HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise & Supertall Proposals

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2016, 1:22 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 34,502
http://thevillager.com/2016/06/02/ac...ry-high-rises/

Activists call on C.B. 3 to take a stand against wave of luxury high-rises-


June 2, 2016
By The Villager


Quote:
Board 3 got an earful last Tuesday night from a coalition of Lower East Side activists who complained that the board was dragging its legs in the battle to stop the proliferation of luxury high-rises, hotels and other upscale developments that are displacing poor people who live in the neighborhood.

Members of the Chinatown Working Group — a coalition of grassroots organizations whose goal is to draft a master plan that would preserve housing affordability in a wide swath of Lower Manhattan — spoke out angrily at the full board meeting at P.S. 20 on May 24. They repeatedly demanded that C.B. 3 at its next monthly meeting issue a strong statement of support for the coalition’s housing preservation agenda.

“We want you to sign a pledge at your June meeting that says ‘no’ to more luxury development,” a C.W.G. member said. “This community board must stop dragging its legs on this issue. Low-income people on the Lower East Side and Chinese people in Chinatown are being treated as second-class citizens by the city and developers.”

A representative of the National Mobilization Against Sweatshops pointedly asked C.B. 3 Chairperson Gigi Li whether the community board was being “complacent “ on this issue.

“Do you stand with us or with de Blasio and the developers,” he said. “Are you going to leave us vulnerable to high-rise developers?”

Francisca Benítez, a member of C.W.G. and Chinatown & Lower East Side Artists Against Displacement, or CLAAD, made a desperate plea for action.

“Passing the C.W.G. plan is now more urgent than ever, with Extell and other skyscrapers being built on the Lower East Side waterfront,” she said. “C.B. 3 should support the community’s demand to stop Extell, and to ensure that no public subsidies or public assets be used to build luxury high-rises. Please sign the Chinatown Working Group pledge, and make a commitment to stand by the plan in full. We need C.B. 3 to help move the plan forward.”

Li responded that the community board is very involved on the issue, which will, again, be on the agenda of next month’s Land Use Committee meeting. Li later told this newspaper that the community board has been working hard to come up with a plan that would stop the proliferation of high-rise luxury development on the Lower East Side.

“We’ve been very involved with the Chinatown Working Group for the past seven years,” she said. “We remain involved and will continue to discuss how C.B. 3 can be most effective in moving the group’s zoning plan forward. It’s understandable that there’s frustration about the time it’s taken to work out the details. Hopefully, we can soon work out a beneficial plan.”

Board member Enrique Cruz, meanwhile, said after the meeting that the community board supports C.W.G. on the issue of curbing rampant development, but that C.B. 3, unfortunately, does not have the final call on this issue.

“We’re wholeheartedly on the side of the groups who want to stop massive high-rise and luxury development buildings in the area,” he said. “The board has already approved the Chinatown Working Group plan. But the problem is that there are different pockets of land involved, so it’s taking longer than expected to finalize a cohesive plan. The board has already reached out and met with city planners on this issue. But we’re not the final decision makers and I understand the frustration of these groups.”

The de Blasio administration rejected the C.W.G. plan for a Chinatown / Lower East Side Special District in March of last year, calling it “not feasible at this time.”
__________________
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
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2016, 7:08 PM
tokilamockingbrd tokilamockingbrd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 61
Any chance they are successful? It seems idiot to me.

NO NICE BUILDINGS IN OUR NEIHBORHOOD! WE NEED TO KEEP IT CRAPPY SO WE CAN LIVE HERE!

They are just blocks from lower manhattan. At some point lower manhattan was going to spill over into their area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2016, 10:26 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, TAAR1
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 19,008
I don't think they will be successful. 250 South aka 227 Cherry is rising nearby. If they failed to stop an 80 floor tower, this will rise as well, along with the other proposals in the area.

But yeah I don't get the NIMBY mentality. Now, while those NYHA towers do have units that are generally pricey, it still looks like a hood. Towers like this will help to bandaid the 1950's brown projects that look like they belong in the Bronx.

At this point in time, anything South of 125th Street is ripe for development, and there should be no surprise when towers like this spring up. If these people want crap, tell them to move to Irvington NJ or on the fringes of JFK. Ungrateful folks I'm telling ya.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2016, 11:12 PM
yankeesfan1000 yankeesfan1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 10014
Posts: 1,396
“C.B. 3 should support the community’s demand to stop Extell, and to ensure that no public subsidies or public assets be used to build luxury high-rises...."

I wonder how many of the people within this group live in subsidized public housing?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2016, 2:20 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 34,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by tokilamockingbrd View Post
Any chance they are successful? It seems idiot to me.

They're just being their usual NIMBYish selves, same as the folks on the more "well to do" eastside that want a rezoning to keep their neighborhood as is. The city isn't going to go all "willy nilly" on a rezoning process just to appease these morons.
__________________
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
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2016, 4:47 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 34,502
http://ny.curbed.com/2016/6/14/11932...-margaret-chin

LES Residents Want a Master Plan to Reel In Skyscraper Construction
To ensure that the neighborhood receives adequate public resources






BY TANAY WARERKAR
JUN 14, 2016


Quote:
Several large-scale projects have been announced in the Two Bridges area of the Lower East Side, over the last few months, and now, community members and local elected officials are looking to bring that development in check.

City Councilwoman Margaret Chin is planning to request a "major modification" to the existing Two Bridges Large-Scale Development Plan, the Lo-Down reports. This in turn will lead to a Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP), which Chin hopes will cover all the major projects either taking place or set to transform the neighborhood, and examine their impact on the community.

The known projects for the neighborhood include Extell’s One Manhattan Square, which is currently under construction, a 77-story tower planned by JDS, two 50-story towers planned by L+M Development Partners and the CIM Group, and conversions of existing buildings as well.

All these projects can move forward as of right, but with a ULURP of the whole area, Chin hopes the neighborhood can secure more resources for the future including schools and access to public transportation.

Prior to this proposal, community activists had submitted a plan to create height restrictions in the neighborhood, and to ensure that 50 percent of new developments would be affordable — that proposal was seen as being too broad by the local community board. Others in the neighborhood have argued that these new towers will also bring hundreds of affordable units to the neighborhood.



http://www.thelodownny.com/leslog/20...ges-area.html#

Development Frenzy Leads to Pleas For Master Plan in Two Bridges Area





Quote:
In response to a wave of new large-scale development projects, local Council member Margaret Chin and others are calling on the city to set in motion a master planning initiative for the Two Bridges community.

On the waterfront, Extell Development is building an 80-story luxury condo tower. In late April, JDS Development Group announced plans for a 77-story rental tower on a neighboring parcel. And as we first reported last month, two more big projects are in the works. L+M Development and the CIM Group (Two Bridges Associates) envision a residential complex on a lot adjacent to 265-275 Cherry St. and Starrett Corp. is looking to build on a parcel it owns alongside the East River.

Council member Chin has advised the Department of City Planning that she’ll be requesting what’s known as a “major modification” of the Two Bridges Large-Scale Development Plan. It would trigger a ULURP, which requires review by the local community board, the borough president and approval by the City Council. It also mandates an environmental review.

Locals are reeling from news of development in their neighborhood that seemed unimaginable just a few years ago. There’s been shock about the scale of the proposed projects but also concern about the lack of adequate infrastructure (including transportation and schools) to cope with an influx of several thousand new residents.

According to a spokesperson, Council member Chin will argue that all of the sites should be considered together. The four developments are “as of right” projects, meaning the property owners require no special permission from the city to build their mega-towers. ULURP (Uniform Land Use Review Procedure), she argues, would help ensure that the long-neglected neighborhood receives the resources it needs for the future.

Other elected officials are keeping a close eye on the Two Bridges area. “Considering the history of the sites and the significant proposed development in the area,” said State Sen. Daniel Squadron, “I share the community’s serious concerns about these proposals.” Newly elected Assemblywoman Alice Cancel met with residents this past Friday Friday, later telling us, “the community is in an uproar” and adding that development in the neighborhood is “out of control.” Cancel said she is calling for an emergency meeting with other Lower East Side leaders to come up with a plan to, at least temporarily, stop the new projects.


Quote:
Since the JDS project (a joint venture with SHoP Architects) is the only one that’s been publicly revealed, it’s attracted most of the fire. The approximately one-thousand foot tower at 247 Cherry St. would be cantilevered over portions of the old Pathmark pharmacy property and a low-income senior housing building. The mixed residential and commercial complex is to be built on land previously owned by the Two Bridges Neighborhood Council and Settlement Housing Fund. The two not-for-profit groups have been battling in court during the past couple of years with another developer, Little Cherry, LLC, which also wants to build on the site.

Representatives of Little Cherry took part in that meeting last week coordinated by Assemblywoman Cancel. We spoke yesterday with principal Roy Schoenberg and with Michael Kramer, director of real estate. They’re confident of ultimately prevailing in court, winning the right to develop the Two Bridges parcel. Kramer said the goal is to build a 47-story project that is “more harmonious with the community. that includes affordable housing but that it not too tall.” They also endorsed the idea of a master plan for the neighborhood.

Little Cherry and Extell Development hold long-term commercial leases in parts of the former pharmacy building. In the past, Extell executives have indicated they’d also like the opportunity to develop the parcel. George Arzt, a spokesperson for the firm, said Extell was in the dark about JDS’s Development’s plans. “No one has reached out to us,” said Arzt. “From what we’ve seen in the paper and blogs, we have some serious concerns about the project.”

As for JDS Development Group, a spokesperson declined to comment regarding Council member Chin’s request of City Planning. There’s been talk that the real estate firms planning projects in the area might come together to coordinate efforts and work on infrastructure issues. On this point, the spokesperson said, “These are three independent projects. If it makes sense to work together to address community or infrastructure needs, we would be open to exploring that possibility.”


Quote:
Residents living in neighboring buildings are making their own case for a Two Bridges master plan. Trever Holland, tenant association president at Two Bridges Tower said, “We have concerns about all of the buildings which are proposed because there’s no way this community can support 3,500-4,000 new apartments without proper city planning and without community involvement.” Holland said he’d like to know from local elected officials about how they see the new projects. “I can’t imagine they want more mega-towers in the Two Bridges neighborhood,” he added.

Other neighborhood leaders are also weighing in on the looming development boom. At Lands End II, where a parking lot is being primed for development, the tenant association is lamenting the “restructuring” of the “waterfront for the wealthy.” In a statement, the executive board asked of community-based organizations and elected officials, “How will you now protect us from these luxury towers moving into our neighborhoods, taking our parking lots… our beautiful scenery that now will be given to those who have the right amount of money and (how will you protect) the essence of our multicultural community that can never be replaced?”

Nancy Ortiz, tenant leader at the Vladeck Houses, criticized community outreach efforts for the JDS tower. “I feel this project was not inclusive nor transparent with the community as a whole,” she said. Ortiz added, “This community presently is over saturated with construction projects, yet it has limited resources, in transit, medical, educational programs and affordable food services.” Similar sentiments were expressed by another prominent tenant leader, Aixa Torres of the Alfred E. Smith Houses.

Victor Papa, president of the Two Bridges Neighborhood Council has been dealing with the backlash over the development deal for the past six weeks. In an interview yesterday, he called on Lower East Side residents to look at the “big picture.”

In his view, the agreement with JDS Development Group includes many benefits for the local community. In addition to 150 affordable apartments (25% of the total), the real estate firm will be renovating the neighboring senior housing building, adding desperately needed local retail and installing flood protection systems. But in a broader sense, Papa said, there’s no getting around the fact that the neighborhood is changing. “It can’t be stopped,” he warned, “and it’s naive to think otherwise.” Papa argued that Two Bridges Neighborhood Council is fulfilling its obligation to envision a new future. By the time all of the projects are complete, he predicted, 800 units of affordable housing could be created by market rate developers.

JDS has been planning to go before Community Board 3, voluntarily, to discuss its plans. Papa believes the current framework will actually lead to more amenities for the neighborhood, as opposed to a full ULURP, which is a more regimented process. As for the Little Cherry court battle, Papa is convinced that the deal with JDS is legally sound. Besides, he said, it’s clear to him that the new plan is a far better deal for the community than the original arrangement with Roy Schoenberg’s company. He thinks the state attorney general, who must approve the deal, will agree.

During the past several years, community activists have advocated for height limits in the Two Bridges area. They also called for 50% guaranteed affordable housing in new developments. The proposal was part of a rezoning plan presented to the city by the Chinatown Working Group. In the past, city planning officials dismissed the overall rezoning initiative as too broad. Earlier this month, Community Board 3 submitted a more targeted plan to the Department of City Planning that included the Two Bridges neighborhood. The board is requesting a meeting with city officials to discuss the new proposal.

A spokesperson told us yesterday that the Department of City Planning values the work that CB3 has done to evaluate the Chinatown Working Group proposals. The agency has received the community board letter and intends to follow up, the spokesperson explained. Meanwhile, CB3’s land use committee will take up the Chinatown Working Group issue tomorrow evening. The meeting will be held at 6:30 p.m. at University Settlement, 273 Bowery.

For her part, Council member Chin views the ULURP request she’s submitting and the Chinatown Working Group plans as separate initiatives. Her letter to the city, expected in the next few days, will not include a call for rezoning the neighborhood.



Closer viewing of the stacking shows the tower to be about 985 ft (more likely 986), but the stacking looks as if it could even top 1,000 ft to the top of the facade. A true supertall either way.



__________________
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.

Last edited by NYguy; Jun 14, 2016 at 4:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2016, 6:16 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
don't *meddle*...
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 4,017
985'8'' = 300.43m = supertall. Add the crown and we'll get >1,000'
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2016, 9:49 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, TAAR1
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 19,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunser View Post
985'8'' = 300.43m = supertall. Add the crown and we'll get >1,000'
These towers are pretty wide as well. Its going to have an amazing effect when driving into the Island via the Manhattan Bridge.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2016, 3:43 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 34,502
http://www.thelodownny.com/leslog/20...aders-say.html

Could Rezoning Block Two Bridges Mega Towers? Unlikely, Some Community Leaders Say





Ed Litvak
June 23, 2016


Quote:
The Two Bridges area is already a major construction zone. As Extell Development’s 80-story luxury tower rises on Cherry Street, at least three more large-scale projects have been added to the drawing board. In recent weeks, local residents have begun asking whether there’s anything that can be done to block the powerful real estate interests that are descending on the neighborhood.

The development bonanza was a main topic of last week’s meeting of Community Board 3’s land use committee. Some community activists are pushing to fast-track sweeping zoning proposals from the Chinatown Working Group, a neighborhood planning coalition formed eight years ago. They believe the plan, which calls for height limits along the waterfront, is their best hope of protecting the neighborhood from over-development.

In February of 2015, the city’s Planning Commission rejected the Chinatown Working Group proposal, calling it too expansive. As we noted earlier this month, Community Board 3 recently followed up with a more targeted pitch, offering to focus first on the historic core of Chinatown, the waterfront and the public housing campuses of the Lower East Side. At last week’s meeting, CB3 Chair Gigi Li announced that the planning commission responded in a June 7 letter, agreeing to meet with community board members. Carl Weisbrod, director of the Department of City Planning, wrote:

I am pleased to see that Community Board 3 has committed to taking a focused look at the Chinatown Working Group proposal. I would like to reiterate that we share many of the same goals for Chinatown, particularly the preservation and development of affordable housing. We are hopeful that with a more focused look – one that is specific to Chinatown – we can accomplish these and other important planning goals for the neighborhood.

The Chinatown Working Group’s grand plan covered a large swathe of the Lower East Side, as you can see in the map posted above. The proposed special zoning district was divided into sub-districts. While Weisbrod was not specific, it is assumed that his offer to look at a plan “specific to Chinatown” means Subdistrict A only, and not the waterfront area (Subdistrict D).

Concerns about mega-towers in the Two Bridges neighborhood boiled over after JDS Development Group announced in April that it intends to build a one-thousand-foot tower at 247 Cherry St., next door to Extell’s development site. Large-scale plans are also in-the-works for adjacent sites along the East River.

Chairperson Li told community board members, “I’m not convinced that pursuing rezoning of the waterfront would prevent any of the buildings that are already being discussed.” One reason why: community-driven rezonings do not happen quickly; they take a minimum of two years.

Trever Holland, a member of CB3 and a tenant leader in the Two Bridges area, said the community board needs to try harder to fight the plans. Referring to members of the land use committee, he said, “There are some creative minds up here… We need to think of something (even if it’s simply approving a statement in opposition to the towers).”

As we first reported, City Council member Margaret Chin wants the changes being proposed in the area to be considered a “major modification” of the Two Bridges Large-Scale Development Plan. She’s made that request of the Department of City Planning. If the agency agrees, it would result in a ULURP for the Two Bridges area, with required consultations with the community board, borough president and approval by the City Council. A spokesperson for Chin previously told us she sees the the request for a ULURP and the Chinatown Working Group plan as two separate initiatives.

Another community board member, Damaris Reyes, quizzed a representative from Chin’s office about the Council member’s commitment to the Chinatown Working Group’s full vision. Reyes is executive director of GOLES, a housing advocacy group already on the record in opposition to JDS Development Group’s tower. “A lot of people from this community and lots of groups,” she said, “worked for a really long time to do a comprehensive plan, not just the core of Chinatown.”

Reyes asked Roxanne Earley, Chin’s director of land use and planning, whether the Council member has an opinion on the city Planning Commission’s decision to only address the “Chinatown core.” Earley responded by saying that Chin is “very concerned about development and change all over the neighborhood and all throughout the district.” She added that the three new Two Bridges projects pose an immediate concern, suggesting that rezoning is not necessarily the answer to the neighborhood’s most pressing worries.

When pressed further by Reyes, Earley added, “We have to engage in conversations where we can get agency buy-in.” Once at the negotiating table, Earley explained, Council member Chin is hopeful the city will adopt more of the Chinatown Working Group’s vision. Reyes emphasized the importance of presenting a united front. “We’re going to count on our elected officials,” she said, “who we believe care about our community, to stand with us as we push forward… Otherwise, we’re spinning our wheels, we’re wasting our time.”

Since Weisbrod sent his letter to Gigi Li, a meeting has been scheduled to discuss the Chinatown zoning plans. Li will be attending, along with representatives from the Chin’s office and the office of Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer. It’s happening before the end of this month, although the exact day and time have not been disclosed.

Li said she’s been talking with representatives of JDS Development Group about two appearances before Community Board 3 in the coming months. In September, they’ll provide an informational briefing on their Cherry Street tower. Then sometime before the end of the year, the developers will return to present either a “minor modification” or a “major modification” of Two Bridges Large-Scale Development Plan.


As for Chin’s request of City Planning, a spokesperson told us yesterday that a letter has been sent to officially request a ULURP on the proposed development sites. Other elected officials signed on to the letter. Chin is awaiting a response from the city.

Meanwhile, it should be another dramatic night at Community Board 3’s monthly meeting this coming Tuesday evening. Last month, community activists demanded that CB3 sign a pledge to push for full implementation of the Chinatown Working Group plan. They’re going to show up again next week. Incidentally, it’s Gigi Li’s last board meeting before stepping down as chair (community board rules prevent her from running for a fifth term). She’s running in the upcoming Democratic Primary in the 65th Assembly District.
__________________
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
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2016, 9:25 AM
Sky88's Avatar
Sky88 Sky88 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 84
So, the 247 Cherry Street tower will be built or not?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2016, 2:03 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 34,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky88 View Post
So, the 247 Cherry Street tower will be built or not?

Why would you think it wouldn't be?




http://www.boweryboogie.com

Behemoth on the Backside: Proposed Cherry Street Tower to Reach 1000 Feet



Quote:
Extell tends to hog headlines when conversations arise about the changing skyline on the Lower East Side waterfront. Their market-rate tower – One Manhattan Square – will reach peak height of some 80 stories. But the real behemoth is on the backside, so to speak. The Cherry Street tower that will trounce the nearby senior center, thanks its own sponsors Two Bridges Neighborhood Council and Settlement Housing (“Two Bridgeset”).

Yes, the community was led to believe that the new 247 Cherry is “smaller” in scope at 77 stories. The truth of the matter, however, is that this number only referred to the liveable residential component. In actuality, its true height is really at or above 1,000 feet, dwarfing both Extell (823 feet) and the 107-year-old Manhattan Bridge (336 feet) in one fell swoop. And it’s literally built on the backs of seniors (i.e. Two Bridges Senior Center).

Check out this architectural rendering from City Planning. The roof sits at 983 feet, but factoring in the parapet will presumably add even more height.

http://boweryboogie.com/content/uplo...-rendering.png


__________________
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.

Last edited by NYguy; Jun 29, 2016 at 2:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2016, 2:12 PM
antinimby's Avatar
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 1,886
So these NIMBY's are essentially trying to use zoning to fight a class war? That's not what zoning is meant for.

Of course the city like idiots will obliged in some way like putting in a height limit. As if that's going to keep things affordable. Some of the most expensive nabes in Manhattan like Greenwich Village you can't build higher than 5 or 6 stories.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2016, 3:43 PM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,440
If the parapet in the diagram is scaled correctly, it should be 1024' tall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2016, 4:18 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 34,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by scalziand View Post
If the parapet in the diagram is scaled correctly, it should be 1024' tall.

Certainly above 1,000 at least.



__________________
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
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2016, 5:38 PM
Skyguy_7's Avatar
Skyguy_7 Skyguy_7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,556
^Simply by scaling the diagram, I get 1,018. But man, an amenity floor at 967'..... drool.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2016, 7:52 PM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
El Barto
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Las Americas y Europa
Posts: 3,054
Excellent place for an 1000 + footer
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2016, 10:37 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, TAAR1
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 19,008
Anybodys who's been to the area will know that this, along with One Manhattan Square will redefine that area. Its going to look so nice when driving over the Manhattan Bridge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zapatan View Post
Excellent place for an 1000 + footer
Hopefully more will follow. The NIMBYS need to just give up. The LES is not immune from downtowns spread nor should it. I can kinda get if this was somewhere in Queens, in an area that has 4-6 floor structures, but these NIMBYS are just kuku for Donepezil. And rightly so. Maybe they just forgot where they live.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Jun 30, 2016, 1:21 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 34,502
The only people I feel badly for are the seniors. The construction of this tower (with included noise) will be a big problem for them - the tower would basically be going up above and over them. They should be relocated, and their current building renovated while this one is under construction. With a guaranteed place in the renovated building, that would lessen the sting of relocating.


The rest of these people though...


http://gothamist.com/2016/06/29/les_tower_rage.php


LES Residents Say New 950-Foot Skyscraper Will Crush Them "Like A Cockroach"

BY MIRANDA KATZ
JUN 29, 2016


Quote:
Two months ago, Lower East Siders got word of a second behemoth tower planned to go up just a block from the 80-story Extell tower already under construction at One "One Percent" Manhattan Square: a 77-story tower on Cherry Street will sit just behind the Extell building, and will rise at least 100 feet above the tower that's already caused local hysteria over sinking sidewalks and cracking walls at surrounding buildings. Last night, dozens of neighborhood residents packed the auditorium of P.S. 20 to protest the development, as well as the ongoing construction at One Manhattan Square, voicing fears that the towers will price them out of the neighborhood and damage the surrounding area.

The tower at 247 Cherry Street, spearheaded by JDS Development, will require the temporary relocation of a small senior center on Cherry Street. That center will eventually be housed in the tower, according to a JDS spokesperson, but its relocation is still of concern to LES residents, who are still mourning the loss of the affordable grocery store whose site is now the home of One Manhattan Square.

"First, they got rid of our supermarket," said Antonio Quelin, who lives at 82 Rutgers Slip, a building adjacent to the new tower's proposed site that is primarily made up of affordable housing. "Then [Extell] damaged the foundation of our building, causing it to shake, making it impossible for many residents to cause our windows and doors. Construction has caused shaking and vibrating, and the dust has worsened health for residents, especially those who cannot close their windows. Our so-called nonprofit landlords are not doing anything for us. They are now allowing another highrise to be constructed on top of a senior building by JDS."

By "so-called nonprofit landlords," Quelin was referring to is the Two Bridges Neighborhood Council, a nonprofit that, according to its website, "serves the community by creating affordable housing...and engaging residents in the public, political and planning processes that impact the community in which they live and work." TBNC helped broker the deal with JDS, as it currently owns the property where the new tower will rise, and TBNC president Victor Papa has presented the plan for the new tower as one of few options for the development of new affordable housing—150 of the 600 units planned for the tower will be affordable.

"They're making false projections, saying people will be able to afford these buildings," argued Ben Rothenberg at last night's meeting. "They're making these to make money—they don't care about the people who live here. They don't care what happens once the building goes up. We have a lot of problems from the land sinking into the water, the buildings getting cracks in them. It's affecting the health of current residents."

Also of concern is the fact that the Cherry Street tower will be even taller than Extell's, despite having fewer floors. In an article out today, Bowery Boogie suggests that developers misled residents by describing the building by its number of stories (77, compared to Extell's 80) rather than feet (over 950, compared to Extell's 850). However, a spokesperson from JDS Development said that they've been transparent throughout the process about the building's height in feet, and provide both metrics to make it easier for people to visualize.

"The project will bring much-needed affordable housing, more retail options, and new open space to the neighborhood, while allowing our not-for-profit partners to further their mission—from funding neighborhood amenities to providing after-school and daycare programs," a spokesperson for JDS said in a statement. "The developers have committed to making building-wide improvements and resiliency upgrades to TBNC's residence at 80 Rutgers Street in order to preserve it as a source of stable, affordable housing for seniors for years to come. We've engaged residents in nearby buildings in discussions about the project and will continue to consider the community's feedback as the process moves forward."

On top of that, there are more towers coming to the neighborhood: there are at least two more large-scale buildings in the works for the waterfront, one a block down from the Cherry Street development and one on Cherry Street bordering Clinton Street. In response to this increased development, Councilmember Margaret Chin has asked the city to treat such changes to the area as major modifications to the existing Two Bridges Large-Scale Development Plan, as doing so would trigger the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure, a laborious process that requires an environmental review, as well as review from the local community board, the borough president, and approval from the City Council. Chin's office hasn't yet received a response to that request.

The Extell tower, which is significantly closer to realization than its 77-story neighbor, recently released a promotional video rendering of what the completed tower will look like, showing it utterly dwarfing the Manhattan Bridge and surrounding buildings. It will be the tallest tower between the Financial District and Midtown by 2019; the Cherry Street tower, meanwhile, isn't expected to begin construction for at least another two years, giving area residents plenty of time to shout themselves hoarse at community board meetings to come.

"We're being treated as a cockroach to be exterminated so the rich and wealthy can move in," said Eileen Boras, a lifelong resident of the Lower East Side who also lives at 82 Rutgers Slip. "Where are the studies for upgrades to public transportation? Where are the independent environmental studies saying it's safe to build around and on top of us? The reality is, you're taking more away from us than you're offering...this isn't fair. We are average, working people. We want to stay in our area. We want to be able to afford our homes."


The issue about this tower being taller than Extell's is a non-issue. What difference does it make at that height?

Also:

Quote:
"They're making false projections, saying people will be able to afford these buildings," argued Ben Rothenberg at last night's meeting. "They're making these to make money—they don't care about the people who live here.

Why does anyone think anyone builds anything? It most certainly is to make money.
__________________
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
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Jun 30, 2016, 1:29 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, TAAR1
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Jersey - Somerset County
Posts: 19,008


Quote:
The Extell tower, which is significantly closer to realization than its 77-story neighbor, recently released a promotional video rendering of what the completed tower will look like, showing it utterly dwarfing the Manhattan Bridge and surrounding buildings. It will be the tallest tower between the Financial District and Midtown by 2019; the Cherry Street tower, meanwhile, isn't expected to begin construction for at least another two years, giving area residents plenty of time to shout themselves hoarse at community board meetings to come.
Hopefully sooner. I'd imagine we are going to see the local politicians get more involved. Still kinda bummed out we have to wait so long through the soft cost stage but at least what's in store is worth it. Still, 2 years is a century in terms of development activity like we are seeing now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Jun 30, 2016, 5:51 PM
Zerton's Avatar
Zerton Zerton is offline
Ω
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,678
It's a decent tower (Kind of reminds me of Tour Montparnasse... or maybe Tower 42 in London). I think the "legs" are very interesting - only in a Manhattan market would that happen. One qualm - does it have to be green?
__________________
If all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed, if all records told the same tale, then the lie passed into history and became truth. -Orwell
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 > Highrise & Supertall Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:50 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.