Page 11 of 141 FirstFirst ... 7891011121314152161111 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 2110

Thread: Manhattan Residential Development

  1. #151

    Default

    Gulcrapek....where is place 57

  2. #152
    Banned Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    8,113

    Default

    That Clarett's height is really accentuated by the small church.

  3. #153

    Default

    It looks like there is an odd looking tree sprouting from the rear facade of the building. Is that an actual structural/landscaping feature or is it poetic license on the part of the rendering artist?

  4. #154

    Default

    It looks like there is an odd looking tree sprouting from the rear facade of the building. Is that an actual structural/landscaping feature or is it poetic license on the part of the rendering artist?
    I would assume the tree would be set on a setback.

  5. #155
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Garden City, LI
    Posts
    1,778

    Default Hudson Square Boom

    By Hemmy So
    http://downtownexpress.com/de_92/hudsonsquareboom.html

    According to one major real estate broker, Greenwich St. has become the new “Gold Coast,” a hot street for those in the market for a new home. Thanks to recent rezoning that now allows residential development in the formerly manufacturing area, Greenwich St. and its neighboring streets in Hudson Sq. have become ripe for sparkling new condominium projects.
    While the small area bordered by Canal, Varick and Houston Sts. and the Hudson River still has strong vestiges of its former life, such as empty parking lots, garages, short manufacturing buildings, a couple of shiny modern condo buildings on Greenwich St. hint at Hudson Sq.’s future.

    Next door to each other on Greenwich St., near the corner of Spring St., two glass buildings will house the first wave of new residents. The larger condo building, 505 Greenwich St., shoots up 14 stories and has 104 units, ranging from one-bedroom apartments to spacious six-bedroom duplexes that can be created from the combination of two smaller apartments.

    Tim Norton, the building’s selling agent, explained that because 497 Greenwich St. offers “white box” lofts that allow owners to design their own apartments, construction in much of the common areas won’t be completed until individual lofts are finished.

    “You wouldn’t want to complete a beautiful lobby while people are still doing construction [in their apartments],” Norton said.

    Though neither building is completely finished, that hasn’t stopped residents from moving in, particularly at 505 Greenwich St. Shortly after developer Metropolitan Housing Partners began marketing 505 Greenwich St. last April, the building sold out of units. Some units however, are currently for sale through individual owners.

    Daren Herzberg, a real estate broker for The Corcoran Group, said apartments in 505 Greenwich St. have generated a lot of interest. “In two weeks, I’ve probably shown it maybe 20 times,” he said.

    Likewise, Greenwich Street Project has sold almost all its lofts. Norton estimates that only four units remain for sale. The apartments range from $1 million to $6.6 million.

    Herzberg attributes 505 Greenwich St.’s success to a few factors, including its new construction, condominium status, and low common charges and taxes. According to the Corcoran Web site, the owner of one 2,000 square-foot apartment there pays only $1,296 in common charges and $71 for taxes per month. Other comparable projects in nearby areas generate $3,000 in common charges per month, Herzberg said.

    Building residents pay little in taxes due to a 10-year tax abatement under Section 421a of the New York State Real Property Tax Law, a tax provision intended to promote housing in areas where there was little previous residential use.

    Jeannette Boccini, a spokesperson for Metropolitan Housing Partners, noted the building’s location as a major factor for both its construction and popularity.

    “It’s so close to Hudson River Park, which is a huge draw for people. It’s also at the nexus of Soho, Tribeca and the Village. So you can basically go anywhere from here,” Boccini said.

    While the hackneyed phrase “location, location, location” may partly explain the condominium boom in Hudson Sq., the real catalyst for development came from the Department of City Planning in August 2003. After heated battles regarding the scope of rezoning, City Council unanimously passed a resolution rezoning the south end of Hudson Sq. to allow residential building in a formerly manufacturing-zoned area.

    David Reck, president of Friends of Hudson Sq. and a 28-year resident on Greenwich St., resident said that the prior zoning rules failed to acknowledge the existing residents in the south Hudson Sq., making the area prime for residential annoyances like nightclubs. Feeling a need for rezoning and predicting further development in the area, Reck helped push for the rezoning measures.

    “Re-zoning is always controversial. There were people farther up in the Village who were uptight about it. I knew that development was coming and we really needed to move forward and get new zoning in place,” Reck said. “I feel like ours was about two years behind the curve, but soon enough to make a difference.”

    Although Reck credits the new zoning law for reducing the building size for 505 Greenwich St., that condominium project began prior to rezoning. Upon receiving a building variance from the city’s Board of Standards & Appeals, Metropolitan Housing Partners got the thumbs-up for building what then-zoning laws would have prohibited. In fact, the building does not fit within current zoning regulations.

    The B.S.A. variance procedure has drawn ire from community members and some local developers. By granting variances, B.S.A. allows developers to build outside the zoning rules currently in place.

    “If you look at what was being granted in the past, it was egregious,” said Richard Barrett, president of Canal West Coalition. “For example, people were getting bulk-and-use variances with a 10 F.A.R. (floor-to-area-ratio), resulting in buildings that did not fit into the neighborhood.”

    Developer Peter Moore, who has two condominium projects in the area, agreed.

    “It’s unfortunate, the disfunctionality of city planning in granting absurd B.S.A. variances,” Moore said.

    “The B.S.A. variance process in this Hudson Sq. area gutted out City Planning rezoning and embedded bulk [and] oversized buildings in the area,” Moore said, pointing out the 505 Greenwich St. condo building.

    Indeed, despite its popularity with apartmen hunters, 505 Greenwich St. has drawn much criticism from community members for its height, steep front façade and somewhat uninspired design. To some, those elements create an oddity that refuse to fit within the neighborhood context.

    “Condos are fine, but they have to be appropriate in some way, contextualized,” Moore said.

    Moore hopes that’s what he and partner Mark Mancinelli will accomplish with their nine-story, 14-unit residential project on the southeast corner of Spring and Renwick Sts. With contractors having begun working on the building’s foundation, Moore hopes the building will be complete in 14 months. The plan for the condo building will be released in six to eight months, he said.

    Moore and Mancinelli did not seek a variance for the building and will therefore work within the current zoning regulations, which permit a 6.02 F.A.R. Moore described the building plan as “well built” and “thoughtful.”

    “I can’t say that a nine-story building is good for the neighborhood - the economics are what they are. [But] it’s a positive addition to the neighborhood instead of just a bulky addition,” Moore said.

    For Moore’s other planned project on the corner of Canal and Washington Sts., he has already approached community members to develop a design palatable to both sides. That planned glass residential condo building will also rise nine-stories and will take approximately two years to complete. Moore will approach the B.S.A. with his plans within two months.

    Barrett said that community involvement only benefits the development process.

    “It’s an element of good planning and process because if you think about it, what was happening in the past, developers would basically work out the project and would probably have a meeting with B.S.A., and the community would be the last to hear about it. There would be very little consideration given to what residents actually thought about something that could have an enormous impact.

    “So I think that what happened many times is that in the 11th hour there would be a concerted opposition. So it’s not a very efficient process. It’s much more prudent planning and certainly good sense to try to involve your neighbors and business that have been in the area for many years,” Barrett said.

    Metropolitan Housing Partners declined to comment on community relations regarding 505 Greenwich St. “They had permission to build the building by the letter of the law,” said Boccini, Metropolitan’s spokesperson.

    In one notable instance, however, the B.S.A. regulations worked in the community’s favor. In 2001, famed architect Philip Johnson (who died last month at age 98) designed a “habitable sculpture” for 328 Spring St. near Washington St. Originally planned as a 28-story residential tower that would have leaned over the landmarked 1817 John Brown House which houses the Ear Inn bar, B.S.A. rejected developer Nino Vendome’s applications for a variance.

    After multiple redesigns, an 11-story residential building plan emerged, but construction has not yet begun. According to one source, real property title for the plot has just transferred from Vendome to developer Charlie Blaikman but the building’s plans have not changed significantly. The condominium building will have 50 units with retail space on the ground floor.

    Just across the street from the planned Johnson building sits the United Parcel Service’s 85,000-sq.-ft. lot bounded by Spring, Washington and West Sts. Last year, Downtown Express reported that U.P.S. hoped to build a 450,000-sq.-ft. condominium and rental apartment building even though that area is still a manufacturing zone.

    Like the U.P.S. lot, many future developments in Hudson Sq. are still in the abstract planning stages.

    The largest planned development is 255 Hudson St., another Metropolitan Housing Partners undertaking. With the marketing tagline, “Downtown Cool, Enduring Style,” the 11-story, 64-unit building will house a variety of two and three-bedroom apartments, lofts and duplexes.

    Although Boccini stressed that 255 Hudson St. will not be a “505 Greenwich St. Phase II,” a rendering of the planned building on the firm’s Web site does look similar to 505 Greenwich. Boccini said Metorpolitan would not release the rendering for publication.

    She did highlight several differences between the sister buildings, including different layouts and luxury amenities (unfortunately for pet owners at 255 Hudson St., the building won’t have a pet spa like 505 Greenwich St.) and a warmer color palette for the common areas.

    “Every building is unique because [Metropolitan Housing Partners] are not cookie-cutter developers and they take pride in their work,” Boccini said.

    Though the land has been cleared, actual construction has not yet begun. Boccini said the building should be substantially completed by summer 2006.

    Developer Andrew Bradfield also plans to construct an 11-story residential condo building, just behind 255 Hudson St. at 22 Renwick St. between Spring and Canal Sts. Currently, corporate mail handler Wall Street Mail currently operates in a small, bright-blue building on that plot.

    Just south of Hudson Sq., on a triangular plot at 500 Canal St., Fabian Friedland and Jeff Levine plan to build a condo building housing 25-30 units. Because the property is just outside the newly rezoned Hudson Sq. area, the developers had to apply for a B.S.A. variance, which Community Board 1 supported. The building will replace an unimpressive lot consumed by weeds and a couple of small abandoned buildings that previously housed a custom ceramic tile company and car audio installation store.

    Certainly, the residential development process will take south Hudson Sq. through a metamorphosis, whether bringing unique architectural structures, a different brand of resident or more residential services like supermarkets and drugstores. But most agree that change was inevitable.

    “As a resident, it would be nice if we could go back and have a nice sleepy neighborhood, but that wasn’t going to be that way forever, it just wasn’t real,” Reck said. “Change is difficult, but the bottom line is that it was coming. It’s better to be involved in the change, and we certainly got this neighborhood involved.”
    Last edited by billyblancoNYC; February 11th, 2005 at 09:12 PM.

  6. #156

  7. #157

    Default

    Projects I found of particular interest, that Im not too familiar with. Im sure youll find your own.

    Bond St

    Ian Schrager and Aby Rosen plan condo tower, to be designed by partners Jacques Herzog and Pierre de Meuron.

    Central Park North and Lenox Ave

    Upscale 20-story, 80-unit doorman building planned by The Athena Group. Demolition on the site is scheduled for spring 2005.

    44 West 63rd St

    Chetrit Group bought Empire Hotel for $80 million, to become 125 condos. (Feb.)

    15 Central Park West

    Joint venture of Zeckendorfs, Goldman Sachs and others bought 15-story Mayflower Hotel and vacant lot for $401 million, or $690 per buildable square foot. (May)

    310 West 52nd St

    Elad Properties bought former SIR Studios site and announced plans to build a 42-story apart-ment tower, the company’s biggest ground-up project in the city so far. (Nov.)

    Ninth Ave between West 35th and 36th streets

    Mendel Mendlowitz bought entire eastern block between West 35 and 36th streets for $22 million. (Dec.)


    Lexington Ave between 85th and 86th streets

    Developer Intell Management and Goldman Properties reportedly plan new luxury tower on Goldman-owned land assemblage along Lex-ington Avenue; currently a group of small, mixed-use properties. Part of a package deal including Stanhope Hotel expected to close Jan. 2005.

    980 Madison Ave

    RFR Holdings’ Aby Rosen and Michael Fuchs bought old-Sotheby Parke Bernet Building and rest of block-front from 76th to 77th Street for $126 million; possible redevelop-ment opportunities for residential.

    200 Chambers Street
    400-unit tower planned by a Resnick family partnership, with the city sign-ing off on the sale of the land in No-vember. Construction on either rent-als or condos expected to begin in January 2005.

  8. #158

    Default

    February 13, 2005

    Apartment Building to Rise Where Temple Now Stands

    By DAVID W. DUNLAP

    nce, its gilded copper dome proudly proclaimed the presence of Temple B'nai Israel, an ample synagogue and vital community center. Once, neighbors played in its gym, swam in its pool, ate from its kitchen. Once, New York City mayors came to win the hearts of its congregants in an imposing sanctuary that could hold 1,300 worshipers.

    Today, the dome is a skeleton, the interior a gutted ruin. And the former synagogue at 610 West 149th Street, one of the noblest vestiges of the Upper Manhattan diaspora of the early 20th century, is about to be torn down to make way for an apartment building.

    Vandals began the demolition in 1991, 12 years after the departure of the few remaining members of the original congregation. They stripped the dome of copper, including decorative lion's heads, exposing the building to the elements. By then, the great arched stained-glass window had been replaced with cinderblocks.

    Despite these structural injuries, however, the exterior retained some of its grandeur and much of its dignity until recently. Inside was a different matter.

    "You could see from the ground floor to the sky," said Greg Baron, one of the developers of the condominium apartment project. He and Eric Bilhuber are working with the Gospel Missionary Baptist Church, which has owned the building since 1994.

    Marvin H. Meltzer of Meltzer/Mandl Architects, designers of the new building, said that he had mixed emotions about the loss of Temple B'nai Israel. He is also renovating the 152-year-old Congregation Chasam Sopher at 8 Clinton Street, near Houston Street. And his father, Shmuel, was an Orthodox rabbi.

    But he said there was no alternative to demolition, for which the developers have a permit. "It was dangerous walking in there," Mr. Meltzer said. "There was a lot of water damage. The masonry was really almost unstable. We looked at trying to keep it in any form. It just wasn't doable." The old synagogue is not an official landmark.

    The new building will have an 11-story wing on 149th Street joined to a six-story wing on 148th Street. Construction will take about a year and a half. The developers expect prices to be about $475 to $500 a square foot, meaning that a 1,200-square-foot, two-bedroom apartment might sell for $600,000. Because 149th Street inclines steeply from Broadway down to Riverside Drive, upper floors will have Hudson River views.

    At the base of the structure will be a new home for the Gospel Missionary Baptist Church, with a sanctuary, banquet hall and baptistery. The church will have its own entrance on 149th Street and will own its space in the new building, Mr. Baron said.

    Mr. Bilhuber said he would look into the possibility, if at all practical, of salvaging some ornamental reliefs on the facade. These include menorahs, Torah scrolls, the tablets of the Ten Commandments, cups of Elijah, lions of Judah and a Star of David.

    "If it's something I feel is worth saving, I'll take it off," he said. "We'll save it."

    The synagogue was the work of Emery Roth, a prominent New York architect. It was dedicated May 28, 1922. "The City of New York is fortunate in having this latest acquisition to the forces of good contributing to the creation of the highest type of citizen," Mayor John F. Hylan told the congregation that day.

    Seven decades later, the building was set upon by vandals. At the time, Michael Henry Adams, a preservationist, tried without success to enlist the help of the police. "In terms of the scrap value of copper, this was small potatoes in West Harlem terms," he recalled. "The police said, 'We have assaults and homicides to deal with.' "

    Mr. Adams said the building merited landmark status even in its damaged state. "This just can't be duplicated now that it's gone," he said.

    Last week, under the black netting erected by the demolition contractor, the menorahs and tablets were faintly visible. And there was still a verse from the Book of Isaiah around the central arch. "My house shall be called a house," it began.

    But the last five words - "of prayer for all peoples" - could no longer be seen.

    Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

  9. #159
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,752

    Default

    Globest.com

    JV Plans West Side Development

    By Barbara Jarvie
    Last updated: February 13, 2005 08:27am

    NEW YORK CITY-Clinton West, a condominium development, will be the first development over the Amtrak rail lines in more than 30 years. Clinton Mews Development Group LLC, a joint venture of Second Development Services and Procida Realty & Construction Corp., purchased 516 West 47th St. for $55 million.


    The joint venture plans 149 condominium apartments fronting both 46th and 47th streets between 10th and 11th avenues in the Clinton District. The site was previously an open-aired parking lot. The complex, which is slated to open in the late summer, will sit on a newly constructed $5-million concrete platform that will serve as a foundation system and mitigate sound from the rail lines. A spokesperson for the developers tell GlobeSt.com that while building over the rail lines costs slightly more, it is not a substantial amount and that SDS/Procida was attracted to the area because the neighborhood is mostly rental and there is a market demand for condos. Price points have not been established yet because there is no offering plan at this time.


    Designed by Larsen Shein Ginsberg Snyder Architects LLP, Clinton West will contain two, six-story buildings with an additional penthouse floor, all within the 65-foot height limit required by the Special Clinton District zoning regulations. The Mews arrangement of the structures will be merged with a glass-faceted greenhouse designed by TEK Architects PC that will overlook a court area.


    “Developing these very special homes above the rail lines required both patience and attention to detail during the approval, design and construction process,” says Mario Procida, president/CEO of Procida, which serves as the project’s general contractor. Construction financing has been provided by HSBC Bank USA. SDS/Procida, through their various entities, is currently involved in the development of more than $500 million of residential property in the metropolitan area.


  10. #160
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,752

    Default

    NYSun

    February 16, 2005

    Up the Ante

    New York Sun Staff Editorial
    February 16, 2005

    The announcement by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority that it will open the West Side stadium site coveted by the Jets and Mayor Bloomberg to a competitive bidding process is a welcome development, one for which these columns have been plumping from the outset. It was clear that the MTA had a fiduciary responsibility to seek other offers for the site before letting it go to any buyer, and we're delighted it has acknowledged the point. "Anybody that's interested in it can put in a bid," a spokesman for the authority, Thomas Kelly, said yesterday.

    But the decision to use an open bidding process also illuminates the fact that New York is at a pivotal moment in its development debate, one that goes far beyond the battle over the West Side stadium. This is a moment that also includes the fight before the City Council's land-use committee, which has been moving to prevent the construction of a new big-box store, BJ's Wholesale Club, in the Bronx. It strikes us that there's an opportunity for someone to emerge with a positive, free-market, problem-solving, unifying theme for the city.

    Start with the fact that we are witnessing a remarkable boom in residential real estate, which is spreading to the outer boroughs. "In the past few years, residential construction in the outer boroughs has increased dramatically," the president of the New York Building Congress, Richard Anderson, told us. In 2004, about 25,000 new residential units were built in all five boroughs, according to Mr. Anderson, and most of them - about 20,000 - were built outside Manhattan. By comparison, 1994 saw fewer than 4,000 units built.

    The latest indication of this housing explosion is the announcement by the Muss Development Company that it plans to build a $600 million mixed-use development in Flushing, Queens, which will include six condominium and rental buildings with 1,000 residential units. The credit for real estate growth in the city goes to a combination of consumer demand, low interest rates, and the rezoning of areas of New York from manufacturing to residential. The Bloomberg administration deserves a bow, too, for encouraging housing construction. So far, the private market has responded well to these incentives.

    But New York remains hampered by a burdensome regulatory environment and complex approval processes for new construction. A forthcoming article in the Journal of Law and Economics, "Why Is Manhattan So Expensive? Regulation and the Rise in House Prices," argues that land-use restrictions continue to constrain the supply of housing in Manhattan - and, by implication, in the rest of the city as well. "We argue that the limited supply response primarily is the consequence of an increasingly restrictive regulatory environment," write the authors of the study, economists Edward Glaeser, Joseph Gyourko, and Raven Saks.

    The upshot, they say, is that increased demand results in higher prices rather than additional construction. "One half or more of the value of a condominium can be thought of as arising from some type of regulatory constraint preventing the construction of new housing," the authors argue. Yet growing demand for housing doesn't need to result in skyrocketing prices. Tens of thousands of new units were built in Manhattan during the 1950s, and prices remained flat. At that time, however, landowners were generally free to develop their properties free of regulations aimed at preventing new construction.

    It seems that the ingredients are now in place for New York City to solve its structural financial problems by embracing a free-market boom in real estate - as the city did at mid-century. What's more, the growth in real estate promises to extend the prosperity that a small sliver of Manhattan has enjoyed for the past 25 years to the whole city. New real estate means more jobs and an expanded tax base for the city. Also, denser residential areas often mean safer ones as well.

    But to embrace such growth, New York needs to encourage market solutions - and decisions such as nixing new wholesale stores only hinder the organic growth of the city. Clearly, there is a demand for new stores such as BJ's Wholesale Club, and the jobs and low prices they bring to the city. The big-box stores that the Giuliani administration cleared the way for in New York - Home Depot in Red Hook and Chelsea, Kmart at Astor Place and 34th Street - have proved to be popular.

    It's obviously better for the city to have New Yorkers shopping for such discounts within city limits rather than out in Westchester or New Jersey, not to mention the jobs that would be created, but this logic seems to elude the City Council. We would have thought the mayor would be out front in this fight, but he seemed to be spending his political capital on a plan for the West Side rail yards cooked up in City Hall and subsidized with taxpayer dollars. Hopefully, the MTA's competitive bidding process will help lead the city toward a free-market approach to development and growth.

    The anti-market forces in New York have gone to such absurd lengths that the courts are now ordering the city and state to spend billions of dollars more on schools with money neither the city nor the state has. How much better would it be for the city leadership to allow New York's entrepreneurial energy to express itself? New York can continue to hinder growth and see more and more New Yorkers excluded by rising prices. Or the city can embrace its potential, expand the tax base, and overcome its structural deficits. This is a kind of pivotal moment for New York. But where is the leader to articulate the pro-growth message of "One New York"?

  11. #161
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Harlem
    Posts
    2,805

    Default

    471 Greenwich St.
    8 floors, 21 units
    111 ft
    Architect: WYS Design Partnership Architect

  12. #162

  13. #163
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Harlem
    Posts
    2,805

    Default

    Tribeca Towers
    20 floors
    Architect: Gerner Kronick + Valcarel

    http://www.gkvarchitects.com > portfolio > building design > residential > around the middle in little thumbnail things

  14. #164

    Default

    No wonder there are NIMBY's was the first thing I thought when I came across that proposal.

    There's a thread here.
    http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5360

  15. #165
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Harlem
    Posts
    2,805

    Default

    "64th Street Residential Tower"

    24 floors
    Architect: May & Pinska
    64th Street and Second Avenue
    On Hold



    http://www.maypinska.com/pages/categories/catsetres.htm

Similar Threads

  1. Greenways and Waterfront Development
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 198
    Last Post: July 21st, 2015, 01:30 AM
  2. Astoria Development
    By Kris in forum Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, and SI Real Estate
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: November 26th, 2014, 04:43 AM
  3. The Final Frontier for Development in Manhattan - Falling re
    By Fabb in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 18th, 2003, 05:16 PM
  4. 139 E. 34th Street - Building type, residential?
    By dvinfo in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 1st, 2003, 11:34 AM
  5. E 34th new development
    By tlowe in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 31st, 2003, 05:15 PM

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