HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jul 23, 2017, 1:43 AM
yankeesfan1000 yankeesfan1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 10014
Posts: 1,612
^ It is really incredible that full grown adults can not wrap their heads around this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2017, 7:57 AM
vegeta_skyline vegeta_skyline is offline
Registered User, Maybe
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Windsor
Posts: 1,254
Wow those are HUGE for the area. The East side could use more density but that's a bit much imo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2017, 12:32 PM
aquablue aquablue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegeta_skyline View Post
Wow those are HUGE for the area. The East side could use more density but that's a bit much imo.
The area looks like east Berlin under soviet rule, or worse. Anything that will distract the eye from the sea of brown featureless disgusting commie blocks is welcome. I can't see how people living in hi rise blocks are so anti-towers.

In fact, the city should replace their old outdated housing like other major cities have done like London.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2017, 10:11 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,009
^^^

The NYCHA has been retrofitting a lot of older projects or public housing with upgrades. Most interior, some exterior. Some of the section 8 housing over Queens/Brooklyn; Randolph houses, Marcy Projects, Queens Bridge, Avenue C projects, Red Hook projects, etc..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2017, 1:05 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,009
Chin, Brewer moving to slow development of residential towers on Lower East Side

Quote:
Two Manhattan politicians are preparing a formal application that would block the development of a trio of residential towers on the Lower East Side now that a bill hastening the submission process has lapsed into law.

City Council Member Margaret Chin and Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer will submit a formal application to the Department of City Planning that, if approved, would subject the proposed buildings to enhanced public scrutiny.

Their hope is that requiring the developers to go through the city's complete land use review process will empower them to demand shorter structures and other perks the neighboring communities are clamoring for. The process culminates in a Council vote, and the legislative body typically defers to the local member.

Chin and Brewer were waiting for a related bill — which passed the Council on Oct. 31 — to become law before submitting their application. The legislation allows borough presidents, Council members and city agencies to waive certain procedural requirements before submitting their own zoning text amendments.

Chin said her bill will have far-reaching implications beyond its original target.

"It's clear that we need more tools to empower everyday residents in the land use process, not less. That is why my Council colleagues threw their full support behind my legislation, which would have wide implications on communities' efforts to protect their neighborhoods from the threat of large-scale luxury development," Chin said in a statement. "It's my hope that this legislation would help Two Bridges residents and groups across the city work more closely with their elected officials, and I will continue to advocate for more ways to strengthen the community's voice in the land use process."

Chin and Brewer have been trying to stop the high-rise construction ever since City Planning determined last year that the buildings would constitute only a "minor modification" to the Two Bridges area, which was governed by an overarching zoning plan that expired 10 years ago. Current rules allow for towers of these sizes with minimal input.
=======================
https://www.politico.com/states/new-...st-side-134991
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2018, 7:53 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,151
More images...


























__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2018, 10:56 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,009
Glad to see the approval process starting for the LES towers. As we've seen, 1 M Square is a profound addition to the LES waterfront neighborhood, and helps to fill the void, especially from certain angles. Further spreading the L. Manhattan skyscraper cluster.

This, and 247 Cherry Street will redefine the area, as its fellow colleague u/c has thus far demonstrated. 1 Manhattan Square shares a parallel with One57 in that it is the tinder box that started a skyscraper boom for its respective zone.

The design is clean, fresh, and safe. Not outlandish, but cool, collective, and without the flashy attitude. It won't stain or tarnish the area, but add a warm welcome.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2018, 11:55 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,151
This image should be displayed in the lobby.


https://therealdeal.com/2018/06/26/c...rs-is-delayed/

City Planning’s review of Two Bridges resi towers will take place in October
Critics have argued the process has been rushed







June 26, 2018
__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2018, 1:01 AM
NYer34 NYer34 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 73
It always makes my blood boil that development like this - decent new construction in a God-forgotten, miserable, butt-hideous corner of the city, an area not so much pock-marked by the hideousness of bad 1950s-70s architecture and urban planning as it is defined by it, an area that has only one direction to go (up), should be in any way slowed or excessively scrutinized by the city ... while pre-Civil War buildings are bulldozed multiple times per year Downtown; entire blocks of classic pre-war NY get demo'd wholesale on a regular basis on the UES; and the travesties of Gene Kaufman are allowed to proliferate in place of the brooding Gotham Gothic of the Garment District - all without a peep or care by the city. WTF.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2018, 10:32 PM
aquablue aquablue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,680
Towers are pretty ugly anyway, no loss from an aethetic viewpoint. The skyline of NY deserves the best designs, and not this second-rate assemblage. I am indifferent to this project. I won't be crying if they don't go up despite the NIMBY's winning. I'ts just noit good architecture. However, I don't agree with NIMBY's here either with their view of what you should build. Basically, don't just like a tower because it's tall, look at the design and see how it will make the city look. The adjacent tower is a hell inducing gross peice of Montparnasse-tower updated for 2018 that ruins a historic view of a beautiful bridge from the 1800s!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2018, 1:20 PM
sbarn sbarn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
New Details For 62-Story Multi-Tower Block 675 Redevelopment, Hudson Yards

This westside project seems similar from these LES proposals in terms of being in a transforming neighborhood and proximity to transit. I wonder how the city council could justify approving one and blocking or downsizing the other? Anyway, hope this move forward and get built.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2018, 1:30 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,009
I'm hoping its the catalyst that further invigorates the local area (In my speculation). As we've seen with HY, LIC, DoBro, high-line... once a few big projects or noticeable ones pop up, the whole area skyrockets. Pretty much this will put LES on the map in the sense of a development magnet. An attractive neighborhood that will use the LES towers sales benchmarks as a measure of how desirable and upcoming the place is from the sense of new development.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2018, 5:42 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 41,151
https://therealdeal.com/2018/12/05/c...o-bridges/amp/

City Planning approves controversial trio of resi towers in Two Bridges
Projects will add 3K units, including 700 affordable units



E.B. SOLOMONT
DEC 5, 2018


Quote:
After a bitter and drawn-out review process, the city approved a trio of large-scale residential towers on the Lower East Side waterfront on Wednesday.

In a 10-to-3 vote, the City Planning Commission voted in favor of a controversial application, filed jointly by four developers, to build three residential towers in Two Bridges that together will add 3,000 housing units to the neighborhood. They include JDS Development’s 1,000-unit rental tower at 247 Cherry Street; L+M Development and CIM Group’s 798-foot tower at 260 South Street; and Starrett Corporation’s 730-foot building at 259 Clinton Street.

Combined, the projects represent $4.5 billion worth of investment in the neighborhood, and would add nearly 700 affordable units.
Quote:
In casting her “yes” vote, CPC Chair Marisa Lago said that from a legal standpoint, the buildings comply with underlying zoning rules in the district. “This is nonetheless a challenging situation because the proposed buildings aren’t minor in scale and will affect the surrounding neighborhood.”

But she cited several benefits to the neighborhood, including wheelchair access to the East Broadway subway station, new public space and the addition of nearly 700 affordable units — “a truly rare opportunity” to add affordable housing in Lower Manhattan. “This represents the largest privately-financed affordable housing development in the city’s history,” she said.


__________________
NEW YORK. World's capital.

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2018, 7:02 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,009
I think the amenities offered and perks to the public won them over.

On a side note, more of this is needed. But a step in the right direction (unit counts; market + affordable).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2018, 9:24 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,009
Via NY ZAP search (screenshot)

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 12:05 AM
BXFrank BXFrank is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 96
Driving through the FDR I seen some activity on this site, not too sure. Can someone confirm this? I will stop by in two weeks and check it out
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 12:17 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,009
Could be sampling (environmental) study purposes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 10:31 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
Life enthusiast
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Barcelona, NYC, California
Posts: 4,005
Wasn't this cancelled due to NIMBY complaints or were those just the three adjacent towers?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 11:25 AM
Crawford Crawford is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 19,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Wasn't this cancelled due to NIMBY complaints or were those just the three adjacent towers?
None of these towers are cancelled. All are being fought by NIMBYs, though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2019, 12:44 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is online now
N, N-Dimethyltryptamine
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 29,009
Yeah its just being delayed. The NIMBYs had made some progress court order wise, but its just delaying it.

Essentially, they NIMBY hordes want this to go through the public review process also known as ULURP which is a code word for massive delays, and an increase in time-tables. Bullshit pretty much, because these towers would destroy the fabric of the neighborhood, and are out of scale with NYC. The usual NIMBY bs.

They also want newer developments to be capped at 350 ft and some ridiculous figure like 50-55% affordable housing. This shows me that they have no concept of how developers make profit. Affordable housing is nice, but if you cap and rezone the crap out of a place, in a negative way, you can't make a profit given how much soft cost is needed to ascertain the land and parcels/assemblage.

Just typical NIMBY bs is all it is.

Developers can add tons of affordable housing, BUT you also need market rate to make the development profitable. People fail to realize this. Without profit, NO NEW towers will rise, unless the government funds it. Private sector is vastly different that the public sector.

I just wish those NIMBYS understood this. Meanwhile, the housing crisis continues. Its a sacrilege folks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:24 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.