern Rail Yard (ERY), between 10th
    and 11th Avenues from West 30th to 33rd Streets, was re-zoned in
    January 2005 as part of the City’s Hudson Yards re-zoning, and allows for
    approximately 6.27 million square feet of mixed-use development (11 FAR),
    including office, residential, hotel, retail, cultural and parking facilities, and
    requires approximately seven acres of public open space. The Related /
    Goldman Sachs plan, organized around a grand civic plaza, will construct:

    * 5 buildings, 6.27 million sf total
    * 1.67 million sf residential with 612,000 sf 80/20 rental (approx. 830
    units) not less than 20% permanent affordable and 1.05 million sf
    condominium residences (approx. 692 units)
    * 3.57 million sf commercial office
    * 565,000 sf retail
    * 265,000 sf hotel
    * Dedicated area for 200,000 sf community/cultural
    * 55% of site public open space"

    Western Rail Yard: "The 13-acre WRY, bordered by West 30th and 33rd Streets,
    between 11th and 12th Avenues, needs to now go through the City zoning / ULURP
    approval process. The Related/Goldman Sachs plan adheres to the design
    guidelines outlined in the MTA’s RFP, and the development consists of
    approximately 5.75 million sf, including:

    * 8 buildings, 5.75 million sf total
    * 3.63 million sf residential with 960,000 sf 80/20 rental
    (approx. 1,324 units) not less than 20% permanent affordable
    and 2.67 million sf condominium residences (approx. 1,927 units)
    * 1.92 million sf commercial office within one building
    * 192,000 sf of retail
    * 120,000 sf PS/IS school
    * Over 55% of site public open space"



    The Related Plan as seen at last November's exhibit (from a post by NYGuy) ...

    Related model ...


  15. #765

    Default Ugh

    The renderings are really depressing, aren't they? Is there any innovation in that at all? Any push to make things better than they are, to push even the slightest boundary? Any vision for an exciting new frontier of Manhattan?

    It looks like somebody took one of the least inspiring stretches of Midtown, cloned it, and plunked it down on the Far West Side. The unordered hodgepodge of buildings is united only in the consistent mediocrity of the constituent pieces, as if Costas and O'Hara had their say, then the floor was handed to some schmucks from a big corporate firm hired by a Trump or Moinian.

    Pray for dramatic changes now that Rupie is (hopefully) out.

Similar Threads

  1. Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 383
    Last Post: July 3rd, 2014, 05:21 PM
  2. Pier 57 - Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: December 17th, 2013, 04:00 PM
  3. Pier 64 - Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: June 23rd, 2013, 08:07 PM
  4. Pier 45 - Hudson River Park
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: July 10th, 2012, 10:58 PM
  5. Replies: 573
    Last Post: May 11th, 2012, 05:40 PM

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software