NEW YORK | 30 Hudson Yards (North Tower) | 1,296 FT | 92 FLOORS

[Roadcruiser1]

Originally Posted by Duck From NY

Speak for yourself. Whether you're viewing Midtown from a Williamsburg rooftop or a Jersey City one, the imbalance will be noticeable.

I'm not saying I object to these tall buildings sprouting on the West Side, I welcome them in fact. I'm just saying that I'd like to see some taller buildings to the East to balance it out. Seeing the EBS flanked by supertalls would be superior in my mind.

There are towers proposed around the UN Building. They would be around 500-900 feet I would say, but nothing higher than that.

[babybackribs2314]

I wonder if the space deemed 'department store' could be filled by Nordstrom... they have been looking for quite some time, and anchoring the city's largest development in Midtown would make quite a splash...

[1Boston]

So the two towers are gonna be connected now by that retail podium thing? Is that gonna affect the construction of the towers? will it go up with the smaller tower or will it be built after both towers are built? And since the second tower isn't going to finish till two years after the first one, won't their be a big hole in either the tower or the podium?

[Roadcruiser1]

Originally Posted by 1Boston

So the two towers are gonna be connected now by that retail podium thing? Is that gonna affect the construction of the towers? will it go up with the smaller tower or will it be built after both towers are built? And since the second tower isn't going to finish till two years after the first one, won't their be a big hole in either the tower or the podium?

1) They are going to be connected.

2) Nope.

3) Shorter tower will be built first since it has a tenant (Coach).

4) Nope. The taller tower will just take longer to build. It would look very similar to the Twin Towers construction images from the 1970's. Everyone would probably be shocked.

[kickser]

Can someone make a diagram of these towers please? Thanks in advance.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Duck From NY

Speak for yourself. Whether you're viewing Midtown from a Williamsburg rooftop or a Jersey City one, the imbalance will be noticeable.

I'm not speaking for myself. I'm speaking for anybody who views any skyline anywhere. No skyline is seen from one point only. Furthermore, you fail to take into account other large skyscrapers being built elsewhere in Midtown.

Originally Posted by babybackribs2314

I wonder if the space deemed 'department store' could be filled by Nordstrom... they have been looking for quite some time, and anchoring the city's largest development in Midtown would make quite a splash...

That has been the talk lately.

[Zapatan]

So the smaller tower will still start soon as planned I'm guessing.

I just hope it's not too long before the larger one gets built and that they can find a tenant.

[RobertWalpole]

Originally Posted by babybackribs2314

I wonder if the space deemed 'department store' could be filled by Nordstrom... they have been looking for quite some time, and anchoring the city's largest development in Midtown would make quite a splash...

Notwithstanding the rumours regarding Nordstrom, in some of the photos in Related's brochure (see, e.g., p. 32), they show a Harvey Nichols store. That "free advertising" does not seem like a mere coincidence. Moreover, Harvey Nicks would have far more cachet than Nordstrom, as it would be the only such store in the US.

For similar reasons, Dior and Louis Vuitton also likely will be tenants in the "mall."

[babybackribs2314]

Originally Posted by RobertWalpole

Notwithstanding the rumours regarding Nordstrom, in some of the photos in Related's brochure (see, e.g., p. 32), they show a Harvey Nichols store. That "free advertising" does not seem like a mere coincidence. Moreover, Harvey Nicks would have far more cachet than Nordstrom, as it would be the only such store in the US.

For similar reasons, Dior and Louis Vuitton also likely will be tenants in the "mall."

Harvey Nicks would be fantastic, but I'm wondering whether Hudson Yards (despite its scale) is high-end enough for them... I would think they would be a much more likely candidate at a location like 432 Park or 225 W57th (remember that 432 Park is going to have two areas of retail--boutique along Park Ave in the Apple Cube-ish box, and in a much larger component along 57th). We shall see...

[NYguy]

I would expect at least some high end stores there.






I was thinking that the design of the "wintergarden" is more in line with the "culture shed"...













Where the High Line, the spur, and the Coach tower will meet...





Dougtone

[Duck From NY]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I'm not speaking for myself. I'm speaking for anybody who views any skyline anywhere. No skyline is seen from one point only. Furthermore, you fail to take into account other large skyscrapers being built elsewhere in Midtown.

I think the volume of space to the West of the ESB would be apparent to almost anyone who isn't in Manhattan, save those who live far enough North, such as Astoria, etc. Even in terms of the light being emitted, I think having the ESB flanked by supertalls would frame it, centralize it (as it always has been on the East/West axis).

Again, I'm not a NIMBY. I'm all for surpassing the height of the ESB in Manhattan. I don't like the thin 1400-tall proposal architecturally, but I'll still take it.

[Duck From NY]

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

There are towers proposed around the UN Building. They would be around 500-900 feet I would say, but nothing higher than that.

I meant to the direct East of the ESB. 32-35th streets.

[RobertWalpole]

[QUOTE=NYguy;5634309]I would expect at least some high end stores there.

[QUOTE]

I think that it will be very high-end. There will be many very expensive condos here, and many highly-paid office workers. Not to mention, it's a short walk from all of the very expensive new condos being built on 10th and 11th Aves. in Chelsea, and before we know it, more very high-end residences will be built on the Javits site.

[NYguy]

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20120325/REAL_ESTATE02/303259985

Wanted: a few huge tenants
Developers hunt for that special someone to get projects going.

By Theresa Agovino
March 25, 2012

It's a very exclusive club, with about 12 huge, closely watched, highly coveted corporate members. Each has the power to have a potentially major impact on the city's skyline for years to come.

They are the kingmakers, mega-tenants such as Credit Suisse, L'Oréal and Viacom. Each faces a major lease expiration in the coming years that gives it the power to transform building plans into concrete and glass by agreeing to become a tenant. With the real estate industry keen to shake off its recession-induced slump, such tenants are being vigorously courted by a trio of developers eager to get their proposed towers built.

“We know who everyone else is talking to,” said Jeremiah Larkin, senior vice president of leasing at Brookfield Office Properties. He is seeking tenants for the first two of a total of four towers that Brookfield plans to erect on a site just west of Penn Station. The company has said that it needs to lease 800,000 square feet before it will start putting up a tower. In the meantime, the developer this summer will start building a platform over the rail yards that is necessary for the project to proceed.

Farther west, The Related Cos. faces a similar task on an even grander scale. It is looking to lease 1 million square feet of office space so it can build an even bigger rail-yard platform for what will be the developer's second office building there. Late last year, the company snared Coach as the anchor tenant for its first tower at the Hudson Yards, the only one that doesn't require a platform.

Both developers face major competition from Silverstein Properties, which has the right to build three office towers at the World Trade Center site. Larry Silverstein's edge, even competing brokers concede, is that he has something to show tenants: rising buildings. The developer's first tower stands just eight floors shy of its planned 64-story full height and is slated to be completed next year. But in order to construct the second tower, Silverstein needs to lease at least 400,000 square feet. Without that, the planned 80-story edifice will be capped at just seven stories sometime in 2013.


Time is crucial for the developers if they want to land a tenant whose lease expires in 2015 or 2016, such as L'Oréal, which is seeking about 500,000 square feet, or Viacom, which needs about twice that. To allow enough time for construction, a lease should be signed by the end of this year for a tenant whose current lease runs out in 2015. In Related's case, it needs a company that can afford to wait until 2017.

[RobertWalpole]

In addition to these big fish, when the economy is thriving (which, barring a war with Iran, it will be in 2 or 3 years), banks will be looking for millions of sf of space.

[Dac150]

^^^ Right, just as financials are quick to layoff they are equally as quick to hire (however, times have changed to a degree and many of the financials are still in a fragile state / recovery mode).

Given the trading capabilities Related's space will provide, it should be attractive to the Credit Suisse's of the world.

[1Boston]

Originally Posted by NYguy

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20120325/REAL_ESTATE02/303259985

Time is crucial for the developers if they want to land a tenant whose lease expires in 2015 or 2016, such as L'Oréal, which is seeking about 500,000 square feet, or Viacom, which needs about twice that. To allow enough time for construction, a lease should be signed by the end of this year for a tenant whose current lease runs out in 2015. In Related's case, it needs a company that can afford to wait until 2017.

By Theresa Agovino
March 25, 2012

Does that mean that viacom and l'oreal are probably gonna go to silverstein since he's the only one who can finish a building that soon, if im not mistaken?

[yankeesfan1000]

Originally Posted by 1Boston

Does that mean that viacom and l'oreal are probably gonna go to silverstein since he's the only one who can finish a building that soon, if im not mistaken?

Yeah. Both expire sometime in 2015.

L'Oreal, source: "The company’s current HQ is at the Emery Roth-designed 575 Fifth Avenue, but the lease expires in 2015...

...none of the sizeable blocks of space on the market right now would seem to suit such a glamorous tenant as L’Oreal (think 3 Columbus Circle’s small floorplates or 11 Times Square’s Eighth Avenue locale). But with its sights set as far off as 2015, there’s always the first tower at Hudson Yards. If it’s good not enough for Coach, maybe it’s good enough for Liliane Bettencourt."

Viacom, source: "... Viacom’s renewal extends the lease through mid-2015..."

[1Boston]

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000

Yeah. Both expire sometime in 2015.

L'Oreal, source: "The company’s current HQ is at the Emery Roth-designed 575 Fifth Avenue, but the lease expires in 2015...

...none of the sizeable blocks of space on the market right now would seem to suit such a glamorous tenant as L’Oreal (think 3 Columbus Circle’s small floorplates or 11 Times Square’s Eighth Avenue locale). But with its sights set as far off as 2015, there’s always the first tower at Hudson Yards. If it’s good not enough for Coach, maybe it’s good enough for Liliane Bettencourt."

Viacom, source: "... Viacom’s renewal extends the lease through mid-2015..."

hmmm, well i wonder what the first company will be to snag the taller tower of the Hudson yards. Also, i can't wait till someone makes a diagram of it for the diagram page, to see how it will compare to ESB and 1wtc

[jd3189]

Don't know if this was asked before,but will there be an observation deck in one of the towers?