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

Voters
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 58 of 128 FirstFirst ... 84854555657585960616268108 ... LastLast
Results 856 to 870 of 1906

Thread: Hudson Yards

  1. #856
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    Meanwhile this Poon-tang Best Western, which is right within (or at least very close to) the path of the greenway, stays on.

    This city is so messed up.


  2. #857

    Default

    Hookers have to work somewhere.

  3. #858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadly View Post
    Hookers have to work somewhere.
    Let 'em rent Spitzer's townhouse by the hour.

  4. #859

    Default

    Two questions. Brookfield-SOM is the winner project?
    The Girasole Tower will be built if Durst is not the winner?

  5. #860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scumonkey View Post
    Not only functional but in the case of 545 w 34th st,
    Nice to look at, good condition, and was occupied with thriving businesses, also with
    a nice side garden-much better than the parking lot or
    fenced pit that will surely take its place
    what a waste!
    Shameful.

    Let 'em demolish when they've got the financing in place for the replacement --not a moment sooner.

  6. #861
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BCNGuy View Post

    Brookfield-SOM is the winner project?
    No - After a snafu with the first choice Related was awarded sloppy seconds and is now the developer.

    Two weeks ago Related discussed some of their big plan before CB4.

  7. #862
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    west village
    Posts
    437

    Default

    yeah, i went to that CB4 meeting per a FHL email notice because related wants to tear down the northern highline spur over tenth avenue, which would make a spectacular viewing platform.

    my impression was that they were a little nervous, but still will move to tear it down. however, no one would commit to anything either way.

    here's a youtube of some meeting highlights:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRlatTvqplY

    boo! no tearing down any more highline!!!!

  8. #863
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Stupid of Related in the long run if they choose to knock down that section.

  9. #864

    Default

    Lofter, developers who make long-term smart moves are few and far between. I would say that, maybe, Silverstein is a long-term thinker who actually cares about the city. The rest of the dime-a-dozen carpetbaggers couldn't give a damn about either the city or their own companies or projects long term. Let's not forget that developers were the hands that fed the Wall Street mouth in recent years. If we had a "casino culture" banking system, developers were -- and still are -- pulling the handle on their slot machines.

  10. #865
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    The only real reason that a developer could want that section of the Spur to come down is to simplify delivery of equipment and materials into the construction site from the south via W. 30th Street / Tenth Avenue. Any of the other excuses given, such as "It's so dark under there" (yes, that's an actual excuse spoken by a rep from Related at he CB4 meeting) are covers for cost cutting construction choices. All excuses have little if anything to do with how the space will be once the development is finished.

    The fact here is that Related is not the only party who controls the High Line Spur which is in danger of being demolished. 75% of the Spur is not even on the Hudson Yard / Eastern Yard property upon which Related will build: the majority of the Spur is over Tenth Avenue and other sections sit above the sidewalks on both sides of Tenth at the NW and SE corners of W 30th. Thereby the Spur would seemingly be under the control of NYC DOT or some other City agency.

    If the Spur is destroyed it will only happen because the City of NY is a party to the demolition. Similarly the City can stop Related from destroying the Spur.

  11. #866
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    west village
    Posts
    437

    Default

    here's a shot of the spur i took 8/'07



  12. #867

    Default

    http://www.chelseanow.com/cn_120/instruggling.html

    In struggling economy, Hudson Yards taking a turn for the burst?

    By Patrick Hedlund

    The city’s dire economic landscape has created major questions over the fate of the massive Hudson Yards development project. With a deadline for payment to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority approaching on Jan. 31, developer the Related Companies appears to be balking once again after postponing its initial payment three months ago.

    Related was supposed to deliver its first $50 million for the Yards last year before the MTA extended its deadline an additional 90 days. The entire deal consists of the developer paying the MTA $1 billion over 99 years, but the state of the economy appears to preventing Related from reaching even the first installment.

    A spokesperson for the mega-developer—which is also attempting to secure a bid to develop Pier 57—stated only that Related is in negotiations and could not comment further.

    “The Hudson Yards continues to move forward, and we remain focused on the various governmental and required reviews that continue to progress,” said spokesperson Joanna Rose.

    Related won the bid to develop the 26-acre West Side rail yards back in May after the MTA’s original pick for the project, Tishman Speyer, failed to come to terms with the authority.

    MTA CEO Elliot Sander admitted on Jan. 21 that negotiations with Related were “very sensitive,” and even entertained the possibility of the deal crumbling completely.

    But with banks tightening and financing frozen, the possibility of a collapse didn’t shock some in the community.

    “I’m not at all surprised that Related is not in a position to pay a bunch of money,” said Anna Hayes Levin, of the Hudson Yards Community Advisory Committee and co-chairperson of Community Board 4’s Clinton/Hell’s Kitchen Land Use Committee. Because the city and MTA have both invested heavily in the deal, she said, there will be “heavy momentum to try to keep the relationship with Related available for whenever the market conditions recover.”

    That assumes, of course, that the developer decides to stay in the game at all—something Levin and fellow advocates might not lose sleep over considering their original desire to see the rail yards bid out to multiple developers. The single-developer plan led to the situation facing the project today, with “an enormous amount of risk [imposed] on one company,” she said.

    “It’s not all bad for us locally for it to not happen for a while,” Levin explained, adding that any delay would allow the community to further advocate for community needs and avoid seeing “the Himalayas between Clinton and Chelsea.”

    “I think monumental things have to happen in our economy for the deal to be able to move forward.”

    But regardless of the outcome, Levin said the community will remain focused on seeing the project through.

    “We’ll be forever vigilant, we’re not going to take our eye off the ball,” she said. However, “it doesn’t look like it’s going to be consuming a lot of our attention for a while.”


    -----------------------------

    She doesn't realize that the entire area between 42nd and 30th is also zoned for highrises?

  13. #868
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chelseanow.com
    Levin said the community will remain focused on seeing the project through.

    “We’ll be forever vigilant, we’re not going to take our eye off the ball,” she said.
    Exactly, Derek. It seems obvious they're focused on reducing height. That is "the ball" they're not going to take their eyes off of.

  14. #869

    Default

    City Council approves railyards project




    West Side railyards


    The City Council unanimously approved the $15 billion West Side railyards project yesterday. The Related Companies' project on the 26-acre site will include housing, parks and office towers, though the economy has delayed construction. The Council approved several required zoning changes, and Related officials said they plan to begin rezoning the western half of the site this year.



    PROGRESS?! Unheard of!


    Keep your fingers crossed for something other than the towers-in-the-park scheme.

  15. #870

    Default Hudson Yards Lawsuit Settled



    Found This in my email today:
    Hudson Yards Lawsuit Settled
    950-car garage eliminated; total parking capped; no minimum required;
    New York, Friday May 8, 2009. The Hell’s Kitchen Neighborhood Association (HKNA) agreed to settle its federal lawsuit aimed at nullifying parking requirements that the City adopted for the Hudson Yards area. Those requirements could have resulted in the construction of up to 17,400 parking spaces. Under the settlement, new development in the Hudson Yards will be limited to no more than 6,100 parking spaces. Also, a 950-car garage that the city planned to build under a new mid-block boulevard will be eliminated.
    HKNA’s brought the suit to enforce New York City’s commitment under the federal Clean Air Act to limit parking in the Manhattan central business district south of 60th Street. The City implemented its commitment in 1982 through zoning changes under which new buildings are not required to provide parking and only a limited number of parking spaces are allowed. In approving the Hudson Yards rezoning in 2005, the City reversed course by requiring parking in a portion of the central business district for the first time since 1982. The settlement will again eliminate any parking requirement. The 1982 zoning rules still apply outside the Hudson Yards.
    And for the first time, special permits for additional parking spaces will not be approved unless there is an actual shortage of parking in the Hudson Yards area. Currently there is no limit on special permits. The Departments of City Planning, Consumer Affairs, and Buildings will collaborate to keep an up-to-date inventory of parking spaces in the area and publish it on a web site.
    “It is rewarding to see the city right a wrong and bring its parking and clean air policies into alignment” notes Kathleen Treat, Chair of HKNA, while plaintiff Vera Lightstone is relieved because “our neighborhood is already overwhelmed with Lincoln Tunnel traffic and plagued by high level of asthma.” The area is host to a large number of garages that serve the theater district and the garment center to the east.
    According to Paul White, Executive Director of Transportation Alternatives, “More parking garages only bring more traffic. This settlement is a big win for a greener more pedestrian-friendly city.” “Congratulations to the Hells Kitchen Neighborhood Association for protecting their residents from more traffic,” said Kate Slevin, Executive Director of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign. “The settlement proves that economic growth does not have to come at the expense of our environment.”
    The 1982 zoning rules would have allowed about 5,000 new parking spaces for development in the Hudson Yards. Although 6,100 spaces will now be allowed, some of those spaces will be in existing, underutilized public parking garages. As a result, the number of new parking spaces is expected to be approximately the same as would have been constructed under the 1982 zoning rules.The settlement was approved by the court on May 5, 2009. The City will have one year to adopt a zoning amendment for the Hudson Yards consistent with the settlement.
    Contact:
    D. Gutman: (212) 586 3888, Dgutman@jps.com
    C. Berthet: (646) 623 2689 christine@sunnysiderecords.com
    K. Treat: (212) 704-0186, Ktreat@earthlink..net




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

Bookmarks

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