NEW YORK | 250 Water Street | 2 x 470 FT | 38 FLOORS - Page 4

NYguy · #1 Posted **May 4, 2020, 5:11 PM**

I hope they go the full height route, to better balance with 80 South Street (which would be higher than what could be shown here).

Camstonisland · #2 Posted **May 4, 2020, 6:26 PM**

Anyone have any renderings of the non-river side of the tower? Are they doing anything interesting with the back corner, or will it just look like a red and brown 432 Park Ave? The triangle inset on the river side looks great, but their ignoring of the other side is concerning.

SkyHigher · #3 Posted **May 4, 2020, 6:38 PM**

Hooray it's red not a shade of blue for once!! + Makes 80 South Street less out of place

Zapatan · #4 Posted **May 4, 2020, 8:44 PM**

A combination of this + 80 SS would be mighty epic

How likely is it that the NIMBYs put an end to all of this though? (Or 80 SS for that matter). I bet Gale is going into vulture mode.

SkyHigher · #5 Posted **May 5, 2020, 12:14 AM**

Out of interest is there any scope for more skyscrapers nearby 250 Water Street?

NYguy · #6 Posted **May 5, 2020, 12:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyHigher

Out of interest is there any scope for more skyscrapers nearby 250 Water Street?

Not really, unless you go up a little bit to the Two-Bridges towers that are undergoing their own battles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

How likely is it that the NIMBYs put an end to all of this though? (Or 80 SS for that matter). I bet Gale is going into vulture mode.

80 South Street just needs a developer with financing to get built, something that could take a little while. 250 Water Street has to move through the approvals process, but one thing the developer has going is that no one wants a large tower built directly on the waterfront, which is the other alternative to a development on this site, whatever form that may take.

mrnyc · #7 Posted **May 5, 2020, 1:28 PM**

^ thats a shame.

oh well, back to square one.

it will get developed someday.

but isnt this a highly polluted site that needs a lot of remediation?

NYguy · #8 Posted **May 5, 2020, 1:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc

^ thats a shame.

oh well, back to square one.

it will get developed someday.

but isnt this a highly polluted site that needs a lot of remediation?

Well, I always figured the height wasn't final, even the 990 ft version, so we're still where we were. However, those were the first actual renderings of the tower we've seen, final or not. As long as they're throwing numbers and designs out there, they may as well throw everything out there. I don't get the need to be secretive. Just show us what you're working with. Otherwise, the NIMBYs will rightfully suspect you are misleading them.

dropdeaded209 · #9 Posted **May 5, 2020, 1:53 PM**

looks like they reworked the David Childs design from the Chicago Spire (cursed) site...

Zapatan · #10 Posted **May 5, 2020, 3:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc

^ thats a shame.

oh well, back to square one.

it will get developed someday.

but isnt this a highly polluted site that needs a lot of remediation?

Why is that a shame? It doesn't mean something tall won't rise here

chris08876 · #11 Posted **May 5, 2020, 3:53 PM**

Hopefully the NIMBYs don't get involved and somehow cause some legal/political battle. The rats tend to be good at that.

NYguy · #12 Posted **May 5, 2020, 9:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876

Hopefully the NIMBYs don't get involved and somehow cause some legal/political battle. The rats tend to be good at that.

They're already involved, and we haven't even begun the approvals process. But they were given 4 options that could be built, 5 if you include the waterfront tower. The waterfront tower needs no approval, but Hughes will submit one of the four plans for approval. I hope they go with the tallest option. That would put less bulk in the historic district, and provide a bonus for the skyline.

citybooster · #13 Posted **May 6, 2020, 6:27 PM**

By mixed income, what do they mean? Thought I saw it was going to be hotel/condo?

Zapatan · #14 Posted **May 9, 2020, 11:00 PM**

It reminds me of Scotia Plaza in Toronto, although sadly it seems the 1K+ tower may not be the one.

I hope we get at least 900 ish and a cool design

Maldive · #15 Posted **Jun 7, 2020, 1:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

It reminds me of Scotia Plaza in Toronto, although sadly it seems the 1K+ tower may not be the one.

I hope we get at least 900 ish and a cool design

^yeah adding to this project's NIMBY woes, Scotia Plaza has filed copyright infringement action in Trump Superior Court.

The good news is this precedent opens up NYC actions against hundreds of (poor) imitations of Empire State/Chrysler/Woolworth built around the world.

chris08876 · #16 Posted **Jun 7, 2020, 3:14 PM**

The Manhattan of the West!

Zapatan · #17 Posted **Jun 6, 2020, 4:37 PM**

Already? Could something start construction this year potentially?

SkyHigher · #18 Posted **Jun 7, 2020, 3:24 PM**

Shame they never added ickle Twin Towers to that mini LV skyline when it was built in the late 90s.

NYguy · #19 Posted **Jun 7, 2020, 6:20 PM**

I stayed at that hotel in Vegas on a couple of occasions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Already? Could something start construction this year potentially?

No, the site needs environmental cleanup. That’s what that is for.

https://www.amny.com/news/cleanup-at-250-water-st-moves-forward/

Crawford · #20 Posted **Jun 23, 2020, 12:23 AM**

Where can we vote "hell, yeah, build it!"?

This tower will transform a hideous parking lot and dead zone into a vibrant neighborhood, so obviously the rent-contolled NIMBYs losing their views are outraged.