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

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by ChiND

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.

Not sure, I just hope they build as tall as possible here, not worried about the quantity since HY already has that. Although I guess both have their pros, especially if the designs stay cool.


No meaning, it's just a funny picture from years ago. Been meaning to update it.

[ChiND]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Not sure, I just hope they build as tall as possible here, not worried about the quantity since HY already has that. Although I guess both have their pros, especially if the designs stay cool.


No meaning, it's just a funny picture from years ago. Been meaning to update it.

Cool!

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by ChiND

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.

The towers would have to be phased in, all but one being residential.

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Do they have enough space to do this?

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

[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?

[ChiND]

This is concerning.

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

[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?

[Busy Bee]

___

[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.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by ChiND

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

Still a while to go before even this phase is final. There will be a lot of talking back and forth between then. Only once the land issues are finalized will this proposal (and the others) begin the state approval process, with more rounds of community engagement. It's a ridiculous repetitive process that was put in place by the governor, which is why we are where we are now - over a year away from knowing who the winning bidders are.

As far as the current ULURP goes, there are currently to things moving at the same time. The mapping change (alteration to a street), and modifications to the site plan itself, but not in the amount allotted to build.

[NYguy]

Mapping action for 33rd Street

[ChiND]

It will be mierda del toros, per se, if this is not built as depicted.

[NYguy]

Very glad they didn't go with this...


https://www.byencore.com/tall-building

[NYguy]

This will be joining Metropolitan Park (Queens Future) in the 7 month approvals process soon.



https://www.amny.com/opinion/give-a-...sino-a-chance/

Op-Ed | Give a Manhattan casino a chance





By Marc H. Morial
October 2, 2024

As the New Orleans Mayor who brought the first land-based casino to the state of Louisiana, I know first-hand the opportunities–and the obstacles–of trying to bring gaming to an urban environment. That’s why I’m increasingly concerned to see the weakest arguments against development in New York City deployed against enormous economic opportunity for the city and state.

Top gaming operators are currently vying for three downstate casino licenses the state announced last year. Not surprisingly, opposition has been lining up to a number of projects before a single proposal has even been submitted. My sincere hope is that the decisionmakers allow the process to play out with integrity and give all proposals a fair hearing.

The criteria for a winning bid should boil down to three key questions — who can deliver the most tax revenue, the most jobs, and the most benefits with the least disruption to their communities?

.....The resort will be the catalyst for other improvements that benefit the neighborhood’s growth and transition. This includes a large new public park, a public school and more than 300 units of affordable housing. As with most debates over big, public projects, some powerful people often get to have the loudest voices. They include supporters of a beautiful public park along the Hudson River who are worried that visitors’ views will be interrupted by the rail yards development. It would be unwise to let those concerns stand in the way of much-needed economic development that would benefit underserved communities. They need those jobs, that school, that park, and the services the tax revenues will provide. These are people who rarely have the power to influence these debates but have the most to lose if this project doesn’t happen.

...Certainly, no project is set in stone and community stakeholders must have an opportunity to weigh in and demand changes for the better. Indeed, Wynn and Related have already made changes based on community feedback and are certain to make more as they engage with additional community members. As all of this plays out, we must keep in mind what is in the best interests of all New Yorkers, and that should not be decided by a privileged few.