NEW YORK | Hudson Yards Phase 2 | 1,376 - 1,189 - 1,180 FT | 80/80/74 FLOORS

[Hudson11]

now add a spire.

[NYguy]

Nothing they are proposing here is so drastically different from what exists at the High Line now.



derekcarter2
















The state needs to get on board, and do something with the 2 sites it owns nearby, including Site K (Affirmation Tower), and this lot, the former truck marshalling yards.
It sits directly across from what would be the casino resort. The governor has said she wants affordable housing on these sites, but has done nothing to move that forward.

[mrnyc]

if they win the casino bid they’ll probably have to start decking it over from north to south and leave the south end open for awhile while they work on gateway tunneling.

[ChiND]

It will be an utter outrage if this project is killed (or dramatically scaled back) by NIMBYs.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by ChiND

It will be an utter outrage if this project is killed (or dramatically scaled back) by NIMBYs.

It won't be scaled back. The square footage has to remain the same. But it is interesting that they met with the community and altered the project 10 times already. That means the formatting of the space probably changed from time to time. Could have been taller towers. Could have been a larger base. Who knows. The bottom line is everything the Friends of the High Line are saying is untrue. They can be against the casino, and that's fine. But they should just say that. It's the lying I can't stomach.

[Zapatan]

^ Agreed, anyone complaining about skyscrapers in NYC is welcome to move to Kansas.

Originally Posted by NYguy

It won't be scaled back. The square footage has to remain the same.

I just hope there's still a chance for something noticeably taller than 30HY.

[gflny03]

Does anyone know if there's a development plan for Block 679?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by bdurk

The fact that there are NIMBYs for these types of project in NYC always makes no sense to me. Manhattan is full of supertalls and somehow the 30th (I don't know the actual number but I figure it might be more than that) supertall skyscraper is going to "ruin" something. I'm used to people in Philly being like that but it is absurd to me that anyone can live in New York City and think they don't sound ridiculous spewing stuff like that.

There is no rationale to NIMBY thinking. It is just the kneejerk reaction. Like a dog barking at anything that passes by.

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I just hope there's still a chance for something noticeably taller than 30HY.

I can tell you that that is not a goal of this development.

[ChiND]

Originally Posted by NYguy

It won't be scaled back. The square footage has to remain the same. But it is interesting that they met with the community and altered the project 10 times already. That means the formatting of the space probably changed from time to time. Could have been taller towers. Could have been a larger base. Who knows. The bottom line is everything the Friends of the High Line are saying is untrue. They can be against the casino, and that's fine. But they should just say that. It's the lying I can't stomach.

I agree. I thought that perhaps Related might cave and reduce the towers’ current proposed heights and instead build another one.

Anyway, presumably, if Wynn doesn’t get the casino license, the western yard won’t start for a long time, which means no school, no give-away, “affordable” apartments, and no park for a long time. Thus, these jerks are only spiting themselves. Also, on a bigger level for the city, Related’s proposal will create far more construction jobs than the other proposals would.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by ChiND

I agree. I thought that perhaps Related might cave and reduce the towers’ current proposed heights and instead build another one.

Do they have enough space to do this?

[ChiND]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Do they have enough space to do this?

Weren’t 4-5 towers originally planned for the west yard?

P.S.: What’s the cat in the blanket supposed to represent? I’m curious.

[bdurk]

The fact that there are NIMBYs for these types of project in NYC always makes no sense to me. Manhattan is full of supertalls and somehow the 30th (I don't know the actual number but I figure it might be more than that) supertall skyscraper is going to "ruin" something. I'm used to people in Philly being like that but it is absurd to me that anyone can live in New York City and think they don't sound ridiculous spewing stuff like that.

[wanderer34]

Originally Posted by bdurk

The fact that there are NIMBYs for these types of project in NYC always makes no sense to me. Manhattan is full of supertalls and somehow the 30th (I don't know the actual number but I figure it might be more than that) supertall skyscraper is going to "ruin" something. I'm used to people in Philly being like that but it is absurd to me that anyone can live in New York City and think they don't sound ridiculous spewing stuff like that.

NIMBYism killed what would've been a very great supertall in Philly, yet NY is about to get it's 30th supertall. One Vanderbilt is a new supertall that I loved and it would've spurred competition between the two cities, but I guess Philadelphians are so nimbyish and so undynamic. They make great food, though!

[Zapatan]

They have more than enough space. Even in the earlier plan, with just as much open space, they were planning 8 towers.

I guess that could easily kill the dream of seeing the heights in the title realized, I do like those designs though!

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I guess that could easily kill the dream of seeing the heights in the title realized, I do like those designs though!

Why would it?

[Zapatan]

^ This is why I never get my hopes for any proposal

A decision is not expected until mid-2025, but already Related has hit a major snag. It is at an impasse with the Friends of the High Line, the creator and curator of the elevated park that has become the defining amenity of the West Side.

Originally Posted by NYguy

Why would it?

To please the NIMBYs. More towers = lower heights per tower. Unless they're skinnier.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by ChiND

This is concerning.

https://therealdeal.com/new-york/202...ag-is-serious/

Not really. A lone councilmember doesn't have the power to block approval. The city council as a whole does have a say in the ULURP process. But if the city and state wants this done, it will be done. As it is, that's just one hoop, and the casino proposals already survived an earlier ULURP process. Even surviving ULURP (which is what the state is blaming the delay in licensing until next year on), there is still the matter of the 6 member board that has to approval a casino proposal before it even gets to the final round. Any proposal cand only afford to lose 2 votes, of which 1 will represent the city council member. Still a long way to go.

Originally Posted by Zapatan

To please the NIMBYs. More towers = lower heights per tower. Unless they're skinnier.

That could also equal less open space and more daylight blocking towers. See how that works?

[ChiND]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Not really. A lone councilmember doesn't have the power to block approval. The city council as a whole does have a say in the ULURP process. But if the city and state wants this done, it will be done. As it is, that's just one hoop, and the casino proposals already survived an earlier ULURP process. Even surviving ULURP (which is what the state is blaming the delay in licensing until next year on), there is still the matter of the 6 member board that has to approval a casino proposal before it even gets to the final round. Any proposal cand only afford to lose 2 votes, of which 1 will represent the city council member. Still a long way to go.

I hope that you’re right. I’d love to see the Related plan built precisely as shown.

[ChiND]

This is concerning.

https://therealdeal.com/new-york/202...ag-is-serious/

[Busy Bee]

___