NYC will always stay the classic skyscraper capital, which has a lot more value forever than all the plastic phallus clowntowns somewhere in the deserts combined.


But anyway, this doesn't belong here, so please stick to the topic which is the Hudson Yards project. Thanks.

NY will never have the worlds tallest building, but it could have the most supertalls in one place which is equally if not more impressive... I say that because, if the Jeddah tower gets built, it will be 3300 feet tall, NY will never build half that high... but maybe itll build so many 1000-1300 footers that it will be more impressive that a city with one 3000 footer

I agree. Although buildings at the Yards have air rights for towers in the 450m range, none have air rights for a 900m tower, as of right. If any developer sought to transfer air rights from contiguous parcels to build a 900m tower, such a proposal would be DOA.

I agree. Although buildings at the Yards have air rights for towers in the 450m range, none have air rights for a 900m tower, as of right. If any developer sought to transfer air rights from contiguous parcels to build a 900m tower, such a proposal would be DOA.

what's DOA?

anyway that would be cool if a 450+ meter tower could end up on the west side :)

Dead or alive? :smug:

Dead on arrival

To say that NYC will NEVER have another tallest is too hard to say.
The only never we can be sure of is we'll never know what the future will bring.
Hudson Yards may not be worlds tallests, but theyll definitely give the city a new dimension. And even more wonderous skyscrapers to marvel at.
Cant wait to hear more on this.

To say that NYC will NEVER have another tallest is too hard to say.
The only never we can be sure of is we'll never know what the future will bring.
Hudson Yards may not be worlds tallests, but theyll definitely give the city a new dimension. And even more wonderous skyscrapers to marvel at.
Cant wait to hear more on this.


Sorry but NYC will never build as high as the Burj Dubai. New York is about money, not power, and therefore will never have the reason to waste so much money on such a profit losing venture. If you think I am wrong, look at the MoMA tower, cut from 1250 feet down to 1050 feet. That statement alone tells you the mindset of the average NYC NIMBY.

I understand what your saying. I live and work right here in the city, i know lots about the restrictions and zoning laws of the city, and i understand corporations and developers intentions when they build a headquarters in downtown manhattan. Height on a scale of world records seems out of sight right now. But thats the beauty of the future, its nearly impossible to say where the city will be in 50 or for that matter 400 years. Just trying to seem optimistic.
But for the sake of the thread we're on, i have to say the renders of hudson yards look brilliant, and hopefully it adds a lot to the magnificant skyline once its built whether its 350 meters or 1000

what's DOA?

anyway that would be cool if a 450+ meter tower could end up on the west side :)

And a 2000/2100 ft tower like Chicago Spire version B, 7 South Dearborn, Miglin Beitler Skyneedle, Think Great Room tower for WTC or Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates 2000 ft tower (WTC), it is possible on west side?:)

Think Great Room 2100 ft tower
http://www.pbase.com/image/12740482

Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates 2000 ft tower
http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3430

While I personally don't believe NY will reclaim the tallest at any point in our lifetimes, there's no way we can predict the future. But we must consider this: the people of New York aren't likely to pull a Dubai. That is to say, they likely aren't going to let a 900m tower go up without first conquering the territories of 600m, 700m and 800m.

We must acknowledge and respect the other buildings. I'm all up for building 900m towers in Midtown, but it would be disrespectful to just build something two or three times taller then the rest out of nowhere, not to mention, it'd just ruin the skyline (in my opinion).

So maybe in a hundred years, the Asian supertall boom will end and another American supertall boom, this one much larger and taller then the last will start again. We won't know until it happens.

I don't know why we're talking about 100+ years down the future, none of us will even be alive to see it.

If it happens within the next few decades we can enjoy it ourselves.

However, NYC has a long way to go before that, seeing on how it can hardly get a 400 meter building up, how can we even possibly talk about taller ones?

I'm really not too optomisitc for NY to be honest, it's probably one of the most dissapointing skyscraper cities there are when it comes to proposals being cancelled, or just not existing at all, but who knows, maybe the future will be better. :cheers:

^Nah, the most disappointing skyscraper city is Chicago, but even then, it's skyline and height is amazing ;)

^Nah, the most disappointing skyscraper city is Chicago, but even then, it's skyline and height is amazing ;)

Yea also true, but Chicago already has 4 1100+ foot buildings and one of the greatest skylines ever. (Not saying NYC doesn't also have a great skyline, it absolutely does)

I just never get my hopes up for proposals in either city.

I also think NYC will never build the tallest building in the world again. But at least i would like to build buildings that could rival the great projects we see today in Shanghai, Dubai, Seoul and other cities. When I look at the skyscrapers under construction in America today and compare it to certain projects in the outside world, i'm discouraged.

I hope they make a 2000 foot taller in NY in the next 15 years.

I like the manhattan skyline because has beautiful clusters of beautiful scrapers, not a chaotic forests of condos and some huge skyscrapers both beautiful and ugly.

I like too much this project because will enlarge the central manhattan cluster and I like the design of buildings.

Imho america(usa+canada but also the AUZ+NZ style is the same) has the best cluster design and will keep having it judging the new skyscraper cities.

I don't like dubai, shangai,singapore for example, but Beijing is not bad and guangzhou too.

Hong Kong is something unique and amazing.

I'm waiting for central and south america! I hope they will make something beautiful in the future!

stay on topic!

Conversation thrown away. Stay on topic '2.

http://www.observer.com/2011/12/the-white-whale-of-west-57th-street-nordstrom-appears-poised-for-nyc/

The White Whale of West 57th Street: Nordstrom appears poised for NYC
By Daniel Geiger 2:00pm
It’s the great white whale of Manhattan retail.

Aside from Walmart, Nordstrom is the store every retail broker in the city dreams of harpooning and reeling into a new home. One prominent broker familiar with the store, the amount of space it needs and the rents it would probably be willing to pay estimates that the commission for handling its lease would be around $10 million.

But like a leviathan lurking beneath the waves, the department store has offered only fleeting glimpses around the city, most notably at several development sites and a few existing assets with the capacity to accommodate its sprawling footprint.

The scuttlebutt nowadays: Nordstrom is contemplating one of two leases, one at the West Side rail yards with the Related Companies or another at the base of Extell Development’s soaring new residential tower now rising at 157 West 57th Street.


Illustration by Zack Nipper
According to brokers familiar with Nordstrom’s search, the options are emblematic of the dilemma that has kept the retailer bouncing around Manhattan for years. The department store is ideally searching for a roughly 250,000-square-foot box, a commodity so rare in the city that the only major department stores that have it—Macy’s and Saks among a short list of others—are ones that have been established in the city for decades and hence had a chance to address their real estate needs before the market became as expensive and supply-starved as it is now.

The solution, of course, has been for Nordstrom to accept a smaller space with a layout that is atypical for a traditional department store. Many brokers say the template for this configuration is the Bloomingdale’s on Broadway in Soho, where the retailer had to greatly reduce the size of its store and tailor its clothing line and layout to appeal to the type of shoppers in that neighborhood.

A similar reshuffling of the Nordstrom concept would likely be necessary to bring the chain to Extell’s project, brokers told The Commercial Observer. The attractiveness of the rail yards stems from an assumption that the company could design a building from the ground up to meet all of its specifications.

But the rail yards are considered a new frontier in the city with little retail connecting the site to Midtown, making a deal there a gamble if the neighborhood takes longer than expected to develop into a popular destination for shoppers.

Extell’s development, though perhaps ill fitting for Nordstrom, would place it at the center of Midtown and near the Time Warner Center, a successful high-end retail mall in Columbus Circle that has helped designate the neighborhood as a retail hub.

Nordstrom has been linked to that area before. Last year, developer Stephen Ross bought the mortgage on the office building 3 Columbus Circle with the intent to foreclose on the property, raze it and erect a new tower with Nordstrom in the base. The deal fizzled when Joe Moinian, 3 Columbus’s landlord, held onto the property by recapitalizing the building with SL Green.

The trade-off between location and compatibility has been a conflict for the company for more than five years. Nordstrom almost had a deal to move into an office tower that was to be built by Stephen Ross and Harry Macklowe on the former site of the Drake Hotel at 57th Street and Park Avenue. A person directly involved in those talks said that lease eventually crumbled because Nordstrom pushed the physical limits of the project, insisting on towering ceiling heights and other amenities.

“They wanted 18-foot ceilings,” the person said. “You could literally do two office floors for every floor that they wanted. They placed themselves out of the game by needing too much.”

The office building at 650 Madison Avenue, not far from the Drake site, has also been a location that Nordstrom has considered. According to brokers, the issues plaguing that property centered around the likelihood that nearby department stores like Saks, Bloomingdale’s, Barneys and Bergdorf Goodman would balk at or even bar its vendors from supplying Nordstrom with the brands that they sell, which would essentially prevent Nordstrom from being competitive.

“None of the existing department stores are going to roll over and give into Nordstrom without a fight,” the broker said, adding that he wasn’t “100 percent certain that they have given up on 650 Madison.”

Perhaps out of necessity, the company has poked around downtown, reportedly checking out an anchor tenancy at the World Financial Center office complex as well as the retail being built at the World Trade Center. Here again, brokers said, Nordstrom has expressed a preference to be in Midtown.

dgeiger@observer.com

That's for the article RW! Nordstrom does seem an odd fit at One57 to be honest, and as the article mentioned, I'm sure Related would basically build almost whatever Nordstrom wanted if they inked a deal, within the existing parameters of their plan of course, which do still seem to be flexible though. Plus Nordstrom can have more space!

All signs point to the final phase of the High Line extending up here, and new apartment buildings are already popping up in the area surrounding the rail yards well before the 7 train is finished, (there's a 30 story and a 32 story rental buildings that both kicked off in the last month, not to mention a 1000+ unit development on 45th), might be smart for Nordstrom to ink a deal sooner rather than later.

The amount of construction in this area in a couple of years when is going to simply be astounding.

That's for the article RW!

My pleasure, sir.

I wonder if the article meant to refer to the new Extell site at 225 W 57th instead of One 57. I don't see how One 57 could possibly accomodate a department store.

That's what I though initially, but third full paragraph it says One57. Weird. I'm putting my money on the Hudson Yards.

I thought one57 was only hotel and apartments and no office space?

I thought one57 was only hotel and apartments and no office space?

There is no office space at One57. They're speaking about a store.

Foreigners will part with their roubles, reais and rupees if they can say to their peers they bought on top of the Park Hyatt. But NEVER to be above a department store..

They meant the site near Columbus Circle, clearly.

What will they actually raze for the entire HY proyect? There is this old beautiful red building next to MC Dons on 34th street, or this older white cladded building on 10th avenue. Will the raze them too and or do we have any official plans which show what will be razed and what not? The warehouses and garages can go, but some facades should be conserved and reintegrated into the new buildings imho.

its a great proposal..surely adds beauty to NYC!!

I like the manhattan skyline because has beautiful clusters of beautiful scrapers, not a chaotic forests of condos and some huge skyscrapers both beautiful and ugly.

I like too much this project because will enlarge the central manhattan cluster and I like the design of buildings.

Imho america(usa+canada but also the AUZ+NZ style is the same) has the best cluster design and will keep having it judging the new skyscraper cities.

I totally agree. Asian and South American cities sicken me with the huge amount of stumpy and as cheap as possible apartment towers. US, Canada and Australia build the most attractive skyscraper cities. These are countries with significant wealth to spend on the design and the art of all buildings.

I agree. These segments of the NY skyline show why it is the king and always will be pre-WW II skyscrapers will never be replicated.

http://www.extelldev.com/images/home/Landmark.jpg

http://i42.tinypic.com/cnnzc.jpg

http://www.museumplanet.com/image/nyc/nypl/nypl021.jpg

i know its all the fashion now but with all these modern skyscrapers going up i would love to see some old style scraper going up other than just glass; i hope they dont tear down some nice architectural building for this, although the plans are unreal! when are they going to start it?

Yeah architects today are far to obsessed with glass. Whatever happened to granite and metal. Is nobody looking at the beautiful facade of Citigroup Center?

^^ And even if nowadays architects try to copy the style of old scrapers they just end up making an ugly kitsch like Abby in Mecca. If they can't duplicate old skyscrapers they shouldn't even try :doh:

i know its all the fashion now but with all these modern skyscrapers going up i would love to see some old style scraper going up other than just glass; i hope they dont tear down some nice architectural building for this, although the plans are unreal! when are they going to start it?

This area of Manhattan is a wasteland. There is nothing out there, it's being built on top of an active rail yard. The shorter of the two office buildings is going to start in the spring of 2012.

@Kanto: I typically agree, there are some exceptions, I think 99 Church is a good example of a modern building built in an old style that looks like it could turn out quite well. Obviously we only have renders, but it looks pretty good.

^^ And even if nowadays architects try to copy the style of old scrapers they just end up making an ugly kitsch like Abby in Mecca. If they can't duplicate old skyscrapers they shouldn't even try :doh:

Beacuse the Mecka project is kitsch, all stone scrapers will be kitschy?

If we could build stonescrapers 80 years ago, why not nowadays?

Nice. :cheers:

Beacuse the Mecka project is kitsch, all stone scrapers will be kitschy?

If we could build stonescrapers 80 years ago, why not nowadays?

We technically could but they always seemed to turn out as sh*t.

in the past there was more of a demand for skyscrapers to look pretty and have as much art as possible. now its all about how much floor space you can get for how cheap. :/

I totally agree. Asian and South American cities sicken me with the huge amount of stumpy and as cheap as possible apartment towers. US, Canada and Australia build the most attractive skyscraper cities. These are countries with significant wealth to spend on the design and the art of all buildings.

I agree. Currently, many cities have some beautiful skyscraper, but the entire rest of the city is an architectural pure garbage.

Most of these cities, only build super-tall buildings to say "Hello world, I can build tall buildings." Hahaha, pathetic.

In Asia has super high buildings, but in South America there is only one super tall (which is in Chile). The other countries is just a hellish amount of highrises. :nuts:

in the past there was more of a demand for skyscrapers to look pretty and have as much art as possible. now its all about how much floor space you can get for how cheap. :/

If they truly went only for floor space and nothing else all new buildings would be boxes, so I think design is still being considered by most developers :cheers:

If they truly went only for floor space and nothing else all new buildings would be boxes, so I think design is still being considered by most developers :cheers:

Ohh, that would be heaven for you Kanto. A world full of boxes ;)

^^ LOL yeah, it would be pure awesomeness :drool::master::hilarious

but you cant deny that is certainly far more of a factor now than it was back then.

in the past there was more of a demand for skyscrapers to look pretty and have as much art as possible. now its all about how much floor space you can get for how cheap. :/

It's not just the efficiency of the floor plate but other considerations such as the degree of natural lighting which is an important consideration w.r.t. sustainability and energy costs.

indeed ^

I can't really comprehend what you're talking about since I'm short of time, but please stop the offtopic discussion and go back to Hudson Yards. Thank you.

^^ I think they're talking about the designs, compared to other buildings.

What's great about NYC is that even though it has a strong art deco theme throughout its skyline, it also has great variation and smatterings of buildings that break the mold.

If they truly went only for floor space and nothing else all new buildings would be boxes, so I think design is still being considered by most developers :cheers:

And they are boxes. Parallelograms, with fancy glass.

In his annual "State of the State" address on 4 Jan. 2012, New York's Governor, Andrew Cuomo, called for demolishing the Javits Convention Center and building a new center in Queens. For those who don't know NY, Javits occupies a gigantic site, which is directly adjacent to Related's Hudson Yards site on the north side. The Javits site would have at least 15 million sf of air rights. It is the very large black building on the left side of the photo and its site continues all the way to the two little, orange, square structures. This will transform the far west side.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1024/1233563063_c36378306a.jpg

does cuomo really have enough say in city affairs for that to mean anything?

Yes. Demolishing Javits has been discussed for a few years now, and now that this forlorn area's transformation is underway, Javits' demolition will be expedited.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/nyregion/governor-cuomo-delivers-state-of-the-state-address.html?pagewanted=2&hp


Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo delivered his State of the State address in Albany on Wednesday.

By THOMAS KAPLAN
Published: January 4, 2012

ALBANY — Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, vowing to revive New York’s stagnant economy, on Wednesday unveiled more than a dozen initiatives aimed at creating jobs across the state, including building the nation’s largest convention center in Queens and offering $1 billion in incentives to lure companies to Buffalo...

Mr. Cuomo threw his support behind the construction of a 3.8-million-square-foot convention center at the Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens, as a joint venture with a subsidiary of the gambling company Genting Group, which in October opened a casino with electronic games at the racetrack. And he said it was time to begin the process of amending the state’s Constitution to allow for full-fledged resort-style casinos developed off Indian land, given the proliferation of gambling on Indian land and in neighboring states.

“We are surrounded by gaming,” Mr. Cuomo said. “And for us, this is not about chips and cards. This is about the jobs that the casino industry generates.”

At the same time, he proposed private redevelopment of the land now occupied by the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center on the West Side of Manhattan, and he vowed to set aside $1 billion in economic incentives to draw businesses to Buffalo, the state’s second-largest city and long an economically depressed area. The governor’s office said the nature of the incentives for Buffalo, and how they would be financed, had not yet been determined.....

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who attended the speech, called Mr. Cuomo’s convention center proposal a “great idea” and said redeveloping the Javits center site would fit in well with construction projects, including Hudson Yards, that are already under way on the West Side. “I liked his focus on the economy and on job creation; that is really what this state needs, and New York City as well,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “It’s a challenge to all of us to put our nose to the grindstone and actually do the work.”

Yes. Demolishing Javits has been discussed for a few years now, and now that this forlorn area's transformation is underway, Javits' demolition will be expedited.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/nyregion/governor-cuomo-delivers-state-of-the-state-address.html?pagewanted=2&hp


Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo delivered his State of the State address in Albany on Wednesday.

By THOMAS KAPLAN
Published: January 4, 2012

ALBANY — Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, vowing to revive New York’s stagnant economy, on Wednesday unveiled more than a dozen initiatives aimed at creating jobs across the state, including building the nation’s largest convention center in Queens and offering $1 billion in incentives to lure companies to Buffalo...

Mr. Cuomo threw his support behind the construction of a 3.8-million-square-foot convention center at the Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens, as a joint venture with a subsidiary of the gambling company Genting Group, which in October opened a casino with electronic games at the racetrack. And he said it was time to begin the process of amending the state’s Constitution to allow for full-fledged resort-style casinos developed off Indian land, given the proliferation of gambling on Indian land and in neighboring states.

“We are surrounded by gaming,” Mr. Cuomo said. “And for us, this is not about chips and cards. This is about the jobs that the casino industry generates.”

At the same time, he proposed private redevelopment of the land now occupied by the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center on the West Side of Manhattan, and he vowed to set aside $1 billion in economic incentives to draw businesses to Buffalo, the state’s second-largest city and long an economically depressed area. The governor’s office said the nature of the incentives for Buffalo, and how they would be financed, had not yet been determined.....

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who attended the speech, called Mr. Cuomo’s convention center proposal a “great idea” and said redeveloping the Javits center site would fit in well with construction projects, including Hudson Yards, that are already under way on the West Side. “I liked his focus on the economy and on job creation; that is really what this state needs, and New York City as well,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “It’s a challenge to all of us to put our nose to the grindstone and actually do the work.”
what makes you think demolition is any closer now than it was a few years ago? are you sure you know what you are talking about?

So much for that big, expensive renovation they're still working on. I say good riddance. It's old, outdated, ugly, and really depressing the area. New York deserves a more functional and competitive convention center anyway.

what makes you think demolition is any closer now than it was a few years ago? are you sure you know what you are talking about?

What sort of question is that? It won't be demolished tomorrow, as it will take a few years to build the new convention center.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203513604577140902582019204.html?mod=WSJ_NY_LEFTThirdStories&_nocache=1325767663384&user=welcome&mg=id-wsj

NY POLITICS
JANUARY 5, 2012
Another New Idea for the Javits Center

By JOSEPH DE AVILA

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's plans to redevelop the West Side facility and build a new convention center in Queens come as the Javits Center is searching for a new chief executive and is completing a $500 million renovation.

Making the announcement in his State of the State address, Mr. Cuomo summed up what critics have said about the state-owned Javits Center for years: It is too small and outdated to host world-class events in the nation's largest city.

"Right now the Jacob Javits Center is not competitive," Mr. Cuomo said, adding that it is smaller than convention centers in cities like Anaheim and Atlanta. "That hurts the New York economy."

Replacing Javits would be what Mr. Cuomo billed as the country's largest convention center, a private venture proposed near the Aqueduct Racetrack and a casino in the South Ozone Park section of Queens. The plan would add the Javits site as another prime parcel of developable land in a fast-growing part of Manhattan near the Related Cos.' Hudson Yards project and Moynihan Station.

Under Mr. Cuomo's plan, the 18-acre Javits Center site would become a mixed-use facility that could include housing, hotels and office space. It would be modeled, Mr. Cuomo said, after the Battery Park City Authority, which signs long-term leases with private developers and provides revenue to the state. Small and midsize conventions could still take place at Javits, while larger shows would happen in Queens. The Cuomo administration estimates that more than $2 billion in private-sector investment would flow into a redeveloped Javits Center.

Carl Loewenson, chairman of the New York Convention Center Operating Corp. that runs the Javits Center, declined to comment on Mr. Cuomo's speech.

Mr. Cuomo's plan is the latest effort by the state to reconfigure the Javits Center, which was built in 1986. Ever since, governors have made halting efforts to expand the center, which is currently in the midst of a $500 million renovation that includes an 80,000-square-foot addition scheduled to be completed in two years.

The Queens convention center proposal—on which Mr. Cuomo's Javits plans hinge—would face significant obstacles.

Malaysian gaming company Genting Americas would have to obtain financing for a 3.8-million-square-foot facility that would cost more than $1 billion at a time when construction loans are hard to get, industry experts said. A Genting subsidiary already runs a casino at the racetrack.

The Queens location could be another hurdle because many tourists prefer to stay in Manhattan with easy access to restaurants and Broadway, said Steven Spinola, president of the Real Estate Board of New York, an industry association.

"Part of the planning will have to be the transportation to get people around the city of New York," Mr. Spinola said. "But if you make it big enough and make it exciting enough, I think you will be able to overcome that."

Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the Aqueduct area would be a "decent location."

"I think all of us agree that we need a bigger convention center," he said. "It would be a great idea to get it done."

Christian Goode, senior vice president of development of Genting Americas, said in a statement: "It's a great time to invest and grow in New York, and we are thrilled to be able to play a role in creating jobs and increasing tourism."

Mr. Cuomo's vision for the Javits Center would open for development a Manhattan parcel of land that the governor said was "larger than the World Trade Center and the United Nations."

"This becomes the biggest development parcel in the city," said Bob Yaro, president of the Regional Plan Association, which had pushed for a similar plan for Javits last year. "It's the opportunity to create a large mixed-use district that would complement the Hudson Yards site."

The proposal comes as the Javits Center has hunted for a new chief executive for several months after its longtime leader Gerald McQueen stepped down last year. Mr. McQueen had been credited for rooting out the mob corruption at the center and helping it turn profits from fiscal year 1997 to 2009.

The center's financial health declined after the 2008-09 recession. Shows have become smaller, and there have been fewer of them as more groups opt for video conferencing instead of traditional conventions, Mr. Loewenson said.

"People have recovered from the shock of the financial crisis, but it's still not back to where it was before 2008," Mr. Loewenson said.

As I understand it, the Javits parcel is outside the current Hudson Yards redevelopment district but can be easily included with the same FAR and other development incentives. Indeed, it is the only parcel outside the zoning district at present.

With over $ 3 Billion in infrastructure investments in the area, including the 7th Line subway extension, a sprawling Convention center is no longer the highest and best use for this site. As we can see in the excellent aerial shot that Robert posted, the entire is all set for density. Once the Javits site is added to the nearly 40 Million SF of commercial and residential development planned in the area, this would be a hub that can challenge Times Square or the WTC area!

In addition, there are several other fullblock sites that are either carparks for industrial vehicles or warehouses, all of which have tens of millions of square feet of air rights.

In addition, there are several other fullblock sites that are either carparks for industrial vehicles or warehouses, all of which have tens of millions of square feet of air rights.

Absolutely! Over the next 15-20 years, this could become the most built on area in NYC, if not the whole of the US! I don't think that there is this much contiguous developable area anywhere else in Manhattan. The trick will be in not creating a glut.

maybe if it really is developed new york will start catching up.

there is no catching up to do when you are already at the top. it could help build a greater lead though ;P

maybe if it really is developed new york will start catching up.

Catch up to what? NY is the king of skyscrapers.

Catch up to what? NY is the king of skyscrapers.
never said it isnt. there are certainly areas where it could use some improving, however.

never said it isnt. there are certainly areas where it could use some improving, however.

Of course.

Of course.
one of the aspects i was referring to was what i view as new york's lack of balance in its skyline. i think this will help its balance and bring it closer to the grandeur of skylines like that of chicago.

Catch up to what? NY is the king of skyscrapers.

I think some second tier cities in China have more highrises than NYC:ohno: IMHO

Catch up to what? NY is the king of skyscrapers.

It used to be, but isn't really anymore... maybe in a few years with newer skyscrapers it will be back in a higher ranking.

Good thing is, this is quite likely to be built, as well as a few other large towers. :)

I think some second tier cities in China have more highrises than NYC:ohno: IMHO

Well that's wrong.. Hong Kong actually is the only one... check the thread about number of skyscrapers.


And if by highrises you mean apartment blocks, maybe, it by highrises you mean full on skyscrapers, I'd say only Hong Kong and Shanghai could compete

I think some second tier cities in China have more highrises than NYC:ohno: IMHO
and those skyscrapers are second tier at best. the majority are highrise tenements.

I think Hong Kong is the only one.


And if by highrises you mean apartment blocks, maybe, it by highrises you mean full on skyscrapers, I'd say only Hong Kong and Shanghai could compete

NYC is the unparalleled king. Most of HK's tower are new lousy. The ICC has a terrible design, and the IFC is mediocre. Neither building is as good as 1, 2 or 3 WTC, and 15 Penn is basically the same tower as the IFC. Also, I am unaware of active proposals in HK that are of the calibre of KPF's 300m+ towers at the Hudson Yards, Torre Verre or 56 Leonard, all of which are expected to begin rising in 2012. That being said, I've been to HK and love it.

Lastly, no city in the world has a sea of pre-WWII skyscrapers like NY. Between 42nd and 23rd Streets in particular are at least 200 pre-WW II towers of at least 20 stories. New skyscraper cities can't replicate these, and the few cities that have them (e.g., Chicago, Detroit, etc.) don't have a fraction of NY's.

Lastly, what first-world city is developing as many 300m+ towers as NY? None.

El rey
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2355/5802510061_5a9288563b_b.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7172/6636132339_2e5321c693_b.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7015/6628398485_753b0af749_b.jpg

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203471004577143333474410466.html?mod=WSJ_RealEstate_sections_Commercial

Jan. 6, 2012
Convention Pact Includes Queens Casino
Malaysian Group Could Land Rights

By JACOB GERSHMAN AND JOSEPH DE AVILA

ALBANY—The Cuomo administration's plans to build a massive convention center in Queens may also pave the way for the city's first full-blown casino.

A rendering of what would be the U.S.'s largest convention center. The complex at Aqueduct may also be expanded to add more gambling.
.The Cuomo administration entered Tuesday into a nonbinding agreement with a Malaysian conglomerate to build a massive complex at the Aqueduct racetrack in Queens that includes a "casino expansion" of an existing gambling space at the site.

The details emerged a day after Gov. Andrew Cuomo delivered a State of the State speech in which he announced that his administration is working with the Genting Group to develop the nation's largest convention center at Aqueduct, near JFK airport. In the same speech, Mr. Cuomo said he supported legalizing casino gambling with a state constitutional amendment.

The new details are contained in a copy of an agreement between the state and Genting released by Mr. Cuomo's office Thursday.

According to the document, the state and Genting would work together to develop a project that would include a "convention, exhibition, hotel and parking space, as well as a casino expansion to the existing video lottery terminal facility."

A spokesman for Mr. Cuomo said the governor hasn't made any assurances to Genting about a casino at Aqueduct. Representatives of Genting said they intend to move ahead with the convention center regardless of New York's laws on casino gambling.

"Though Genting Americas supports the governor's constitutional amendment legalizing table games in New York, our plans for a privately funded, $4 billion convention center are not predicated on that amendment," said Stefan Friedman, a spokesman for Genting.

In his State of the State Address, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo outlined his plans to build a new convention center in Queens and redevelop the Javits Center in Manhattan. (Video: NewsCore/ Photo: AP)
.People familiar with the matter said Genting has committed to building the first 2.6 million-square-foot phase of the convention center and Mr. Cuomo has indicated that he would support giving it the rights to build a casino there. Genting would complete the 3.8-million-square-foot project if a constitutional amendment for casino gambling is passed, which could happen in November 2013 at the soonest.

A New York City casino would be sure to garner "gigantic revenues," drawing business from competitors in Connecticut and Atlantic City, said Cory Morowitz, a gambling-industry consultant not involved in the Aqueduct project.

"I think it's a home run," Mr. Morowitz said.

The chief financial officer of Resorts World New York City, a Genting subsidiary that runs a racino at Aqueduct, testified before the state Senate that it wanted to transform the racetrack into a destination casino resort that featured a major convention center. The official indicated that casino gaming was a crucial component of the convention center project because both of them together would create thousands of jobs.

Legislative leaders have expressed support for amending the state constitution to allow for non-tribal casinos, and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver has said he wouldn't object to a casino at Aqueduct. But negotiations over where to locate other casinos are far from settled and could throw a wrench into Genting's plans.

Genting's "racino" at Aqueduct includes two floors with thousands of video lottery terminals, which are similar to slot machines. If casino gaming were legalized, Genting could potentially add Las Vegas-like table games and slot machines on an upper floor or replace some of the lottery terminals below.

New York has higher gambling taxes than most other states. Racino operators get to keep about a third of their revenue. People familiar with the talks said Genting is trying to negotiate a lower tax rate.

Genting's agreement with the state also proposes up to 3,000 hotel rooms with the convention center—a project it dubbed the New York International Convention and Exhibition Center, or NICE.

Genting officials said they hoped to complete the first 2.6 million-square-foot phase of the project by 2014 at the earliest, with construction of hotel rooms slated to begin in November 2015.

It envisions adding more convention space in a second phase, building on a 22-acre space to the east that's currently owned by the Port Authority. The authority would have to lease Genting the land with the approval of the state's franchise oversight board.

The Queens convention center would largely replace the Jacob K. Javits Center on Manhattan's West Side, which Mr. Cuomo described as obsolete and too small. The Javits site could then be redeveloped near the Hudson Yards project.

Obstacles loom over the project. The price tag is steep, financing for large construction projects remains tight and the convention industry is struggling. Genting said it would work with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to fund uninterrupted subway service between Midtown Manhattan and the proposed convention center—a bid to alleviate concerns over the site's remote location.

It's not clear what such service would look like. In the 1980s, the MTA operated the "Train to the Plane," which ran along the A line and stopped in Manhattan and Downtown Brooklyn before running nonstop to Howard Beach, where passengers transferred to a shuttle bus to JFK Airport. But that service lost money, drew complaints from people in neighborhoods that were skipped and was ultimately discontinued.

In addition, with ridership higher now than it was in the 1980s, the MTA runs more trains overall, making it harder for a convention center express to avoid getting stuck behind regular A trains.

on roberts first picture could someone pinpoint where abouts the hudson yards is
? thanks if you can

Roughly speaking, the Yards are where the piers are sticking out on the right side of Manhattan.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2355/5802510061_5a9288563b_b.jpg

on roberts first picture could someone pinpoint where abouts the hudson yards is
? thanks if you can

http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/5802510061_5a9288563b_b.jpg

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/4315/newyorkexpli.jpg

You forgot Torre Verre and 225 W57th, both of which are 300m+ towers that should start rising in 2012. Also, 15 Penn should start rising in 2 to 3 years.

No, No... I just put some reference points, and some construction projects to have a better idea of where they are. If I were to put each proposed project in New York, this picture would be full of names... :lol:

EDIT:
Here is.

http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/6534/newyorkallprojects.jpg

That could be better.:D

How about this? :D

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/6558/ooopc.jpg

Lol. I prefer the areal shot, which puts everything in perspective.:)

Thank you everybody:D robert isnt 15 penn being cancelled as the owner is considering making improvements to the building they already have.

Thank you everybody:D robert isnt 15 penn being cancelled as the owner is considering making improvements to the building they already have.

No. It's being built.

uh.. when? ^^

Good to hear about plans to move Javits Center! That makes the west side development even more interesting. It's incredible to think about how many people can work and live in that area which is pretty large. This whole development will bring up the total Manhattan density up significantly! Manhattan residential density is now about the same as Paris', but will increase where Paris' density can't. Up to over 30.000/km2 maybe? :)

Postponed construction start =/= not being built.

uh.. when? ^^

Probably around 2 years. A site with 2.8m sf as of right is like gold.

Probably around 2 years. A site with 2.8m sf as of right is like gold.

You fo show? I need this project to lighten up the west side of Manhattan.

You fo show? I need this project to lighten up the west side of Manhattan.

Yes.

Can't wait for construction. This would have a great view of the Hudson river I would really like to live here. It's beautiful

I walked passed this site today right near my home. I'm telling you, it is HUGE but empty. I can imagine looking out my window every day in 3 years or so to see how the construction is going.

Why no pictures then? :)


Seriously, photos of the site would be very welcome. I'm especially interested in the buildings that are intended to be torn down.

Why no pictures then? :)


Seriously, photos of the site would be very welcome. I'm especially interested in the buildings that are intended to be torn down.

the site is a rail yard, so no buildings need to be torn down.

What's being torn down are hideous one story warehouses. They look like temporary structures that were just sort of left there. Real real bad.

Edit: econ, the first, shorter tower is being built on firm ground on the south west corner of the site, on the corner of 30th and 10th basically unless I'm horribly mistaken which is a possibility.

Why no pictures then? :)


Seriously, photos of the site would be very welcome. I'm especially interested in the buildings that are intended to be torn down.


I did not take any photos because there's not much to see, it's a 20 ft giant hole that spands at a 6 block radius in the deserted place in Manhattan with a bunch of trains parked out. If ya'll want, I'll go take some.

I'll go take some.

That would be awesome! :)
thx

pics from
http://www.nolandgrab.org/archives/west_side_stadiumhudson_yards/

http://www.nolandgrab.org/images/HudsonYards02.jpg

http://www.nolandgrab.org/images/HusdonYards-ES.jpg
http://www.nolandgrab.org/images/yards600.jpg
http://www.nolandgrab.org/images/hudsonyards.jpg

Ah, thank you! :) ^^

I finally got over there to the site after school. Here are some random pics from my smartphone...

http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326837239734.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326837159738.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326837683640.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326837468483.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326837577285.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326837614470.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326837594967.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326837987067.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326838000285.jpg
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326838114835.jpg
Like I said there is not much to see, but the area is very vast and huge, spanning about total 6 blocks.
The last photos some of you may remember from the render, which showed the highline leading up to the towers.
Directly behind the black slanting building is right where the Brookfield towers want to be built which because these two projects are 2 blocks away from each other I have also taken pictures of.

^^Thanks for sharing your pics. :D

Ah thanks! Now people can see that nothing of any sort of significance of any sort will be demolished for this project. This is basically building an entire new neighborhood from the ground up.

California company to build Hudson Yards project (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/california-company-build-hudson-yards-project-article-1.1006706?localLinksEnabled=false)

BY ERIN DURKIN / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Sunday, January 15 2012, 10:20 PM


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/california-company-build-hudson-yards-project-article-1.1006706#ixzz1jlaCQe00

"...Related Companies hired California-based firm Tutor Perini for the $4 billion West Side project, Crain’s New York reported.

...Hudson Yards is slated to include nine housing towers, three office buildings, stores, a new school and a cultural center. Work is set to begin later this year..."

Construction Firm Named for Hudson Yards Development (http://www.dnainfo.com/20120117/chelsea-hells-kitchen/construction-firm-named-for-hudson-yards-development)
January 17, 2012 4:40pm | By Mathew Katz, DNAinfo Reporter/Producer


HELL'S KITCHEN — The long-delayed rehab of the Far West Side took another step forward on Tuesday when the developer behind Hudson Yards named a contractor for the 26-acre project.
The Related Companies and Oxford Properties, which are partners in the massive project, tapped California-based Tutor Perini Corporation as contractor for Hudson Yards. Tishman Construction will work as building partner on the project.
Hudson Yards, a massive project to build towering office and residential buildings over what's now the West Side Rail Yards, was kick-started in November when luxury handbag maker Coach announced it would anchor the development's first building. Construction on that building, at the southeast corner of the rail yard, is set to begin in mid-2012.
Related has also retained Tutor Perini for a new residential tower just south of the Hudson Yards project, at West 30th Street and 10th Avenue.
“Tutor Perini is a world-class contractor offering decades of experience and an exemplary track record with complex, large-scale developments,” Jay Cross, president of the Hudson Yards project, said in a statement.
Tutor Perini is one of the largest general contractors in the country, and has worked on runway reconstruction at JFK Airport, the Airtrain Terminal at Jamaica Station, and the Greenwich Street Corridor Project at the World Trade Center.
Tishman is currently managing the construction of One World Trade Center.
Hudson Yards will offer over 13 million square feet of commercial and residential space if it's completed to plan. Currently, only construction of the first building has been confirmed and there's no final completion date set for the overall project.
Numerous other developers are champing at the bit to develop skyscrapers nearby, with the end goal to develop a brand-new neighborhood on the Far West Side.

Construction Firm Named for Hudson Yards Development (http://www.dnainfo.com/20120117/chelsea-hells-kitchen/construction-firm-named-for-hudson-yards-development)
January 17, 2012 4:40pm | By Mathew Katz, DNAinfo Reporter/Producer

constuction expected in mid 2012?
Awesome. :nuts::nuts:

:dance:

Great news but I'm a bit puzzled, will preparations begin in mid 2012 or construction? :dunno:

^^ Its says construction. ;)

But it could as wel be preparation (don't know what the site looks like at the moment).
Anyway, there will be another supertall rising by the end of the year. :cheers:

Thx for the pics, arawooho! :D

And: Very good news!

Thx for the pics, arawooho! :D


Thanks :-P
For those who are wondering, the "southeast" corner is the empty part with no rails, closest to the high line, to the right of my 5th picture, and directly in front of the last.

Bring it on!

http://www.kpf.com/projects/Project125/16287_hr.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/139326029/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/139385782/original.jpg

Bob, which pic shows the final design? It's the second one isn't it, cause in the first one the difference between the towers doesn't look like 86 meters :dunno:

They all depict the final design.

I think some second tier cities in China have more highrises than NYC:ohno: IMHO

hmmm. try no to think. Know for sure. Manhattan is still 2-3 x more skyscrapers than Hong Kong at present, china's most skyscraper density megacity.

By 2015, NYC is adding atleast 6-7 more supertalls or near supertall. all is good. No city can beat NYC anytime soon. although, Dubai is trying very hard

Construction Firm Named for Hudson Yards Development (http://www.dnainfo.com/20120117/chelsea-hells-kitchen/construction-firm-named-for-hudson-yards-development)
January 17, 2012 4:40pm | By Mathew Katz, DNAinfo Reporter/Producer


terrible news in my opinion. perini habitually screws up projects.

see: Big Dig

for one example.

lovely towers. really excited about these. will be truly brilliant to watch this and 432 park rise with 1WTC getting finished off. looking like a good 2012 so far for NY

Looking at the pictures, it seems so far from where I thought it would be. :shocked: I was looking forward for it being closer to the 1WTC. That in my opinion would really make New Yorks the skyline rockin!! :D


Also is this going to be taken out of Proposed Supertalls????

Looking at the pictures, it seems so far from where I thought it would be. :shocked: I was looking forward for it being closer to the 1WTC. That in my opinion would really make New Yorks the skyline skyline rockin!! :D
It's more in midtown than downtown.


This year has a nice list of under construction towers.:)

lovely towers. really excited about these. will be truly brilliant to watch this and 432 park rise with 1WTC getting finished off. looking like a good 2012 so far for NY

Don't forget 225 W57th and Torre Verre.

Don't forget 225 W57th and Torre Verre.

i didnt, i just wasnt 100% sure they were getting built in 2012. stupid of me consdering 225 w57th is at demo stage. truly exciting times!:banana:

sanity prevails

instead of wasting valuable hudson yards on building a New Jets Stadium that is clearly not affordable if it ever happened.

we get these scissors design skyscrapers. Bring it on. I'm lovin' it.

hmmm. try no to think. Know for sure. Manhattan is still 2-3 x more skyscrapers than Hong Kong at present, china's most skyscraper density megacity.

By 2015, NYC is adding atleast 6-7 more supertalls or near supertall. all is good. No city can beat NYC anytime soon. although, Dubai is trying very hard


..err..

http://www.emporis.com/statistics/most-skyscraper-cities-worldwide
Hong Kong 1221
New York 563

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_with_most_skyscrapers
Hong Kong beats New York in every category over 150m.

If you count all 100m+ buildings, it's...
Hong Kong 2354
New York 794

If you just count high-rise buildings, over 35m
Hong Kong 7685
New York 5924

They all depict the final design.

But they have different tops there :dunno:

Kind of knew this already about the asia skyscraper boom.

Maybe its just the Manhattan affect. that super high NYC density makes it look clearly more imposing than HK & Dubai can ever look.

..err..

http://www.emporis.com/statistics/most-skyscraper-cities-worldwide
Hong Kong 1221
New York 563

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_with_most_skyscrapers
Hong Kong beats New York in every category over 150m.

If you count all 100m+ buildings, it's...
Hong Kong 2354
New York 794

If you just count high-rise buildings, over 35m
Hong Kong 7685
New York 5924

Kind of knew this already about the asia skyscraper boom.

Maybe its just the Manhattan affect. that super high NYC density makes it look clearly more imposing than HK & Dubai can ever look.

How did you 'kind of know' that already when you just said the opposite?
It has been true for at least 10-15 years as well (Hong Kong was a sea of skyscrapers far before Shanghai and Beijing ever boomed). Anyway it's due to Hong Kong's style of residential building which is basically a thin tall apartment tower whereas Manhattan and Brooklyn are full of lower fatter tenement housing.

hope this project sees the day of light.

New York is leagues ahead of any Other city.

hmmm. try no to think. Know for sure. Manhattan is still 2-3 x more skyscrapers than Hong Kong at present, china's most skyscraper density megacity.

By 2015, NYC is adding atleast 6-7 more supertalls or near supertall. all is good. No city can beat NYC anytime soon. although, Dubai is trying very hard

let's look it up on ctbuh.org
skyscraper is defined as building over 200m.

so new york has completed buildings over 200m: 52
and hong kong has completed buildings over 200m: 62

for buildings over 150m you have a similar result.
New York is together with Hong Kong the most dense city in the world and these two are probably the only ones that can be defined as dense skyline cities, because as far as i know shanghai is the third on the list and its far behind these two in terms of 150m buildings for 200m and up it also has 45 and is quite close. but saying nyc cannot be beaten is not quite true.

New York is leagues ahead of any Other city.


In terms of what? I love NY as much as anyone, while no city makes NY look small in terms of skyscrapers there are some that surely compete.

In terms of what? I love NY as much as anyone, while no city makes NY look small in terms of skyscrapers there are some that surely compete.

In many respects, but I was referring to skyscrapers. As I've said, New York's sea of pre-WWII skyscrapers can never be replicated by newcomers like Shanghai (which has a few), Dubai, HK, etc. Chicago has a tiny fraction of the huge number that NY does.

In addition to these old gems, NY is building tons of great supertalls.

^^ Bob, I think you should remove that boring "Registered user" from your avatar and put "New York supremacy crusader" in it instead :hilarious

In many respects, but I was referring to skyscrapers. As I've said, New York's sea of pre-WWII skyscrapers can never be replicated by newcomers like Shanghai (which has a few), Dubai, HK, etc. Chicago has a tiny fraction of the huge number that NY does.

In addition to these old gems, NY is building tons of great supertalls.

it's funny how you make your own rules, you talk about skyscrapers, but to push new york on top you only let old skyscrapers count :cheers: but if it was about culture and old buildings the usa would be the last place to go. :ohno: New York has an amazing skyline, but in terms of height it is currently not on top. if you ask about design or style thats a different question that everyone has to answer by themselves, but in height its just not right.

it's funny how you make your own rules, you talk about skyscrapers, but to push new york on top you only let old skyscrapers count :cheers: but if it was about culture and old buildings the usa would be the last place to go. :ohno: New York has an amazing skyline, but in terms of height it is currently not on top. if you ask about design or style thats a different question that everyone has to answer by themselves, but in height its just not right.

If it was about culture, NY would be at the absolute top. Only Paris and London rival it in that regard. If we discussed old buildings, Rome has no peer whatsoever.

^^ I think that everyone else who reads that will have a little laugh just like I did :lol: :ohno:

Haha. There are people who are having to revise their concepts. Cities in China has more buildings because of the excessive amount of people, it is because of cheap labor, so much easier to build buildings that most of the world. Now let's see, the cities of China has: High rise buildings and what else ...? ZzZz.Zz. I will not even talk a bit about the history of China, because everybody knows it.

Anyway, I will not waste my time talking about it, because google is there and is open to anyone who wants to do research on a little history.

I'm looking forward to watching this project to get more tenants and start being built soon. This will greatly strengthen this part of town.

it's funny how you make your own rules, you talk about skyscrapers, but to push new york on top you only let old skyscrapers count :cheers: but if it was about culture and old buildings the usa would be the last place to go. :ohno: New York has an amazing skyline, but in terms of height it is currently not on top. if you ask about design or style thats a different question that everyone has to answer by themselves, but in height its just not right.

To be fair the twin towers didn't get knocked down in any other city.


Once the WTC and some others are built it will be MUCH better.


As for Hong Kong, it definitely has more highrises than NYC, but to say many Chinese cities do is not correct. Shanghai is second behind HK and has less 200 meter towers.

Even then, why does everything have to be a China vs USA thing? jeesus

^^ Because there the only 2 countries that have big skyscraper cities.......

Why no pictures then? :)


Seriously, photos of the site would be very welcome. I'm especially interested in the buildings that are intended to be torn down.

Trust me - it is one o f the rarest cases when it is either no buildings at all or just warehouses. It is almost completely empty.

According to the WSJ's 23 Jan. 2012 edition, the London-based media company, Group M, seeks 600,000 sf and has been speaking with Related's representatives for the Hudson Yards, as have Bloomberg and Time-Warner.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204624204577177331189476996.html

NY REAL ESTATE COMMERCIAL JANUARY 23, 2012 New Darlings of Development Article Stock Quotes Comments more in NewYork-Real Estate | Find New $LINKTEXTFIND$ »Email Print Save ↓ More
smaller Larger
By LAURA KUSISTO And ELIOT BROWN
A major ad agency is looking for a huge new office in a space search that's welcome news for landlords facing high vacancy rates and developers hoping to move forward on new office skyscrapers.


Ramin Talaie for The Wall Street Journal

498 Seventh Ave., one of two buildings currently occupied by the advertising agency, GroupM.
GroupM, the media buying and planning arm of London-based WPP PLC, is looking for 500,000 to 600,000 square feet, according to multiple people familiar with the matter. That's enough office space to cover more than eight football fields.

GroupM and its broker, CBRE Group Inc., have made preliminary inquiries at new developments, including Related Cos.' Hudson Yards project, according to people familiar with the search.

Related has been searching for another tenant to join handbag maker Coach Inc. to help launch its first building at the 26-acre site.

Another possibility would be one of the new buildings being developed at the World Trade Center. There also are blocks of space over 500,000 square feet at towers such as developer Steven Pozycki's 11 Times Square in Midtown and Goldman Sachs Group Inc.'s former headquarters at 85 Broad St., according to CBRE.

A spokesman for GroupM confirmed the company had begun looking for space, but noted that its current leases don't expire for another five to seven years. "We are in the very early exploratory phase of checking out some other locations, including some places that aren't even built yet," the spokesman said.

It's always good news for landlords when big tenants enter the market. But it's especially welcome now when the city's economy remains shaky and faces contractions by the financial-services industry—the sector which occupies the most New York office space.

Lately, media and advertising firms have become the new darling of office-building owners. Some of the biggest leases last year were by Conde Nast, which signed a 1-million-square-foot lease at 1 World Trade Center last spring, and Young & Rubicam, a WPP subsidiary, which inked a 340,000-square-foot deal at a recently revamped 3 Columbus Circle.

Time Warner Inc. and Bloomberg L.P. have also spoken with Related about its Hudson Yards development, according to people familiar with the matter.

A recent report by CBRE Group Inc. showed media companies making up 13% of Manhattan occupancy by industry, compared with 11% in 2005. Financial-services tenants, meanwhile, shrunk to 26% from 29%.

New leasing activity by ad and media companies may be good for individual landlords, but not necessarily for the entire market, which has been facing a higher than usual vacancy rate. That's because often firms are doing deals for the same amount of space they're giving up, moving into more efficient offices that allow them to squeeze in more workers per square foot.

Group M, for example, which buys advertising time on behalf of marketers, is currently spread over about 500,000 square feet in two buildings on Seventh Avenue, but is looking to consolidate its employees into about the same amount of space, according to a person familiar with the company's thinking.

Kind of knew this already about the asia skyscraper boom.

Maybe its just the Manhattan affect. that super high NYC density makes it look clearly more imposing than HK & Dubai can ever look.

It doesn't matter, Dubai clearly has the tallest skyline by far. 23 supertalls, and the most buildings over 250m. It only looses out on high-rises.

Shanghai will only have 6 supertalls, same with NYC and HK. I expect Shanghai to have more soon enough.

NY hardly looks imposing to me compared to HK. If you look at HK pics, it cearly has more height and density. Dubai of course looks even more imposing from a distance due to its extreme height, more imposing than any of them. Dubai is simply amazing with the amount of supertalls it has built in 10 years.

I think Dubai will be the King for a long time when it comes to supertalls.. Unless it basically stops building, only a few cities will ever challenge it in the next 20 years in the height department. Probably Shenzen, Guangzhou or Shanghai. I guess NYC has a chance to become #3 or #4 if the economy picked up.

.

NY hardly looks imposing to me compared to HK. If you look at HK pics, it cearly has more height and density. Dubai of course looks even more imposing from a distance due to its extreme height, more imposing than any of them. Dubai is simply amazing with the amount of supertalls it has built in 10 years.



Just take into account that a significant portion of HK's hi-rises get a free height boost by sitting on the slopes of those hills.

Shanghai will only have 6 supertalls, same with NYC and HK. I expect Shanghai to have more soon enough.

NYC will have 6 Supertalls T/O in a matter of months when 1WTC and One57 top out. Then there are these two for the first stage of Hudson Yards, 2WTC and 3WTC that are started but will take a couple years to complete, 432 Park which is well into the prep phase and around another half dozen midtown proposals that have a realistic chance sometime in the next 5 or so years.

I think it's safe to say NYC will have more then 6 soon enough as well.

NYC will have 6 Supertalls T/O in a matter of months when 1WTC and One57 top out. Then there are these two for the first stage of Hudson Yards, 2WTC and 3WTC that are started but will take a couple years to complete, 432 Park which is well into the prep phase and around another half dozen midtown proposals that have a realistic chance sometime in the next 5 or so years.

I think it's safe to say NYC will have more then 6 soon enough as well.

to roof, not spire.

Just take into account that a significant portion of HK's hi-rises get a free height boost by sitting on the slopes of those hills.

This and the fact that NY's skyscrapers are literally besides each other forming a canyon whereas in HK, Shanghai, and Dubai, the buildings are far apart hence you can appreciate their height

to roof, not spire.

The last i knew architectural spires count towards the official height of the building so I am just going with the official numbers here.

Even if you go by roof height these two towers and every other proposal i mentioned will be a supertall without need of a spire, so what i said would still be true. It would just eliminate Chrysler,BoA and the NYTimes(I can understand that one in a way). It wouldn't change that there will be more then 6 soon enough.

It wouldn't change that there will be more then 6 soon enough.

I hope so.

Heey... Competition from Asian cities is x NY is getting very boring. Both have their qualities, that's cool, but this issue appears in almost all topics. I think we should stop comparing cities, and talk more about this project itself.

Heey... Competition from Asian cities is x NY is getting very boring. Both have their qualities, that's cool, but this issue appears in almost all topics. I think we should stop comparing cities, and talk more about this project itself.

Someone said that NY was more imposing than HK, which is ridiculous and deserved a rebuttal.

HK has supertalls on the water which loom over you, taller than anything currently in NYC. Now that is an imposing skyline. HK's density makes NYC look like London. Dubai also, although not dense, is far more imposing from a distance given the massive height. Up close is a different story because it becomes evident that the scrapers are spaced out and there are vast distances between clusters unless you stand near the Burj cluster.

The last i knew architectural spires count towards the official height of the building so I am just going with the official numbers here.

Even if you go by roof height these two towers and every other proposal i mentioned will be a supertall without need of a spire, so what i said would still be true. It would just eliminate Chrysler,BoA and the NYTimes(I can understand that one in a way). It wouldn't change that there will be more then 6 soon enough.

I never count spindly spires as part of the height, it is ridiculous. I mean, anyone can stick a pole on a building and call it a super tall. I also find it very dangerous to try to predict NY's future supertall count, given the tendancy for buildings to be cancelled or to go on hold for years.

Dubai has experienced the most major boom in history of skyscrapers. I don't know how many are real supertalls to roof, but I'd say 15+ at least. Only China will have a city that could possibly challenge that title in the next 20 years, but I doubt it. My money would be on a Shenzhen or one of those new cities in China that don't have to worry about heritage or space and are in full boom mode.

I think Dubai will be the King for a long time when it comes to supertalls.. Unless it basically stops building,
Since it has stopped building and no additional buildings are starting it already has begun to decline!

isnt this a thread about hudson yards?

The Hudson Yards demonstrate why NY is the architectural capital of the world. It's truly amazing that a developed city is building an entirely new "city within a city" with stunning supertalls like the ones that will rise at the Hudson Yards.

^^ That's whats happening all around the world mate. Perth has had this vision for a long time now and they are now finding contractors to start building it.

Personally, I don't get why an established city like NY or Perth would do such a thing. I would prefer them build it somewhere else.

NY, like Perth, is too mixed up and random to have something that planned. It will make the rest of the area look like rubbish, ie. it doesn't fit into the skyline!!!!.

Think about how ugly ICC complex would look if it was on HK Island.

or Pudong in Puxi?

Big developments like these are getting a bit lame now with so many countries (China/SKorea/India etc...) having these planned looks.

Since it has stopped building and no additional buildings are starting it already has begun to decline!

For now....

On topic: Hudson yards is great. I really like this 'new' direction for the city, with towers that are rather iconic IMO. Cutting blade like buildings that slope will really help propel midtown's skyline into a new era. The area around there is full heavy brick buildings and these light glass towers will help balance everything out.

There are reports saying that companies like Bloomberg and Time Warner want to build new headquarters buildings in Hudson Yards. Bloomberg and Time Warner are currently headquartered in mixed use buildings.

For now....

On topic: Hudson yards is great. I really like this 'new' direction for the city, with towers that are rather iconic IMO. Cutting blade like buildings that slope will really help propel midtown's skyline into a new era. The area around there is full heavy brick buildings and these light glass towers will help balance everything out.

I agree that Hudson Yards have iconic towers and that this project will create a quite major new hub in midtown but I still think that both in being iconic and in creating a hub of activity the new WTC is superior. Just my 2 cents :2cents:

I agree that Hudson Yards have iconic towers and that this project will create a quite major new hub in midtown but I still think that both in being iconic and in creating a hub of activity the new WTC is superior. Just my 2 cents :2cents:

The WTC has iconic value independent of the height or design of its towers. However, once we combine the 7 office towers (3 at Hudson Yards, 3 at Manhattan West and 15 Penn) on the Farley Corridor, that would be quite striking too, since it has some separation from the cluster of Midtown skyscrapers. :)

by the time that the hudson yards are done, Manhattan will have a new skyline to go with midtown and downtown.

For those interested the company that made the CGI for Related is visualhouse (https://www.visualhouse.co.uk), the same studio that made Kingdom Tower's animation.

Some from their webpage (sorry if they were already posted)

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1180.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port662.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port665.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1176.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1264.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1186.jpg

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1181.jpg

Thanks for the renders Otie :cheers: The towers look far bigger than they should in it. Might that be on purpose and will their height increase when compared to the official data we have now? :dunno:

^Renders almost always make the surrounding buildings look shorter. I highly doubt there'll be any significant height increase.

Great renders, the surrounding building are much uglier whith this towers.

^^
True. A lot of those biuldings are awkwardly set or shaped. Some of them are even rotting down as we speak haha

nice renders. I did not expect these towers to be so dominating. They are huge.

https://www.visualhouse.co.uk/files/gallery/port1176.jpg



The scale of the towers in this rendering is almost comical.

they are way too large. :lol:

they look awesome though.

actually they're quite right, remember it's an almost 1300 footer next to an 1000 footer with no high buildings in that immediate area, of course they will look huge.

^^ The NYTT spire goes up to 1,046ft, so yeah the rendering is a bit exaggerated.

The shorter building should have it's roof below the top of NYTT's spire but in the render above it's roof is well above that spire :tiasd:

NYTT is a few blocks away, so I don't think the shorter building's that tall.

The NYTT tower is on 41st and 8th Ave, and these towers are between 30th and 33th Streets on 11 Ave. They're not close. Also there's nothing tall around these towers which makes them look much bigger.

I don't get why people always think that renders are wrong, the people who make these know what they are doing, it's there job! :ohno:

I don't get why people always think that renders are wrong, the people who make these know what they are doing, it's there job! :ohno:

http://i.imgur.com/sHMge.jpg

They are shockingly lazy at there job :lol:

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2012/01/30/hudson-yards-development-site-on-the-block/

Hudson Yards development site on the block
January 30, 2012 04:00PM

http://therealdeal.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/1-00709-0067.kMOtnxIa111.jpg

From left: the site for sale in Hudson Yards and Robert Knakal, chairman at Massey Knakal
Another development site in the Hudson Yards special zoning district is on the block, according to a statement from the Massey Knakal Realty Services today. The plot, at 462-470 11th Avenue and 554 West 38th Street, encompasses approximately 320,000 buildable square feet over five adjacent parcels, the statement said.As it is currently zoned the site would work well for office buildings or hotels with a residential component, Robert Knakal, chairman at Massey Knakal, one of the site’s exclusive marketing agents, told The Real Deal. The residential component could comprise around 30 percent of any development built at the site, which is on the north side of 38th Street, he said. The site also offers “flexible height and setback requirements,” according to the statement.
While he declined to give pricing, Knakal did say that “because the property is on the avenue, we expect the pricing to achieve a preminum over what mid-block sites have been selling for.”

Massey Knakal is in contract to sell another parcel in the Hudson Yards area east of the available one, for $150 per square foot, Knakal said. Last January, 431-439 West 37th Street, a mid-block site between 37th and 38th streets sold for $18.7 million, or about $185 per square foot, but Knakal noted that that site was zoned for residential. — Guelda Voien

http://i.imgur.com/sHMge.jpg

They are shockingly lazy at there job :lol:

:okay:

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/sHMge.jpg[IMG]

They are shockingly lazy at there job :lol:

Did both of you just unintentionally say "there job" without a hint of irony?
I don't know about you Funkyskun but I would assume at least Eastern37 is a native speaker no? It's pretty amazing how often native speakers make silly mistakes like "there and their" "could care less" (this one is extra jarring because the speaker is usually trying to sound clever) and so on. Sometimes it seems like they are done wrong more often than not.

Anyway back on topic; I think reflections in renders mixed with real photos are almost never done 100% correctly :lol: that would be hell to do. Though maybe one could conceivably import the google earth program into a 3d editor and create these models with a reflective surface and take it from there.

Did both of you just unintentionally say "there job" without a hint of irony?
I don't know about you Funkyskun but I would assume at least Eastern37 is a native speaker no? It's pretty amazing how often native speakers make silly mistakes like "there and their" "could care less" (this one is extra jarring because the speaker is usually trying to sound clever) and so on. Sometimes it seems like they are done wrong more often than not.

Anyway back on topic; I think reflections in renders mixed with real photos are almost never done 100% correctly :lol: that would be hell to do. Though maybe one could conceivably import the google earth program into a 3d editor and create these models with a reflective surface and take it from there.

funkyskun? See I can do this two.

And no I don't expect them to do real reflections, but at least grab from a different picture.:ohno:

In reply to my statement that the Hudson Yards has a massive price advantage over other proposed towers such as Manhattan West, 15 Penn, and 2 and 3 WTC, I stated that Related plans to sell or lease its office space at cost (which obviously, no other developer is willing to do) and that it has a much larger tax break than Manhattan West. (None of the other projects even has tax breaks.)

Here's an article regarding this:

http://therealdeal.com/issues_articles/brookfields-grand-plan/

Brookfield’s grand plan
The Canadian firm is ramping up its Manhattan presence
February 01, 2012
By Adam Pincus

If Brookfield Office Properties’ newly aggressive stance in Manhattan isn’t keeping Related Companies’ Stephen Ross and Silverstein Properties’ Larry Silverstein awake at night, it probably should be.

Publicly traded Brookfield Office Properties, led by CEO Ric Clark, is looking to lease up as much as 10 million square feet of office space over the next few years in Manhattan — which may be the most space any private company has ever put on the market at one time. The onrush of inventory includes Brookfield’s proposed 5.4 million-square-foot Manhattan West project, as well as 3 million square feet in the World Financial Center, which Brookfield is upgrading. The need for tenants puts Brookfield in direct competition with the aforementioned moguls’ Manhattan mega-developments: Related’s Hudson Yards and Silverstein Properties’ World Trade Center towers....


Still, Brookfield will have to nab some of the largest tenants in the market to have a chance of successfully leasing up. Currently, there are an estimated 40 tenants looking for more than 200,000 square feet each, hunting for an aggregate of 14 million square feet. Some of the biggest include Time Warner, News Corp. and Credit Suisse — firms that brokers say are all looking for at least 1 million square feet of space.

To catch these big fish at Manhattan West, Brookfield is deviating from its usual strategy of handling leasing in-house, and has tapped a team led by Bruce Mosler, the chairman of global brokerage at Cushman & Wakefield, to help with the lease up. While construction hasn’t started at the site, a company in Italy is building a sophisticated piece of construction equipment that will be shipped here to build the $300 million platform over the site’s commuter train tracks, Larkin said. While construction on the platform will move forward once that mechanism is delivered, the company will not start constructing the actual towers until it signs an anchor tenant, he said.

Mosler declined to identify which ten ants his team was courting, but said, “We are meeting with the obvious players, with some growth tenants that are in the media sector, [and] some financial tenants that find efficiencies in this building and want to consolidate multiple sites.”

By contrast, Manhattan West will have the latest modern amenities, and it will compete against other brand-new towers, like the World Trade Center, Boston Properties’ 250 West 55th Street and even the SJP Properties speculative tower at 11 Times Square. Asking rents are now in the $70-to-$80-per-foot range, Larkin said.

Meanwhile, Brookfield and Related are vying to get into the ground first with their competing Far West Side projects.

“At the end of the day it comes down to the gross rent that both parties are going to be offering, and that is where the competition is going to be,” Larkin said.

Some give Related a better chance because it has a larger 40 percent tax break for tenants, and has already inked an office user: designer Coach. Because of that, Related has committed to providing them space in the 1.7 million-square-foot tower by late 2015, a Related source said. In addition, it is offering tenants the option of buying “at cost,” meaning the $700 per square foot that it is paying to build, or leasing for about $70 per square foot, in a building that will be near the new terminal for the 7 train. Yet, despite the proximity to the new station, some knocked Hudson Yards for being too far west.

While Manhattan West, on the other hand, has a lower, 25 percent tax break, it is one avenue from the city’s most active transit hub: Penn Station.
“From a timing perspective, I think [Brookfield] is going to be ahead of Related,” said Richard Bernstein, vice chairman at Cassidy Turley, pointing to the simpler process of building a foundation platform at Brookfield’s site. “There is a lack of supply in the market overall for good quality, large blocks of space.”

http://therealdeal.com/issues_articles/big-fish-scour-market-looking-for-office-space/

Big fish scour market looking for office space
Tightening market yields no large deals — so far
February 01, 2012
By Adam Pincus

http://therealdeal.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Comm_market_Report_top_10_tenants.jpg
Industry professionals expected little from the Manhattan office leasing market at the start of 2012. And a month into the New Year, they’ve been right in their predictions.

Noticeably lacking is a headline-grabbing deal, such as the one that supply-chain firm Li & Fung inked for 490,000 square feet in the Empire State Building in the first week of 2011.
In fact, a review of office leasing in industry database CoStar Group shows no relocation deals larger than 100,000 square feet in Manhattan through the first three weeks of January.

The biggest deal discussed last month was not even for a signed lease, but instead for one in advanced negotiations. Law firm Chadbourne & Parke is expected to lease about 300,000 square feet at 1 World Trade Center, the New York Times reported.

Overall, however, commercial real estate pros expect leasing activity to increase as the year progresses.

“These deals take a long time to finish,” said David Lebenstein, a senior managing director at Cassidy Turley. “I would imagine you would see announcements through the year, and more in the second and third quarters.”

Mark Weiss, a leasing broker and vice chairman at commercial firm Newmark Knight Frank, said the strong activity in 2011 was partly because it was unduly slow in the two prior years.

“This year is going to have to stand on its own,” and not rely on pent-up demand, he said. Plus, Weiss noted, “the largest users, the financial service companies, are likely going to be very quiet.”

Yet he is hopeful that other types of firms will grow.

“There are plenty of companies that do business in New York that will expand their presence,” he said.

To give some perspective, for all of last year, there were a record 51 deals of 100,000 square feet or more, figures from Cushman & Wakefield show.

And there are more than 500 tenants in the market at any one time, scouring for between 2,000 square feet and over 1 million square feet, a market report from commercial firm Cassidy Turley shows.

Sources said some of the largest tenants looking right now include Time Warner, which is reevaluating its 4 million-square-foot portfolio, including its headquarters at the Time Warner Center; law firm White & Case, located at 1155 Sixth Avenue; and Viacom, which is looking for 1 million square feet (see accompanying chart on page 24).

They will be doing so in a Manhattan market where the average asking rent rose by 8 percent to $51.40 per square foot in December 2011 from $47.66 per square foot in December 2010. Meanwhile, the availability rate — which measures office space available for rent now or in the next 12 months — stood at the end of last year at 10.9 percent, on a steady improvement from 12 percent at the same point a year ago, statistics from Cassidy Turley show.

Midtown

Some of the largest tenants on the hunt for new space are currently located in Midtown, so moving would open up large blocks of space there.

Whether firms are quietly contemplating relocating is obviously closely held information. As a result, predicting how much space they’ll vacate is not easy for market analysts.

But what analysts do know is that for Manhattan, large tenants (those with 100,000 square feet or more) signed relocation leases for more than 26 million square feet in 2011, but just less than 15 million in renewals. That clearly shows that for many tenants, relocating is more common than staying put.

Although not large deals, Midtown has seen some high-profile activity in recent weeks.

On the last day of 2011, global consulting firm McKinsey & Company renewed its lease for 26,450 square feet on the fifth floor of 875 Third Avenue at a building represented by Jones Lang LaSalle brokers Diana Biasotti and Paul Glickman, CoStar records show. There was no estimate of the rent provided, and Biasotti and Glickman did not respond to a request for comment.

The average asking rent in Midtown rose by 6 percent to $58.68 per square foot in December 2011, while the availability rate dropped to 11.6 percent, the same level as a year ago, after peaking in March at 12.4 percent.

Midtown South

If Credit Suisse, one of the largest tenants in the market, were to relocate from 11 Madison Avenue, as some speculate it may, it would send shockwaves through Midtown South.

A departure by the financial giant — which CoStar shows occupies 1.6 million square feet in the 2.2 million-square-foot office building — would provide much-needed space in the tightest market in the country, which has a Class A vacancy rate of only 8 percent.

Still, Newmark’s Weiss saw a potential relocation as a blow to the neighborhood.

“It would hurt [Midtown South] severely,” he said. “It would be such an enormous hole, it would take years to fill. [Credit Suisse] is an enormous fish in that pond.”

Despite news reports about landlords pulling back on concessions, sources say building owners are, in fact, providing more free rent and tenant improvements than most in the industry realize.

For example, handbag and fashion designer Kate Spade signed a new deal for 86,000 square feet of corporate office space in November at 2 Park Avenue, between 32nd and 33rd streets. But while the deal was reported in the “mid-$40s” per square foot, the effective rent (which factors in concessions) was lower, according to industry sources. The designer got eight months of free rent and $55 per foot worth of tenant improvements, bringing the effective rent, the source said, to just $33 per foot over the 10-year lease.

The average asking rent in Midtown South was $41.91 per foot at the end of 2011, up 9.6 percent from $38.23 per square foot in December 2010, Cassidy Turley figures show. And, speaking to the tightness in the market, the availability rate has plummeted in the last year, down 2.5 points from 12 percent in December 2010.

Downtown

The Downtown market, and specifically the World Financial Center, stands to gain if some of the large tenants in the market, like Credit Suisse or Citigroup, can be pried lose from their current locations and induced to take space there.

But there are some big tenants Downtown that are also considering uprooting. For example, law firm Hughes Hubbard & Reed — currently located in 1 Battery Park Plaza and being represented by Newmark Knight Frank — is on the hunt for about 250,000 square feet.

Meanwhile, law firm Milbank Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, now located in 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza, is in the market for about 350,000 square feet, though recent reports suggest it might ultimately renew its lease there.

As in Midtown South, some landlords made large concessions Downtown to close deals. In fact, according to data from JLL, there was an increase in landlord contributions Downtown in the fourth quarter, compared with the same period in 2010.

One such generous deal came at Donald Trump’s 40 Wall Street, where structural engineer Weidlinger Associates inked a lease. The firm took 61,082 square feet for 20 years, with a rent starting at $27 per square foot, which included 12 months of free rent and $65 per square foot in improvements paid for by the landlord.

Donald Trump Jr., executive vice president for development and acquisitions at the Trump Organization, said that rent package isn’t reflective of what his firm is offering for other spaces in the building.

“We are also leasing in the high $40s and low $50s in the tower portion of the building,” he said.

Those prices were a bit above the average asking rent Downtown, which was $37.99 per square foot at the end of 2011, just $0.14 per square foot higher than the end of 2010. In the same period, the availability rate dropped sharply to 10.5 percent from 13.3 percent one year earlier, the Cassidy Turley figures show.

Overall, the older buildings Downtown, where rents are in the $20s and $30s per square foot, could attract large nonprofits, said Cassidy Turley’s Lebenstein.

“I think it pushes the budget-sensitive ones south to Lower Manhattan or to the Far West Side. There is some very good space affordably priced in Lower Manhattan,” he said.

^^ It's good to have you back Bob :cheers:

Thanks, sir!

Interesting stuff. There could potentially be a lot of movement in the coming years.

Big fish scour market looking for office space


^^ - Very nice article, Robert. Thanks. I am doing some related work on these sub-markets, this is very helpful albeit a little too late for my thesis! :)

^^ - Very nice article, Robert. Thanks. I am doing some related work on these sub-markets, this is very helpful albeit a little too late for my thesis! :)

My pleasure, sir. What do you study? Are you getting a Master's or Ph.D.?

My pleasure, sir. What do you study? Are you getting a Master's or Ph.D.?

I just graduated from the MS in Real Estate Development at the MIT Center for Real Estate. One of the case studies in my thesis was Manhattan West (lol, the wrong project to mention in this thread!).

I just graduated from the MS in Real Estate Development at the MIT Center for Real Estate. One of the case studies in my thesis was Manhattan West (lol, the wrong project to mention in this thread!).

Congratulations!

Congratulations!

Thanks, Robert. I hope my keen interest in some of the NYC threads becomes easier to understand in this context. :)

I found your keen interest to be understandable even before knowing your expertise.

:cheers:

Interesting stuff. There could potentially be a lot of movement in the coming years.

Definitely. There is more than enough demand for 2 and 3 WTC, 15 Penn, and Manhattan West. Bear in mind that in 3 years, the economy will be booming, and the banks will seek millions of sf of space.

^^ Hopefully though, than the construction violence will erupt in New York.

Considering that 1WTC, which is about a year before opening, is now 2/3 leased I have absolutely no trouble believing that the office real estate market in NYC is healthy and that all of these other buildings will get their tenants sooner or later. To me personaly, and I might be wrong, it looks like atm the 2 big players are 1WTC and 4WTC and the Hudson Yards. 1WTC and 4WTC cause they can deliver office space sooner than other projects and the Hudson Yards cause they can offer better prices than other projects :cheers:

It should also be noted that 3WTC and 2WTC already have the longest part of construction, constructing the sub levels and first normal levels, already partly finished so my guess is they'll get built sooner than 15 Penn or the Brookfield towers but then again, that is just my guess :cheers:

1WTC and 4WTC cause they can deliver office space sooner than other projects and the Hudson Yards cause they can offer better prices than other projects :cheers:

It should also be noted that 3WTC and 2WTC already have the longest part of construction, constructing the sub levels and first normal levels, already partly finished so my guess is they'll get built sooner than 15 Penn or the Brookfield towers but then again, that is just my guess :cheers:

1 WTC definitely has a time advantage on the two Hudson Yards projects but it's also a question of which office sub-market is more attractive than merely of which tower is available first. Over the last few years, the Midtown market has been much more attractive than Downtown, which is reflected in the nearly 50% rent differential between them.

On the whole, media firms - which are emerging as a significant driver of office leasing - seem to prefer Midtown (Conde Nest has bucked that trend, but we can't be sure if that's just a one-off or whether it is the start of a new leasing direction). Even financial services and law firms have tended to move to Midtown in the recent past.

Thus, while both these markets are in Manhattan, we could look at them as having distinct tenant sets and demand profiles. Hudson Yards and Manhattan West could find tenants which do not want to move Downtown, even when the WTC towers continue to have vacant space.

^^ Thanks for the info :cheers:

Btw, I have one question, why is midtown more attractive to companies than downtown? Does midtown have better transportation, more residential space or is it just preferred cause it's bigger than downtown? :dunno:

:hm:More facilities in Midtown, better transportation. :dunno:

^^ Thanks for the info :cheers:

Btw, I have one question, why is midtown more attractive to companies than downtown? Does midtown have better transportation, more residential space or is it just preferred cause it's bigger than downtown? :dunno:

You are always welcome, buddy! Midtown is more vibrant as a Live-Work-Play type of location as opposed to Downtown which is only recently moving from a traditional all-work-no-live CBD to a more mixed-use cluster. Midtown also has better transportation, especially in a regional context with Penn Station, Grand Central and the LIRR.

This is kind of a central tenet of my thesis and is a subject I can talk on and on about, so let me stop. :)

^^ Well, I'm always glad to learn something new, I love buildings and this kind of knowledge could be usefull in my future studying of structural engineering :cheers:

1 WTC definitely has a time advantage on the two Hudson Yards projects but it's also a question of which office sub-market is more attractive than merely of which tower is available first. Over the last few years, the Midtown market has been much more attractive than Downtown, which is reflected in the nearly 50% rent differential between them.

On the whole, media firms - which are emerging as a significant driver of office leasing - seem to prefer Midtown (Conde Nest has bucked that trend, but we can't be sure if that's just a one-off or whether it is the start of a new leasing direction). Even financial services and law firms have tended to move to Midtown in the recent past.

Thus, while both these markets are in Manhattan, we could look at them as having distinct tenant sets and demand profiles. Hudson Yards and Manhattan West could find tenants which do not want to move Downtown, even when the WTC towers continue to have vacant space.

A tenant like Time Warner, Credit Suisse, or Newscorp will want naming rights to a new tower, which they'll get in any tower other than 1 WTC. Also, 1WTC does not have enough room. They're all looking for at least 1m sf, and will want room to expand. Lastly, 2 and 3 WTC will seek much higher rents than the Hudson Yards towers.

A tenant like Time Warner, Credit Suisse, or Newscorp will want naming rights to a new tower, which they'll get in any tower other than 1 WTC. Also, 1WTC does not have enough room. They're all looking for at least 1m sf, and will want room to expand. Lastly, 2 and 3 WTC will seek much higher rents than the Hudson Yards towers.

Good point, Robert. I am not sure whether 2,3 WTC will get higher rents than Midtown. 1 WTC's rents are close to the Midtown level, at least that's what Conde Nest is going to pay. Not sure whether 2,3 WTC would be able to maintain that level. Anyways, being in Midtown should give the Yards/MW towers an edge.

Good point, Robert. I am not sure whether 2,3 WTC will get higher rents than Midtown. 1 WTC's rents are close to the Midtown level, at least that's what Conde Nest is going to pay. Not sure whether 2,3 WTC would be able to maintain that level. Anyways, being in Midtown should give the Yards/MW towers an edge.

1 and 4 WTC are PA buildings, and the PA is willing to accept a lot less in rent than Silverstein is willing to accept a 2 and 3 WTC. Also, the rents at 1, 2, and 3 WTC are a lot cheaper than would be had at a new, monumental supertall in Midtown -- not that any even exist other than BofA, which is full.

^^ Iirc 4WTC is Larry's building, the PA is only a tenant in it :dunno:

Looks like the tunnel-boring part of the 7 extension is done. That's a nice little bit of progress for the area.

http://m.nypost.com/p/news/local/dig_it_up_jpSb7LyrbGftfkxxLlA8zL

Looks like the tunnel-boring part of the 7 extension is done. That's a nice little bit of progress for the area.

http://m.nypost.com/p/news/local/dig_it_up_jpSb7LyrbGftfkxxLlA8zL




this could mean that the abandoned E train junction at 42nd street will be reopened.

I passed by today and noticed drilling in the south east side of the yards. This was not there before. Not sure what this means yet or even if its related to the yards project but I do know that the smaller tower (996ft)is suppose to start building this summer on that spot; the left hand side of the render.
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/Mobile%20Uploads/PART_1329346863632.jpg?t=1329347268
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/Mobile%20Uploads/PART_1329346900179.jpg?t=1329347522
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/Mobile%20Uploads/PART_1329347024564.jpg?t=1329351537

Looks like this prep work to me! The spot with some digging is exactly where the shorter tower will rise, so I think this is underway!

Also, thanks so much for trekking over there. I'm going to post your update on SSP and link it back here and credit you of course, just an FYI.

Looks like this prep work to me! The spot with some digging is exactly where the shorter tower will rise, so I think this is underway!

Also, thanks so much for trekking over there. I'm going to post your update on SSP and link it back here and credit you of course, just an FYI.

You're welcome and thanks for letting other people know about this discovery. I didn't want to mess up and jump to conclusions about the south tower actually being in prep faze. I just noticed the hole so I took quick pictures with my Droid. I might return soon to get more "professional" photos haha

^^ - Looks mighty interesting! I might be in the area next week, will try and get a look-see too. :)

This is such a stunning project!

Wow, prep already? Things are going to be crazy later on this year.

They got a tenant for the lower tower, so I guess they will start pretty soon. Should be really interesting later this year and beyond. :cool:

Wow, so this is finally kicking off! It's gonna be a great addition to NYC skyline! New York is the new Dubai! Wait...

Is it possible to get up on the High Line tracks? If not, who knows when will be open for public? This 3rd part is under construction now, right? Nice spot for taking pictures..

21th century New York City is gonna be built :cheers:

I love London :bowtie:

Is it possible to get up on the High Line tracks? If not, who knows when will be open for public? This 3rd part is under construction now, right? Nice spot for taking pictures..

Yeah you can the High Line currently terminates basically at the foot of the tower that's under prep work, and I imagine the final phase will be built along with the Western half of the Hudson Yards development Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Line_(New_York_City)):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/West_side_line.png/225px-West_side_line.png

Is it possible to get up on the High Line tracks? If not, who knows when will be open for public? This 3rd part is under construction now, right? Nice spot for taking pictures..

I was thinking of that, but it's blocked over, and the parts that I can go on curve away from that spot anyway. This picture I had taken a month ago on the high line shows the spot. The lower tower is to be set on the right where those cars were parked at. Now it's covered up and there's a giant hole there.
http://i1081.photobucket.com/albums/j358/Arawooho/biuldings/1326838000285.jpg

The smaller tower is basically already in preparation... another supertall underway for NYC!

The larger tower may start later this year or next depending on Tenants.


The tower also has 54 floors (51 is top office and 3 mechanical on top)

The larger 68 (65 is top office and 3 mechanical floors above)

Source: Look some pages back in this thread I'm too lazy to repost.

The smaller tower is basically already in preparation... another supertall underway for NYC!

The larger tower may start later this year or next depending on Tenants.


The larger tower depends more on the construction of the platform. The shorter tower is the easiest one to build in the entire complex because it is the only one that does not sit above existing train tracks.

The larger tower depends more on the construction of the platform. The shorter tower is the easiest one to build in the entire complex because it is the only one that does not sit above existing train tracks.

Hope that can be solved easily, it would be a terrible shame if the larger did not get built.

this new new york looks well exciting :) would love to visit one day

Fortunately the High Line is next to the spot from where you van make photos, because there are so many fences around the site.

?? The larger tower doesn't depend on them figuring out how to build the platform, it's been known for a long time how Related is going to build the platform. The only thing that is keeping the taller tower from being built is a tenant.

Someone change the title please :)





The tower also has 54 floors (51 is top office and 3 mechanical on top)

The larger 68 (65 is top office and 3 mechanical floors above)

Source: Look some pages back in this thread I'm too lazy to repost.

Only if I get a reliable source.

Only if I get a reliable source.

Here ya go, the towers are actually 55 and 67 stories

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/139381062/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/139381063/original.jpg

From here...

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=187315&page=27

^^ - From Related's brochure, so as official as it gets. :)

There are some amazing photos on Related's brochure which show the stunning fountain and central plaza. Does anyone know how to copy a PDF?

^^ Take screenshots and post them here.

There are some amazing photos on Related's brochure which show the stunning fountain and central plaza. Does anyone know how to copy a PDF?

I copied everything that appeared to be new.

http://i.imgur.com/QrYVq.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/O3Vgx.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/J5ap5.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/RpmOI.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/xFadf.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/HmU4z.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/BWs7c.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/UCtVV.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/H71ri.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Sc9jY.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/aIaFd.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/fkdfV.jpg


Album: http://imgur.com/a/uhZXW

Source: http://www.related.com/destinations/hudsonyards/images/Hudson%20Yards%20Brochure.pdf

Great new renders, thanks for posting them here.:)

Oh man....... Related really nailed this. This is such an amazing project. From what we've seen I have literally zero complaints, of any magnitude at all. Bravo Mr. Ross, this project is a masterpiece!

Downright amazing!

How would you like to work in that building with the missing wall? Yikes!!!

:lol:

Oh man....... Related really nailed this. This is such an amazing project. From what we've seen I have literally zero complaints, of any magnitude at all. Bravo Mr. Ross, this project is a masterpiece!
Of course, everyone agrees that the Current yards are a dump, there are no "historical" biuldings or landmarks that people can complain about, it's not too close to the Empire State Building ( 5-6 avenues is longer then you think), the 7 line is going there anyway, and it's just beautiful.

The Hudson yards is pretty much a perfect project in my eyes. However, the only thing I might be concerned is the new load of traffic that will be in the west side, with all those people going in and out.

Edit:
Does anyone know if there will be some sort of mall or plaza at the yards? I'd love to have another mall 3 blocks away from my Building.

http://i.imgur.com/J5ap5.jpg

Columbus circle?

Yeah that's Columbus Circle from another Related building the Time Warner Center, and the third photo from the bottom is also not a Hudson Yards render but of existing parks.

Of course, everyone agrees that the Current yards are a dump, there are no "historical" biuldings or landmarks that people can complain about, it's not too close to the Empire State Building ( 5-6 avenues is longer then you think), the 7 line is going there anyway, and it's just beautiful.

The Hudson yards is pretty much a perfect project in my eyes. However, the only thing I might be concerned is the new load of traffic that will be in the west side, with all those people going in and out.

Edit:
Does anyone know if there will be some sort of mall or plaza at the yards? I'd love to have another mall 3 blocks away from my Building.

There will be a huge mall, like at the TWC, but a lot bigger. I believe, as per the brochure, that it will have 1m sf. In addition to that, there will be a huge cinema, supermarket (probably Whole Foods, which also is at the TWC), and, I'm sure that there will be additional restaurants and retail in the ground floor of the residential towers. This, together with the stunning greenspaces depicted above, is why I believe that this is a much nicer project than Manhhatan West, and it offers cheaper office space. I can't see why anyone would go to MW over the HY.

There will be a huge mall, like at the TWC, but a lot bigger. I believe, as per the brochure, that it will have 1m sf. In addition to that, there will be a huge cinema, supermarket (probably Whole Foods, which also is at the TWC), and, I'm sure that there will be additional restaurants and retail in the ground floor of the residential towers. This, together with the stunning greenspaces depicted above, is why I believe that this is a much nicer project than Manhhatan West, and it offers cheaper office space. I can't see why anyone would go to MW over the HY.

Lol, Robert, are you on Related's rolls? ;)

HY's a much better mixed use project, which is a central theme of the cluster concepts that I work on. However, it has a limited stock of office space. There is a lot more demand out there than that, plus as you once explained yourself, prestige tenants like naming rights so that means only 2-3 at the Yards. Wait till the Javits parcel opens up! :)

Don't forget that many of the old buildings on Madison have a lot of air rights and will be redeveloped. I'm not happy about that because they're classic prewar towers.

I walked by on 19 Feb 2012 and saw construction equipment on the part of the site where the south tower will start rising this year.

^
Same. More drilling seen and there's a mobile crane present.

Hopefully I can get a few snaps on Tuesday! :)

Sounds good!

Lol, Robert, are you on Related's rolls? ;)

HY's a much better mixed use project, which is a central theme of the cluster concepts that I work on. However, it has a limited stock of office space. There is a lot more demand out there than that, plus as you once explained yourself, prestige tenants like naming rights so that means only 2-3 at the Yards. Wait till the Javits parcel opens up! :)


The decision to move the Javitz hasn't been made. They have no even voted casino gambling into law yet in the state !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The related brochure was pretty stunning (I'll spare you my complaints about socioeconomic homogeneity and globally overreplicated commercial and landscape architecture and what I see as the slow death of a certain intangible New York-ness), but I still have two issues with connectivity, that are related:

- Why do 31st and 32nd Streets, or at least one of them, not connect between 10th and 11th Avenues or to West Side Highway, but rather terminate on the west end in what look like sort of high-end cul-de-sacs and in a glorified porte cochere in front of the retail podium/mall at the east end? The very attractive plaza and fountain centerpieces are essentially cut off from everything east of 11th avenue.

- It appears that there is no retail that faces directly onto or in any case has a primary frontage on 10th Avenue. It seems like this would have the effect of creating a three-block dead zone on 10th from 30th to 33rd, with, from the renderings, what looks like a 6-story stone wall along almost the entire length of the podium facing the avenue.

As in this image:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7049/6775718484_afa6072732.jpg

This seems like not great urbanism for a project whose remainder appears so carefully designed.

The related brochure was pretty stunning (I'll spare you my complaints about socioeconomic homogeneity and globally overreplicated commercial and landscape architecture and what I see as the slow death of a certain intangible New York-ness), but I still have two issues with connectivity, that are related:

- Why do 31st and 32nd Streets, or at least one of them, not connect between 10th and 11th Avenues or to West Side Highway, but rather terminate on the west end in what look like sort of high-end cul-de-sacs and in a glorified porte cochere in front of the retail podium/mall at the east end? The very attractive plaza and fountain centerpieces are essentially cut off from everything east of 11th avenue.

- It appears that there is no retail that faces directly onto or in any case has a primary frontage on 10th Avenue. It seems like this would have the effect of creating a three-block dead zone on 10th from 30th to 33rd, with, from the renderings, what looks like a 6-story stone wall along almost the entire length of the podium facing the avenue.

As in this image:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7049/6775718484_afa6072732.jpg

This seems like not great urbanism for a project whose remainder appears so carefully designed.

The building behind is so ugly that walking along there shopping wouldn't be that pleasant.

There are worse streetscapes in the city.

The building behind is so ugly that walking along there shopping wouldn't be that pleasant.

Brookfield owns that building, and the site has 2.5m sf of air rights. It will be gone within 15 years.

This fountain will be huge! It looks to be around 3 stories tall and at least 30m long.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Njeg4Qj-Q5g/T0WpA1ME-cI/AAAAAAAAAiE/nLV9jhcR5XI/s672/clip_image002.jpg

I'm convinced now that this entire development is on par with the WTC as most important and influential in the city.

The towers are nice, but the gifts Related will be giving this nice chunk of west side Manhattan are unmatched in an urban project. It's the 21st century Rockefeller Center.

I agree. Also, the city is giving the West Side a nice gift with the new Hudson Boulevard that it is creating. It will be amazing.

^^ Completely agreed! This is a pretty underwhelming part of Midtown right now, near what I think is one of the least exciting places in midtown (midtown west and it's cheap nasty tourist stores along 8th avenue). This will completely revolutionize the area! Along with highline park, the new subway, and the other projects here, this is going to be an amazing place! Hopefully it will cause more to happen in Jersey too! I'd love to see more developments in Hoboken and Jersey City.

This fountain will be huge! It looks to be around 3 stories tall and at least 30m long.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Njeg4Qj-Q5g/T0WpA1ME-cI/AAAAAAAAAiE/nLV9jhcR5XI/s672/clip_image002.jpg

I am more scared of the size of the ESB in this pic.:lol:

^^ Completely agreed! This is a pretty underwhelming part of Midtown right now, near what I think is one of the least exciting places in midtown (midtown west and it's cheap nasty tourist stores along 8th avenue). This will completely revolutionize the area! Along with highline park, the new subway, and the other projects here, this is going to be an amazing place! Hopefully it will cause more to happen in Jersey too! I'd love to see more developments in Hoboken and Jersey City.

Excellent observation. I agree wholeheartedly. I would also like to see more projects in Jersey City (Several years passed, and there's nothing new there).

I'm really looking forward to this project. Will add great quality to the city.

Excellent observation. I agree wholeheartedly. I would also like to see more projects in Jersey City (Several years passed, and there's nothing new there).

I'm really looking forward to this project. Will add great quality to the city.

I'd say Jersey city will get more condo/rental towers soon enough. However, I doubt anything very tall.

As for Hoboken, don't hold your breath. The mayor seems very anti-development and I wouldn't expect anything tall to be built there for years.

I don't give a damn about jersey. What i care about is the development of NYC as a whole. And the hudson yard is a big part of that. After the WTC is complete, I look forward to watching this go up.

This fountain will be huge! It looks to be around 3 stories tall and at least 30m long.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Njeg4Qj-Q5g/T0WpA1ME-cI/AAAAAAAAAiE/nLV9jhcR5XI/s672/clip_image002.jpg

I like it. Nice pocket park also.