NEW YORK | HDSN (418 11th Ave) | FT | 70 & 40 FLOORS

[NYguy]

This sounds about right for building size, though when you include mechanical space, it will be between 1.6 - 1.8 msf…


https://www.bdonline.co.uk/news/adjaye-r...per-by-a-black-architect/5115358.article

Developers working on the skyscraper, which is estimated to cost $3.5bn and would incorporate a rooftop entertainment centre, includes a general contractor JV that is 35% women-owned.

If the plans go ahead, Affirmation Tower will be the site of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) headquarters in New York.

It will be an all-electric building with a total square footage of 1,255,939 sq ft and is expected to create more than 50,500 jobs.

Zoned sf with the 24 FAR comes out to 1,256,712 sf.

[NYguy]

According to this, things are on hold again…


https://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news...tate-rescinds-rfp-for-site-k-javits.html

New York state rescinds RFP for development of lot next to Javits Center

New York's economic development arm has rescinded its request for proposals for plans to develop a 1.2-acre lot next to the Javits Center.

[NYguy]

More here…


https://esd.ny.gov/esd-media-center/pres...t-regarding-rescinding-rfp-javits-site-k



Statement From Empire State Development Acting Commissioner and President & CEO-Designate Hope Knight Regarding the Rescinding of the RFP for Javits Site K

December 21, 2021


”In light of today’s changed economic environment and in keeping with Governor Hochul’s commitment to building a thriving and equitable New York, Empire State Development is rescinding the current RFP for Site K, one of the last remaining State-owned parcels in Manhattan, to reassess development priorities and solicit more input from the local community and other stakeholders. It is critical that this site fulfill the Governor’s goal of delivering on the needs of New Yorkers today and into tomorrow.”

[C.]

Originally Posted by NYguy

According to this, things are on hold again…


https://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/news...tate-rescinds-rfp-for-site-k-javits.html

New York state rescinds RFP for development of lot next to Javits Center

Damn. So any proposal would have to be readvertised, I guess.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by C.

Damn. So any proposal would have to be readvertised, I guess.

Not the first time this happened with this site. But new administration, different priorities. I wonder if all of the current bidders will rebid. Who know’s what “guidelines” will come out of this delay.

[Busy Bee]

Maybe they read my rant about the Empire Connection tunnel Kind of a bad idea to go to a development team after a year of engineering work and say "oh by the way we might need to widen that tunnel running underneath your building."

[NYguy]

https://champ.gothamist.com/champ/gothamist/news/hochul-scuttles-plan-skyscraper-near-javits-center

Hochul Scuttles Plan For Skyscraper Near Javits Center


BY JON CAMPBELL
DEC. 22, 2021

Gov. Kathy Hochul is pulling back on Andrew Cuomo’s plan to reshape a vacant 1.2-acre lot near the Javits Center, which a team of developers had eyed for a 1,600-foot skyscraper that would have been one of the city’s tallest.

Empire State Development, the Hochul administration’s economic-development branch, announced late Tuesday it would rescind a request for proposals for the site on 11th Avenue, just east of the convention center. The agency was not explicit in its rationale, but the state had been facing community pressure to require affordable housing options at the site as the city faces an ongoing housing crisis.

The state had billed the property – which is owned by a state entity and known as “Site K” – as one of the last remaining vacant lots in Midtown West.

In October, a team of Black-owned companies led by the Peebles Corporation unveiled a headline-grabbing proposal that called for a 1,663-foot Affirmation Tower with two hotels, commercial space, an ice-skating rink and an observation deck. The building, they claimed, would have been the tallest in the Western Hemisphere, though the spire height of One World Trade Center would have been taller.

But community organizations, including Manhattan Community Board 4, have been pushing for development in the area to include affordable housing. And the consortium’s proposal, which was the only one to be made public, included no residential housing.

In her statement, Knight said the state will “reassess development priorities” for the site and “solicit more input from the local community.”

Under Cuomo, the state had been seeking a developer or team of developers to build a commercial or mixed-use space on the vacant lot, which is between 35th and 36th streets and is part of the zoning district for the Hudson Yards development.

The state’s request for proposals made clear it was looking for someone to build a hotel on the space, though it wasn’t necessarily a requirement. And it also made clear the community board preferred residential housing at the site, but that wasn’t required either.

If a bidder decided to propose a building that included residential use, they would have been required to make 30% of units affordable for those making 80% of the area’s median income, according to the state’s request.

Lowell Kern, chairman of Manhattan Community Board 4, said the board would prefer the state make affordable housing a requirement for development at Site K moving forward.

He pointed to plans for a nearby 11th Avenue lot – known as the Slaughterhouse Project because it once was home to the New York Butchers' Dressed Meat Company – as a model. There, the city is advancing plans to build two skyscrapers with more than 200 residential units, all of which will be designated affordable housing.

“We are committed to affordable housing on [Site K],” Kern said. “And if there were no affordable housing proposals that were submitted that the state deemed acceptable, then we’re happy they are pulling the [request for proposals].”

[Steely Dan]

So does this news mean this project is completely dead, or just that they have to restart the process from the beginning?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

So does this news mean this project is completely dead, or just that they have to restart the process from the beginning?

The project is not dead, they want to redo the entire bid for the site. The Affirmation Tower proposal was just one of 6 bids for the site. No particular project was ever selected.

My guess is that they were close, and the governor said , “wait, where’s the affordable housing?” They issued a press release hinting at that, which is odd, because there’s no way for the public to know there weren’t any bids that offered it. They haven’t released anything.

For the developers part, no one did anything wrong, if that’s the case. It wasn’t a requirement of the bid. The problem is that Cuomo mentioned it as one of 2 sites that could have the affordable housing (while not requiring it). So maybe now, the new RFP will be for both sites, and maybe they will require affordable housing.

Empire State Development is rescinding the current RFP for Site K, one of the last remaining State-owned parcels in Manhattan, to reassess development priorities and solicit more input from the local community and other stakeholders.

It is critical that this site fulfill the Governor’s goal of delivering on the needs of New Yorkers today and into tomorrow.”

Definitely sounds like she wants housing included.

[chris08876]

Would be nice if the state would just sell this parcel without complicating the whole thing. Maybe use the proceeds to fund transit or some other needed things in the city.

[Steely Dan]

^^ gotcha.

From the former thread title, I thought that the stacked cantilevered boxes "affirmation tower" design had already been selected.

Maybe that design can be reprogrammed to include affordable housing, if that is to now be a hard requirement in the new RFP.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

^^ gotcha.

From the former thread title, I thought that the stacked cantilevered boxes "affirmation tower" design had already been selected.

Maybe that design can be reprogrammed to include affordable housing, if that is to now be a hard requirement in the new RFP.

That’s why I tried to slow things down. Affirmation was never official. The thing about the affordable housing is how this site works. They are limited in ways with what they could do. The other site, just south of Javits, is much larger. You can build multiple towers or multiple components of a project. This is a difficult site, and it would have to be at least half hotel or office or both, with the other half being residential. Not the best mix here. If they were able to combine the two sites, maybe some of the developers could team up for a joint bid, and we’d still get pretty much the same. But I would bet the governor will demand affordable housing be a part of this bid.

[BK1985]

What a crock

[Zapatan]

If affordable housing will be involved, does that nix the possibility of a supertall at the site? Hard to picture a supertall containing AH.

As much as I loathe Hochul's Nimbysm I can't say I really loved this tower tbh. I hope a very tall, much better looking building goes here.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

If affordable housing will be involved, does that nix the possibility of a supertall at the site? Hard to picture a supertall containing AH.

As much as I loathe Hochul's Nimbysm I can't say I really loved this tower tbh. I hope a very tall, much better looking building goes here.

Yeah this comes with the turf when your dealing with the state. If anything it really is just to look good on paper. Affordable housing, expensive city, the perception of people... all factors.

If this site was positioned on Central Park South, you bet their would be an affordable component. Just comes with the turf.

And I'm all for affordable housing and if they are going to do it, do it right. A ton of it but also provide whoever develops this the incentive to build bigger, denser and recoup the costs.

[NYguy]

People, we can criticize official's actions without getting into politics.

As for the issue of affordable housing, the question is, is this really the best location for it? Of the two sites, site K in particular is situated around the 7 train entrance like the other surrounding commercial structures. On the opposite side, stands the convention center. So, when we talk of the community and the "stakeholders", yeah, it's basically the Javits Center (which in turn, is basically the state). The Hudson Yards was rezoned as mix-use, yes. But the commercial core is primarily along the southern sites of the new Hudson Boulevard, where the 7 train terminates. It's here where the city is trying (and having good success) to create a new business district. Affordable housing can be included in there, but the question is, why this site in particular? Nothing about it says this should be housing at all.

For the much larger southern site, I can see some mixed-use or all housing with affordable inclusive. A comparison of the two sites....




















What's also annoying is the amount of time wasted. They want to do more talking to the community, but how much talking can you do? A decision has to be made at some point, someone's going to be unhappy with whatever gets built on this site. Stop wasting time, and get down to business. Release the bids that you already have so we can see what the problem is, and then put out the bid again, for both sites if necessary. Get moving!

[Busy Bee]

So much of the "community engagement" is just going through the required theatrics before they get to do what they planned on all along. It's just a waste of time. Some of the ideas of "community members" are just so astonishingly bad and misguided. Can you imagine if they had any more power than they already do? That's just my opinion though.

As far as Affirmation Tower, clearly the "dislike/hate" camp is smaller than the "like/love/orgasm" camp on here, but I think we dodged a bullet. I think the design was absurd and it probably would have had cost overruns in the hundreds of millions. Also, and this is not designed to insight, but how come no one is asking the question why this completely African American led project, future home of the NAACP, in a city with a chronic affordable housing crisis.... didn't include an affordable housing component from the very beginning voluntarily?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

So much of the "community engagement" is just going through the required theatrics before they get to do what they planned on all along. It's just a waste of time. Some of the ideas of "community members" are just so astonishingly bad and misguided. Can you imagine if they had any more power than they already do? That's just my opinion though.

As far as Affirmation Tower, clearly the "dislike/hate" camp is smaller than the "like/love/orgasm" camp on here, but I think we dodged a bullet. I think the design was absurd and it probably would have had cost overruns in the hundreds of millions. Also, and this is not designed to insight, but how come no one is asking the question why this completely African American led project, future home of the NAACP, in a city with a chronic affordable housing crisis.... didn't include an affordable housing component from the very beginning voluntarily?

That particular proposal didn't include affordable housing because it was primarily designed as a commercial office and hotel tower. If it would have been a mixed-use residential/office or residential/hotel it would have included affordable housing.

As to why that particular team didn't include it, why should they above anyone else have included it? Was the affordable housing somehow going to be for minority residents only? That's not how it works. For one thing, "affordable" is one of those words that's thrown around to make people feel better. It would have been based on the area median income. That would be far different for Hudson Yards than it would be for somewhere like East New York.

Everyone put forward the best proposal that they thought would win the bid, and made the most sense for them to build on this complicated site.

[BK1985]

Also doesn’t the affordable housing plans typically use AMI? Take a look at the all the neighboring residential buildings with monthly rents ranging 4K-10k+ affordable housing here is never really “affordable”. This entire process is a joke, if the state wanted affordable housing to be included then it should have been mandated in the initial RFP, instead of of teams wasting money pulling together architects, engineers and capital partners.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by BK1985

Also doesn’t the affordable housing plans typically use AMI? Take a look at the all the neighboring residential buildings with monthly rents ranging 4K-10k+ affordable housing here is never really “affordable”. This entire process is a joke, if the state wanted affordable housing to be included then it should have been mandated in the initial RFP, instead of of teams wasting money pulling together architects, engineers and capital partners.

I agree. It's just a waste of time, and a new process likely won't even begin for a few more months (at least). So we're looking at maybe a year before we even get new bids. I know in the long scheme of things, the state has a lot to consider. There are RFPs that will eventually be issued for the Port Authority Bus terminal sites, as well as the Penn Station development sites. But those are future developments, years away from anything. This is a prime development site that is ready to be built on now. The Hudson Yards is blossoming. There's no need to put a lid on this site. Go big, regardless of what the development is. The issue of affordable housing can be focused on elsewhere. It's a great, big city.

Another question I have is what was the rush to make this particular announcement before Christmas?