SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Cancelled Project Threads Archive (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=654)
-   -   NEW YORK | 270 Spring Street | 320 FT | 30 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=197722)

NYguy Feb 17, 2012 3:29 PM

NEW YORK | 270 Spring Street | 320 FT | 30 FLOORS
 
Another tower for the Hudson Square area...
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=188746


http://www.dnainfo.com/20120217/gree...story-building
Hudson Square Property Owner Plans Dominick Street Park, 30-Story Building

http://assets.dnainfo.com/generated/...age640x480.jpg


February 17, 2012
By Andrea Swalec


Quote:

A real estate company looking to build a 30-story housing tower on Spring Street says it will tear up a parking lot and create paradise if the city makes zoning changes that would allow the construction of a building and park.

Dominick Street Park and a 320-foot-tall building would take the place of the parking lot Edison Properties owns between Dominick and Spring streets and Varick and Hudson streets, just north of the Holland Tunnel, company vice president Anthony Borelli said in an interview. "One of the primary goals of our plan is to encourage the creation of a vibrant, mixed-use neighborhood," he said.

Edison's plans are dependent on city approval of a zoning request by Trinity Real Estate that would allow residential development in Hudson Square — the 18-block area roughly bounded by West Houston Street, Sixth Avenue, Canal Street and Greenwich Street. Designs for the 13,700-square-foot, mid-block park envisioned by Starr Whitehouse Landscape Architects and Planners show new trees and plantings, moveable cafe tables and chairs, and a fire department-themed children's play area with water features, in a nod to the park's neighbor the New York City Fire Museum.

Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation president Andrew Berman said Hudson Square will need more parks as it gains residents, but he questioned the wisdom of allowing tall buildings to be built in exchange for them. Community Board 2 chair Brad Hoylman said he thought it was "positive" that a player in the Hudson Square rezoning was considering opportunities for new parks. "CB2 feels strongly that rezoning Hudson Square to include residential use creates a need for new open space," he said, adding that the board does not have an official position yet on Edison's proposal.

http://assets.dnainfo.com/generated/...age640x480.jpg



http://assets.dnainfo.com/generated/...age640x480.jpg



http://assets.dnainfo.com/generated/...age640x480.jpg



http://assets.dnainfo.com/generated/...age640x480.jpg



http://assets.dnainfo.com/generated/...age640x480.jpg



http://assets.dnainfo.com/generated/...age640x480.jpg

NYguy Mar 30, 2012 12:09 AM

http://www.thevillager.com/?p=3178

Hudson Sq. heights too high, residents say on zoning

March 29, 2012
BY ALBERT AMATEAU

Quote:

Residents of Hudson Square’s low-rise blocks voiced their concerns on Tuesday on a proposed 20-block district that would encourage a mixed commercial/residential district active 24 hours, seven days a week.

...Height limits for new development would be 320 feet on the wide streets of Varick and Hudson Sts. and Sixth Ave.; 125 feet on Broome and Watts Sts.; and 185 feet on Dominick, Spring, Vandam, Charlton and King Sts. The proposed height limits are intended to achieve the goal of transforming the district, currently dominated by warehouses and commercial lofts, to 25 percent residential. But Sylvia Beam of the Vandam St. Block Association and Dick Blodgett of the Charlton St. Block Association, said the proposed 320-foot and 185-foot limits were not low enough to ensure the quality of life in the low-rise blocks.

sbarn Mar 30, 2012 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 5646768)
http://www.thevillager.com/?p=3178

Hudson Sq. heights too high, residents say on zoning

March 29, 2012
BY ALBERT AMATEAU

Ugh. NIMBYs. Hopefully they don't have their way... this particular nabe could use an influx of new residents.

NYguy Mar 30, 2012 11:20 AM

It's inevitable. With the city's population growing, there must be more housing in underutilized spaces. Of course, the most underutilized space of all is up, but some of these neighborhoods of Manhattan at least, that aren't historic could use some upzoning.

babybackribs2314 Mar 31, 2012 8:25 PM

Quote:

Besides Trinity's stake in the neighborhood, another tower has been proposed at Spring and Dominick Streets. Yet again, NIMBYism has reared its ugly head, even though the developers have already planned major concessions to the public's benefit--besides the new tower, which will rise a mere 320 feet, Edison Properties proposes a new 13,700 square foot park adjacent to Dominick Street. Despite these major improvements, many NIMBYs are still outraged, arguing that the height of new buildings is somehow linked to quality of life issues--in the meantime, residents are flocking to the Financial District, where the vast majority of buildings are skyscrapers.
Full article: http://newyorkyimby.blogspot.com/201...osed.html#more

Needs to be built. 320' is nothing, although I do think 500'+ would be unreasonable for this neighborhood.

chris08876 Aug 6, 2017 7:34 PM

I'd say this is canceled.

I checked, and the Edison Parking lot is still there, plus its been like 5 years since an update.

Maybe something will be developed in time, but that is in question. Unless someone knows something...

=============

Quote:

272 Spring St
b/t Varick & Hudson Sts

7 DAYS | 24 HOURS
Phone: (212) 675-8910
Text Ahead: (917) 525-2296

Day rates (Monday - Friday)
Enter 4:00am - 4:00pm
Up to 1/2 hour8.00
Up to 2 hours23.00
Up to 24 hours

https://www.parkfast.com/Styles/Imag...ons/Loc280.jpg
============================
https://www.parkfast.com/parking-in-soho

Crawford Aug 6, 2017 10:34 PM

This site is part of the rezoned Hudson Square neighborhood. Obviously it's a development site. Owned by Trinity RE and leased by Edison, both developers. It's on the list of future Trinity residential projects.

I don't understand the SSP definition of "cancelled" (or for that matter "proposed"), so don't particularly care either way. It all seems arbitrary.

Submariner Aug 7, 2017 6:31 PM

Too bad nothing has come of this site. The parking lot is an eyesore in an increasingly built up neighborhood.

Interestingly, a parking lot adjacent to this lot, situated on the west, was cleared out and put on the market by "Right Time Reality" roughly six months ago. Since then, the sign has disappeared and the site still remains empty.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.