This site is more likely than any of the others to get a casino license. The NIMBYs have no say over the height of whatever get's built here. If Related reverts back to the original site plan, it will take longer to get the site fully built, due to most of it being residential. But there will be at least one, possibly two supertalls built on site. Further, it's a site bordered by numerous supertalls, so that argument really doesn't hold any weight, which is why now they're leaning on the "High Line" and "Housing" arguments. If they really cared about anything other than being anti-casino, they would insist Related build more affordable housing units instead of the extra luxury units they're insisting Related build.

The awarding of the license will ensure the second phase gets built at once, just as the first phase did.




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...OO.Large7c.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...iA.Large7d.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...DX.Large7e.jpg

This proposal is by far my favorite casino bid, and I'm afraid of what may or may not rise here without it. I know they say the development would still happen, but I'd be willing to bet it won't be nearly as good without the resort to bolster funding.

I think the high line would benefit from having a more polished northern end, and like NYguy has said the whole appeal is that it weaves its way through the city. The addition of a resort would only improve the experience for people. The argument against just doesn't make sense - and risks even more resort-less towers rising around it, potentially lacking that polish it needs.

My fingers are crossed for this one, and it's such a shame the process is being drawn out so much. With this resort, I think the MW/Moynihan connector and surrounding area/businesses would see a lot more foot-traffic too.

The thing they are most against here is the casino. Usually, it's the big towers (which wouldn't make sense because there will be big towers either way). But it's basically the anti-casino crowd. They don't care about anything else, including the usaul affordable housing.

The office component is the same size as what was originally planned, so no argument there. But Related will have to phase in development of so many residential towers. Who knows how long that would take. Meanwhile, if they get the casino license, the site would be built out in 5 years they say.

You're right there. But I think without the backbone of resort revenue, a non-resort based development just won't compare to the proposal we're seeing in those renderings, for public green space, businesses, and what it does to improve the high line - although it could, and I could be wrong. :shrug:

What I know for sure is that this proposal will spur the area into life, bring in revenue, and it will make that happen a lot quicker. It's a win win.

The one thing about the old plan for the western half is that being mostly residential, it probably wouldn’t feel very public. The casino resort, while upscale, would be an open entity. And then there’s everything that comes with it.

Hudson Yards looks like it's in its own time zone here. The planned office tower should really be a couple of hundred feet higher to stand out more. But I get it.



Bwillschcreative

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...0591e003_b.jpg



https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...2e06f2c6_h.jpg




https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...c9f7969d_b.jpg

You've come a long way baby...

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/KcoAA...3/s-l1600.webp
___

Yes it has, and still more to go.

I can't think of anything that exemplifies the depressing state of NYC development more than a project that was sold on the promise of mixed-income housing, schools, and a walkable urban core, only to be then replaced with a plan centered around a fucking casino after the initial stages have already been approved and built...

Um, the mixed income housing and school is still part of the plan. It's as walkable in its current form as it was in the previous form. The "fucking casino" will generate much more revenue for the city and state (for things like schools, transit, etc.) than any more condo buildings will, which in case you hadn't noticed, aren't rising. And won't rise anytime soon.

All of those are still part of the plan...

It's interesting that people are complaining about Related's plan to cut back on the amount of luxury condos it plans to build. Nowhere in New York City are they demanding more luxury condos be built. But the NIMBYs here are special. The one argument they could be making is that Related should offer more affordable units, but the fact that they haven't shows you they don't really care about that. Meanwhile, Hudson Yards remains the most expensive neighborhood in the city, and that's saying a lot...


https://www.propertyshark.com/Real-E...neighborhoods/


Related has said it would take some time to build all of those luxury residential units, and you can see why. Meanwhile, commercial has done and continues to do very well for them in the Hudson Yards.

I hope that a casino is never built here (rather in Times Square). They should stick to the original plan (affordable housing). New office space should rather be built on Park Ave, there is still enough demand there. 350, 175 Park Ave and 45 east 45th Street should be just the beginning.

But given the problem of affordable units and luxury units, why not consider the idea of ​​a single large tower of 1,700 ft tall with 3 million square feet, which includes offices, luxury apartments and a hotel. A Wynn casino in the shape of a sphere, a park and the rest spaces for affordable units and schools. It would cost less and there would be less and useless controversy. It could work... :)

I guess I really don't understand the backlash to casinos. Bars are on every corner and alcohol is a much more widespread and damaging vice compared to gambling?

there is no way someone is going to pay for covering over a railyard and then just put up affordable housing. come on now.

I don’t understand what people are not getting about the difference between the 2 plans, but it’s basically more commercial space and less condos. That’s it.

- the same number of affordable housing units will be built (which makes it an increase, percentage wise)

- the same amount of seats will be built at the school

- the amount of office space is the same.

As I’ve said, the only thing they cut was the amount of luxury units. And frankly, so what? There will be luxury condos built all over the city. The difference is you can blend that into existing neighborhoods. No neef to make the Hudson Yards any more of a gated community in feel than it already is.

The condos have been a harder sell, and the office has done VERY well for Related. The City foresaw this, which is what the HY is really about.

As far as the NIMBY backlash to casinos, its what they do. People play the lottery and gamble on phones every day. States profit GREATLY from it. If NIMBYsfind it personally objectionable for different reasons, the have the option to boycott the casinos. And any related entertainment or dining venues.

Has anyone been inside the mall recently? I went in today and it's a complete warzone. So many stores blocked off and under construction. I know that Wells Fargo is taking up the top stories, but is anyone know anything more about whats going on in the lower floors?

If you've been in recently, you've got the gist of it. Not really worth creating an account for.

A lot to look at here. First a comparison of the site plans...



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...PVrpRr.s1b.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...Gnopjy.s2b.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...XE.sitegif.gif




Here you can see what changes from plan to plan:



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...rBNVoJf.c1.jpg


https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...7bqCqmL.c2.jpg


https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...4qhvB6a.c3.jpg



The shiny casino...


https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...MibRHN.r1b.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...BNy9A9.r1c.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...9mBWuuK.r2.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...L.r3large2.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...v.r3large3.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...O.r4large2.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...i.r4large3.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...P.r5large2.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...5.r5large3.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...Pdd7fe7.r6.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...z.r7large2.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...c.r7large3.jpg

A look at some screenshots...


1
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen1.png



2
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen2.png



3
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen3.png



4
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen4.png



5
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen5.png



6
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen6.png



7
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen7.png



8
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen8.png



9
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1....HYscreen9.png



10
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen10.png



11
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen11.png



12
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen12.png



13
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen13.png



14
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen14.png



15
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen15.png



16
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen16.png



17
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen17.png



18
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen18.png



19
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen19.png



20
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen20.png



21
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen21.png



22
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen22.png



23
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen23.png



24
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen24.png



25
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen25.png



26
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen26.png



27
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen27.png



28
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen28.png



29
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen29.png



30
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen30.png



31
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen31.png



32
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen32.png



33
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen33.png

I feel like the only thing I really do dislike about this design, is actually the office tower. I really really hope they don't go with that design because it's so basic and boring for a tower that tall, and being among the tallest at the Hudson Yards site, I'd hope to see it would have a more interesting crown. Maybe something to compliment 30 Hudson Yards.

Is there a link to the original video?

Downloaded from the website…


• Video Link

Needs more street level retail. This is Manhattan.

It has some street level retail, but the real issue is that they should really be building more on the railyards. Both phases, and even Manhattan West are underbuilt using even the basic Midtown FAR. That's the reason there's so much open space, and why it feels so different from the rest of Manhattan. But the NIMBYs had to be appeased. Which means they should be told to fuck off now.

One other thing, though Related classifies the earlier plan as having 6 towers (as opposed to the 3 now), it was really 8 because two of the sites featured 2 towers with a shared base.



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...XE.sitegif.gif

I don't think they need any more retail at the base. If you want retail, just walk a few blocks away. The open space is a respite to streets and cityscape that can get supercrowded and overwhelming at times. Since the streetscape is not developed organically but as a full complex, it would be hard to expect it to be like the rest of Manhattan's blocks. And at least they are not destroying neighborhoods or making stark superblocks with superbland buildings and useless plazas like they did in the 60s/70s 'urban renewal' phase.

He's saying it needs street retail because that's what activates Manhattan streets, which is why it's required in all of the buildings in Hudson Yards - it doesn't have a tradition of foot traffic.

As for a "respite" from the city, one of the largest parks in Manhattan - Hudson River Park - is right there. As is the High Line Park. People who want a respite from the city don't flock to the location of some of the tallest towers in the city.

I don't think retail at the base makes much sense given that the whole neighborhood is built around a shopping mall at its center.

I do prefer the original plan i think just from a terms or the two Phases flowing together. But zero complaints either way this one will be great

Side note, it's completely ridiculous New York State can't work through the licenses before the end of 2025. Hope that once the three are awarded, not only do the casino projects get moving right away, but all the developers who aren't picked turn around and throw all their eggs in another project.

A shopping mall isn't the same thing as street retail, nor does it serve the same purpose. It's for that reason most towers, and even Hudson Yards towers like 50 Hudson and the Spiral are required to have street level retail at the base. New York doesn't do multi-story parking garages in the heart of the city at the base of its towers. It's all about the pedestrian experience.



It can be done. Both houses of state government came to an agreement that would have had the bids due this week, but the governor simply ignored it. Another decision kicked down the road. Meanwhile, bids for the Affirmation Site were due a year ago. Those apparently have been ignored too. No need to deal with "troublesome" issues when you can kick it down the road.

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...TSYfX.r8.1.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...MxfDn.r8.2.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...buwL.r8.4b.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...Oc27.r8.6b.jpg

How do you always find these high resolution images? All of the ones I'm seeing don't exceed a 2000 pixel width

That's the only one I've seen directly from the website. But if you change the width in the address bar, you can get it larger. I've gotten that one up to 6000.

https://www.wynnnewyorkcity.com/



• Video Link

TBH I honestly don't mind them reducing the number of towers for more park. I do wish they'd build taller though, like double that Wynn tower's height and now we're talking..

My fingers are crossed for this one! Especially after seeing these new images/renders. I agree about the reduced number of towers, the more open park space feels nicer - and if the proposal isn't losing any promised features like school capacity, affordable housing units, etc. it's a Wynn Wynn! ;)

If I cross my fingers any harder I'll break them!

The base of that straddle tower is amazing. I don't really care for the rest of the building above that though.

I remember there were earlier comments about street level retail. I did not think it was an issue, but looking at the video rendering I wonder why they do not show any retail at the building level to the High Line walkway. Is there are a reason why they can't or don't want/depict retail at the High Line levels, such as traffic congestion concerns?

In reality these would be the true dimensions of the towers. :)

1 Hudson waterfront 1,180 ft - 74 floors
Wynn Resort - 1,189 ft - 80 floors
40 HY - 1,376 ft - 80 floors

http://live.staticflickr.com/65535/5...8be5e4b2_b.jpg

http://live.staticflickr.com/65535/5...5dab18e3_b.jpg

There is no retail at the High Line levels, rather the retail is underneath, just as it is on the eastern side of the railyards. The High Line itself is above street level.

The casino complex also will have street level retail on the Avenue side, and restaurants on the park facing side.



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...Pdd7fe7.r6.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...z.r7large2.jpg

I still believe that in a city with so few developable spaces minus demolition, there should have been more built over the railyards. But it is what it is.

Ironically, Related's latest changes are more in line with what was originally proposed for the western yards after the stadium fell off. Originally, the center was to be left open, just a it is in the current proposal...


1
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...NcOFhQ5.p1.jpg


Note the changes on both sides...


2
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...XBBVQbK.p2.jpg


3
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...ZcTBMfk.p3.jpg


4
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...G4yjOh2.p4.jpg


5
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...db6c97S.p5.jpg


6
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...Yy9H9bw.p6.jpg




This is important, the flexibility of what could be built...


7
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...xcuoAHD.p7.jpg




One thing the city has done since 2007 is retreat from the parking requirements in the Hudson Yards, as well as reduced reliance on auto traffic in key areas.

8
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...n1RGGBm.p8.jpg


9
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...eseVlYA.p9.jpg


10
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...xy4kbz.p10.jpg


11
https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...5pRXZk.p11.jpg



Related's initial proposal, like the others at the time, featured the open space requirements in the center...



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...G8i2Um.p17.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/g4/06/102706/2/...3.Cxh3gyBn.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o3/06/102706/1/...del1121074.JPG



Vornado's proposal:



https://a4.pbase.com/g4/06/102706/2/...8.yIyzW3Ap.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1/...qwjjvIA.p1.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1/...1lMnf3s.p2.jpg



Extell's proposal:



https://a4.pbase.com/o3/06/102706/1/...el11210713.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/o3/06/102706/1/...el11210716.JPG



People forget that Tishman Speyer was the original winner of the railyards development, this was their plan....



https://a4.pbase.com/o3/06/102706/1/...el11210766.JPG



This is the Brookfield proposal, I remember it being a favorite among many...


https://a4.pbase.com/o3/06/102706/1/...el11210755.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/o3/06/102706/1/...Cg.large4b.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/o3/06/102706/1/...el11210738.JPG




In addition to changes to the eastern yards, Related's plan for the western yards evolved into this:



https://a4.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1/...rendering2.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o10/06/102706/1...RC5ovit.d2.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/o2/06/102706/1/...0T.hudson2.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/o2/06/102706/1/...t2.hudson3.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/o1/06/102706/1/...tMY2F3.r25.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/o1/06/102706/1/...YGymfM.r29.JPG



https://a4.pbase.com/o2/06/102706/1/...dZIbI4.r59.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1/...OEbF1f.r5b.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...ken_24x758.png



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...wiv6rt.s2b.jpg

Now we're here...



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...Gnopjy.s2b.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...ic0317241b.jpg



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HYscreen11.png

Being the hotel the Wynn Resort should be the taller one. Many views will be blocked otherwise so not a great sell.

LOL. Have you seen Manhattan? Every hotel is surrounded by buildings. People aren't complaining about the views.

But if that's your concern, this tower - at even half it's height - would have more open views than most hotels in Manhattan.



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...UeVdCv.s2c.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...CM.Large9b.jpg




https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...c1.Large9c.jpg

Maybe something like that? :)

http://live.staticflickr.com/65535/5...4a836b4d_b.jpg

I guess it could have been worse given that Steve Wynn is an afront to good taste.

Nice edit!^ Looking at this, I wouldn't mind a height increase.

Some testimonials for the Related/Wynn project...


• Video Link



I was worried about how the tower would turn out, given all of the Wynn towers look the same, but I'm comfortable with it. The office tower, while not exactly flat at the top, would look better I think with a more pronounced curve up top like the Wynn tower. I'm sure these towers will all be refined more before we get to any actual construction.



https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...HzMi.r8.6d.jpg