NEW YORK | 708 First Avenue (Con Ed) 4 Towers | FT | FLOORS

[UrbanImpact]

This might be goofy if it were in a different location, but, I love the design here. However, a casino next to the United Nations is a bit weird. Drunkards who lost all their money spilling onto the street with people like Malala Yousafzai and President Biden.

[jbermingham123]

Originally Posted by UrbanImpact

This might be goofy if it were in a different location, but, I love the design here. However, a casino next to the United Nations is a bit weird. Drunkards who lost all their money spilling onto the street with people like Malala Yousafzai and President Biden.

Great point, it would be impossible to tell our politicians apart from the casino drunkards.

We already have enough of a problem with that as it is with trump tower right there

[DCReid]

Originally Posted by UrbanImpact

This might be goofy if it were in a different location, but, I love the design here. However, a casino next to the United Nations is a bit weird. Drunkards who lost all their money spilling onto the street with people like Malala Yousafzai and President Biden.

It might work in Hudson Yards and even complement what's been built already. As posts just said, it's highly unlikely that the casino would be built here.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

I must say those designs do look intriguing but that changes nothing about this site being the most illogical all of the license candidates. The vulgarity of a casino casting a literal shadow on the Secretariat is disgusting.

It’s a terrible location, he’s just taking his shot.

Originally Posted by jbermingham123

Also, it would make much more sense to tear down that adjacent low rise and then rebuild the javits center on top of both plots.

It’s as bad a location for the Javits as it is the casino. That lowrise is also a tunnel vent.

The design though is better than anything proposed there before. He should still build it, minus the casino.

[NYguy]

Bjarke Ingels Group, the star architecture firm, is designing the project.

"Without a doubt, we’d have to reimagine the project as a whole” if the casino license is not granted, said Mr. Ingels, the founder of the architecture firm —
because of both the casino’s location on the site and its financial benefits to the development.

I'd like to see the Ingels non-casino design for the complex. It's not likely they will be granted the casino, so that is most likely the version we should get adjusted to.

A broader look at the casino proposal....

[TonyNYC]

Originally Posted by NYguy

It’s a terrible location, he’s just taking his shot.





It’s as bad a location for the Javits as it is the casino. That lowrise is also a tunnel vent.

The design though is better than anything proposed there before. He should still build it, minus the casino.

I have no problem with the location.. means nothing to me that it would be next door to the UN. In my eyes, way better location then Nassau County, Citifield and Coney Island.

As for their design.. looks great!! As for their sweetener proposal of 510 below market apartments included... that's a nice giveback.. wheeling and dealing!

[Doubleu1117]

If this bid isn't successful I hope there are backup plans they will pivot to. Maybe not the best location for a Casino, but it's still a very large plot right on the riverfront, lots of potential.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by TonyNYC

I have no problem with the location.. means nothing to me that it would be next door to the UN. In my eyes, way better location then Nassau County, Citifield and Coney Island.

The location is terrible because there's no subway, or any type of major mass transit. It's not geared up for the throngs of people a casino needs to attract. Coney Island is better than most, save for Times Square as far as that goes. And that area is an absolute no-go during General Assembly Week. Build the market rate residential, which it's zoned for, and keep the designs as sharp.

As for the known (or supposed) bidders, the only reason I would put this ahead of Citifield is because that location is park land - even though it's a parking lot. It would first take a state action to rezone it, and they aren't doing that. Cohen should have tried to swap places with the soccer stadium. Getting a location to hold the casino is the first step to even putting together a proposal. Which is why it was important for the Sands to get the land agreement in Nassau county, and why Bally's got the golf course in the Bronx. But that Bronx location is further removed than even this one.

I would be very surprised if either of the 2 "racinos" got a license. It's often repeated in the media that they are the favorites, but only because they haven't read the RFP.

70% of the bid will be based heavily on economic development (NEW development as well as spillover to other local businesses), and the number of jobs created.

This is a large plot of land that needs to be developed, but there's really nothing surrounding it that would benefit from having the added casino and it's visitors there, nor much of a reason for tourists to be over there. There are just too many better options. They need locations with and that can support high volumes of people coming and going.

[Busy Bee]

The gold building has real CCTV cantilever vibes. I'd like to see what it looks like from 1 Av.

[Zapatan]

I'm digging the park a lot, the whole thing looks like something out of Singapore.

It's not likely they will be granted the casino, so that is most likely the version we should get adjusted to.

So basically don't get our hopes up for the above rendering.

[NYguy]

^ Not as it is.

Bjarke Ingels Group, the star architecture firm, is designing the project.

"Without a doubt, we’d have to reimagine the project as a whole” if the casino license is not granted

That Ingels is designing the development suggest it won't be business as usual. But that rendering is for the casino proposal.



https://twitter.com/jonostrower/stat...75421812785227

[jbermingham123]

Random question, why is it that skyscraper density drops off so sharply east of 3rd ave?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by jbermingham123

Random question, why is it that skyscraper density drops off so sharply east of 3rd ave?

Mostly zoning.


I want Soloviev to develop at least one supertall tower on this site. That would bring some balance to the East River waterfront, as well as provide a focal point .

The UN was fine for it's time, but the skyline has turned into a supertall skyline. A nicely designed tower, say 1,000-1,200 ft on the Con Ed site would make the development stand out.

It's one of the largest undeveloped tracts of land in Manhattan, and should get something noteworthy.



https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/p...&adppopup=true





It would be iconic...

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/n...?adppopup=true





https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/p...&adppopup=true





https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/p...&adppopup=true

[Busy Bee]

People won't come, Ray

[NYguy]

https://memes.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/0...6b7e56daed/gif



I imagine they are just trying to prove the site worthy of attracting a crowd. But whether people come or not, it will in no way be comparable to a daily casino crowd, especially with the hours a NYC casino would be open (as opposed to this 12 hrs a week plan). They need to focus on building the site as planned.

Originally Posted by DCReid

Was this the site that they were supposed to build something 10-15 years ago and several plans were rejected multiple times? I can't believe that this site is still empty land.

Sheldon Solow is no longer with us, so expect something to happen with this site sooner or later.


https://ny.curbed.com/2018/4/6/17207...ue-development

Apr 6, 2018

In a rare interview with the New York Times, the 89-year-old Solow and his 42-year-old son Stefan Soloviev sat down to talk about their plans for the future, and while the conversation mainly revolved around Solow’s transfer of power to his son, the duo also shared details about the site surrounding their project at 685 First Avenue (which Curbed used to affectionately refer to as the First Avenue Mud Pit.)

Richard Meier & Partners won a bid to create a master plan for the site in 2008, but it’s unclear how or if those plans will change in light of the revelations of sexual misconduct by Meier. (The marketing for 685 First Avenue, whose condos quietly hit the market in late March, has scrubbed itself of its lead architect’s name.)

The Times interview makes clear that Solow and Soloviev are still looking ahead to the redevelopment of the vacant site across from 685 First. The site is poised to give rise to three residential buildings, originally conceived as rentals. Those buildings will now be condos, a move that will help the developer recoup its expenditures more quickly. The paper of record also notes that the site’s master plan still calls for a fourth structure, an office building, that the developer plans to lease to biotech companies.

Solow sold the southernmost portion of the site to JDS Development Company for $127 million in 2013. JDS would go on to bring the American Copper Buildings to the site. “I hate the price we got,” Soloviev said of the American Copper site. “But those were some trying times.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/06/r...the-torch.html

[UrbanImpact]

This proposal has even made it to CNN
No new info though.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/15/style...ridge-new-york

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by UrbanImpact

This proposal has even made it to CNN
No new info though.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/15/style...ridge-new-york

Yeah, it's been getting a lot of press. I just wish they would show us the alternative version, without the casino. I can't blame them for not bringing it up. What we know is that there would be no affordable housing without the casino. But this development could still be built with market rate apartments.

This is what they were saying earlier...


https://therealdeal.com/magazine/nat...oloviev-group/

It may be just one component of the proposal, but the casino is the golden ticket at the heart of the development, which would be built on Soloviev’s 6.7-acre lot in Midtown East. Besides the casino, which would be mostly underground, the proposal calls for two residential towers, a hotel, a park and a democracy museum.

Hershman said he’s had more than 40 meetings with community groups and representatives as well as union leaders. He recently revealed that if the casino license is awarded, the project’s residential component would have over 500 affordable units, one of the largest affordable developments in the neighborhood’s history. Soloviev Group would also donate a part of its profits to a community fund “with no strings attached,” Hershman said.

Residents like the project’s affordable component and green space, according to a Murray Hill Neighborhood Association survey, but the casino plans triggered negative reactions, and community opposition remains.

Community Board 6 opposes the project and insists the company hasn’t been proactive enough in its engagement. Its chair, Kyle Athayde, said the group was made aware of the proposal and subsequent updates through news coverage.

“After more than a decade of ignoring the community, the Soloviev Group has suddenly decided to start beautifying the vacant pit with art exhibits and promising the world to the community, which is so obviously disingenuous,” Athayde said in a statement.

The community board said it is concerned about an increase in traffic and security risks associated with more visitors to the area. They say any development should maintain the neighborhood’s residential character.

Hershman said he’s made several concessions to appease the concerns. There won’t be any entrances on First Avenue, and the casino would bus people directly from Grand Central to cut down on traffic.

“There’s going to be development there whether you like it or not,” he said.

“We have the right to build four towers and, under the plans we have approved now, there would be higher traffic volume, less security and less convenience than this improved plan. So they have a choice.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/19/n...iev-group.html

Now Soloviev Group, the longtime owner of the lot, is trying a different tack: the inclusion of 1,325 apartments, nearly 40 percent of which would be offered permanently below market-rate rent, according to the firm. It would represent the largest number of such apartments to be built in the neighborhood in at least a decade.

But it’s a package deal: no casino, no affordable housing.

“We’re not required to do it,” said Michael Hershman, the firm’s chief executive, referring to plans approved by the city several years ago that would allow the developer to build mixed-use towers on the site without affordable housing. But the addition of a casino, which requires the support of local politicians and community members, would make the lower-cost housing “economically viable,” he said.

Without a doubt, we’d have to reimagine the project as a whole” if the casino license is not granted, said Mr. Ingels, the founder of the architecture firm — because of both the casino’s location on the site and its financial benefits to the development.

[James Bond Agent 007]

Originally Posted by UrbanImpact

This proposal has even made it to CNN
No new info though.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/15/style...ridge-new-york

I just saw that. Cool design! I actually don't mind that it's not particularly tall, it goes well with the UN building next door.

[SkyHigher]

Love it. SAF. Shame it can't be taller.

[Zapatan]

Those public spaces look amazing. What are the odds this actually gets built as is?