I'm glad to hear that this project seems solid.

Meanwhile, it's Manhattan West vs. Hudson Yards...

Developer Says Condé To Rejoin Rail Yards Bid, But Condé’s Not Talking

by Eliot Brown
May 15, 2008

One of the remaining bidders for the West Side rail yards, a team of the Durst Organizaiton and Vornado Realty Trust, said it is expecting that S.I. Newhouse’s Condé Nast will remain part of its bid as an anchor tenant.

“We expect that Condé would be our partner,” said Durst spokesman Jordan Barowitz.

However, Condé, which began a new search for space after Tishman Speyer was named the winner over the Durst/Vornado team in March, did not make clear its plans, as a company spokeswoman, Maury Perl, declined comment. In the original Durst/Vornado bid, Condé expected to take about 1.5 million square feet on the rail yards, a move made easier given that its 4 Times Square headquarters is owned by Durst.

But after the bid fell short (Tishman was announced the winner but failed to ever sign an agreement before its deal collapsed in recent days), Condé began talking to other potential landlords. And, according to a real estate executive, the firm is still in discussions to go to a Ninth Avenue site owned by Brookfield Properties just east of the West Side rail yards.

So they say, but I'll wait until Conde actually speaks up to take them seriously.

One way or the other, Brookfied is taking action on their site so it will be ready to begin construction when a tenant is found.

5.4 msf is half of the original WTC. Not bad at all, especially for a project that won't even be the largest in the immediate area.

"Spokeswoman Melissa Coley said pre-construction work on the deck has begun, with plans to start construction next month and finish by as early as 2013."

The whole project will finish "as early as" 2013, or just the deck?

^^^ I believe the whole thing is planned to be done by 2013, but given the current track record of NY construction you can't bank on it. I believe NYguy said that they want to compete with the WTC.

With 1 of the last big undeveloped sites left in manhattan (besides hudson yards) they'll need to compete with other sites such as the WTC to become a viable addition to the manhattan real estate business, which is currently in need of office space.

A little on that:

A little more:

More:

But yeah, I think the 2013 target date is for tenants who's leases will expire around that time, which is what Silverstein and Vornado are doing. Even if it was completed in 2014, it would only be a matter of months. But don't be surprised if dates change, as they often do.

It may still be possible that Merrill could jump to Midtown...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...s&refer=canada

The company this month learned that its biggest tenant, Merrill Lynch & Co., broke off talks with World Trade Center leaseholder Larry Silverstein about moving its headquarters to a tower under construction at the trade center site, just east of the financial center. Merrill's lease at the financial center runs out in 2013.

Brookfield is seeking tenants for a 5 million square-foot development at "Manhattan West'' in New York City, a development site at Ninth Avenue and West 33rd Street.

Merrill is one top card that Brookfield has in its deck. It's a doubled edge sword though because either way Brookfield will have to sell space, wether it be in the WFC or in Manhattan West. If I were Brookfield I'd try to keep Merrill as is, and lure another big name into Manhattan West. We all know that there isn't a shortage of them right now. Morgan Stanley, Viacom, News Corp, Conde Nast, all have expressed interest to find a new home, among others.

I personally would like to see Merrill stay Downtown.

We'll I'm watching CNBC right now listening to the former CEO of UBS PaineWebber. From what is sounds like, by 2013, there might not be a Merrill Lynch. Either that or a merger with Goldman Sachs or Lehman Brothers could be in order. The point is these financial firms are not facing good weather, therefore I wouldn't be surprised if the reason for Merrill pulling out of the WTC is due to a look into the future.

They're also talking about financials going private and downsizing by 1/3 in terms of assets.

So with that I'll also make it another point to say that filling these buildings with financials and investment banks might not be the way to go in terms of solidifying lease agreements.

There's always talk about changes, some happen, some don't. Either way, the city will need the new office space, so we'll see where things go in terms of leases. Reportedly Conde Nast was one of the companies looking at this site, but whether or not Related's Hudson Yards lands a tenant first remains to be seen.

I hope that will be built and not moved as other buildings that were built at the end not in New York.
Please, can someone tell me what is the maximum height that can be built in New York? Thanks and a greeting from Spain!

This now belongs in the "supertall proposal" forum.

Where is the Hudson Yards thread, under the new scheme?

Good question. Posting here in the meantime...

http://www.observer.com/2008/real-es...est-side-yards

Related Taps New Landscape Designer For West Side Yards

by Eliot Brown
August 1, 2008

Expect changes ahead in the renderings of Related Companies' planned $15 billion West Side rail yards development: The developer has brought on Michael Van Valkenburgh Associates to lead the landscape design, tapping a design firm widely known for its work on public parks, including the planned Brooklyn Bridge Park.

Related was designated the developer of the 26-acre site by the Javits Center in May and is expected to sign a contract with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the owner of the yards, in the fall.

Related's decision to bring on the design firm represents a shift from the bidding process, when it had West 8 lead the landscape architecture for its proposal.

Matthew Urbanski, design principal at Michael Van Valkenburgh, said much of the landscape design will focus on relating to the Hudson River given that the development will sit on a platform over the rail tracks that rises well above street level in sections of the site, especially on the western edge.

"Normally, if you move back in a block in Manhattan, you kind of lose connection with the river, just because it's relatively flat, and you can't see it," he said. "But if you're moving back in on a high platform, and if you do it right, it could have much more deep views out to the west in the sunset; across the river."

Looks good, just switch the towers so the curved ends are facing away from eachother.

Matthew Urbanski, what a name for an urban designer.

But good luck relating to Hudson Yards when you have that big ol' hunk of the Daily News building sitting between the two sites.

By the way, NYguy, great to see you back. We missed your blue text updates. Where have you been anhway?

Still checking here for updates, and putting together some threads of my own. It's a lot to cover in New York, and we are about to experience a wave of construction that will require a lot of effort to keep up with.