SkyscraperCity Forum banner
952K views 2K replies 285 participants last post by  Zaz965 
#1 · (Edited by Moderator)
Tishman Speyer has acquired a site at 435 10th Ave. near Hudson Yards for what will be a 61 story $3.2 billion tower. No renders or detailed plans are available at this time.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Previously as...

THE HUDSON SPIRE




Rendering of an imagined Hudson Spire at the Rosenthal site in Hudson Yards. Photo: MJM+A Archictects

Major site for sale at the Hudson Yards -
The block-long parcel on Manhattan's far West Side could trade for more than $200 million and host the city's tallest skyscraper—and its neighbor might sell, too.
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20140110/REAL_ESTATE/140119991

One of the largest development sites in Manhattan's Hudson Yards that could one day be home to the city's tallest skyscraper has hit the sales market.

The Rosenthal family has hired Massey Knakal Realty Services Chairman Bob Knakal and his colleague James Nelson to market a parcel it owns stretching from West 35th to West 34th streets between 10th Avenue and what will be a grand new thoroughfare running through the neighborhood called Hudson Boulevard.

That parcel can accommodate as much as 1.2 million square feet of space, including about 200,000 square feet of residential development.


Mr. Knakal and James Nelson are focused on selling just the Rosenthals' half of the land, which could trade for more than $200 million and can host up to 1.2 million square feet of development as well as reach 1,800 feet in height.


Those parcels are located at:
435 10th Ave., 507 W. 34th St. and 510-28 W. 35th St.

------------------------------

Also, the site sits directly next to another similarly sized piece of land owned by Sherwood Equities at 447 Tenth Avenue, which for years has planned to develop a single super-tower on the two parcels in partnership with the Rosenthals. Now that the Rosenthals are selling, Ryan Nelson (no relation to James), a senior vice president at Sherwood Equities who manages the company's acquisitions and sales, said it, too, will consider selling its parcel to either the buyer of the Rosenthal land or another purchaser.

Together the two sites could allow for an 1,800-foot mega-tower nearly 2.5 million square feet in size—what would be the tallest, and one of the largest, buildings in the city.

Most of that structure would have to be for commercial use under the area's zoning, either office or hotel space, but it also could contain a substantial residential component as large as 400,000 square feet.

Ryan Nelson said that the two sites together, however, would appeal to major developers who want to have a presence in the Hudson Yards neighborhood, where millions of square feet of development are either underway or in the planning. "Together these sites are one of the best commercial development parcels in the area," he said.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




http://newyorkyimby.com/2014/02/new-renderings-hudson-spire.html


http://newyorkyimby.com/2014/02/new-renderings-hudson-spire.html










 
See less See more
7
#104 · (Edited by Moderator)
Back on topic, I'm still feeling quite skeptical about this tower being 1,800ft. My guess is that they will make it a short, fat one like 50 Hudson blvd unless recent height decreases to 30 Hudson mean that the obs. deck is about to be moved to 50 Hudson blvd...

*IF* 50 Hudson blvd is radically redesigned though, you can bet that any developer of this potetial tower will do everything in their power to exceed it.
 
#105 ·
Oh please don't be so depressing....... I think something really big will get built here, most simply because of all he available spaces to go higher than the Central Park area towers(and at best we'll only have five or six supertalls in my opinion in that immediate area that are effectively spread out to avoid the wrath of the shadow busting Central Park NIMBYs) there is the wide open spaces of the West Side... they'll maximize this one and hopefully get better designs for the two other Hudson Yards area towers... the third one, not officially HY because Related doesn't own the property, is the Girasole and that will be a great addition. Hopefully gets a little taller too(currently listed as 1,050 ft) but a beautiful proposal right now as is.
 
#106 ·
If this thing gets built (which I doubt it will), it'd be a HUGE thing for America because I think we all know they can only get so far in global building competition in terms of height. I found one more "rendering", not sure if it's been posted but it's worth a repost:



I think it's going to be at LEAST a good 20 years before a tower rises that's taller than 1 WTC. Whether this building gets built or not will be a really interesting topic. In other words, I don't think this'll get built, but I hope it does.
 
#129 ·
If this thing gets built (which I doubt it will), it'd be a HUGE thing for America because I think we all know they can only get so far in global building competition in terms of height. I found one more "rendering", not sure if it's been posted but it's worth a repost:



I think it's going to be at LEAST a good 20 years before a tower rises that's taller than 1 WTC. Whether this building gets built or not will be a really interesting topic. In other words, I don't think this'll get built, but I hope it does.
it's a shame...2000ft Limit for the Country of oppertunity...why not 3000ft oder 4000ft...where is the difference...an arabian Investor pays all...
 
#108 ·
All of USA.

^^
Hey nyc15 -AKA- usafarid, weren't you banned?

Back on topic, I'm still feeling quite skeptical about this tower being 1,800ft. My guess is that they will make it a short, fat one like 50 Hudson blvd unless recent height decreases to 30 Hudson mean that the obs. deck is about to be moved to 50 Hudson blvd...

*IF* 50 Hudson blvd is radically redesigned though, you can bet that any developer of this potetial tower will do everything in their power to exceed it.
This has some residential which would make the top fairly thin even if they went as economical ass possible like 50 hy.
 
#110 · (Edited)
If 1,800' doesn't go, this will end up being the height the Nordstrom is supposed to be which is 1550' to the roof at least. The Hudson Spire has the same 1.5 msf as the Nordstrom and since this is marketed as the Hudson Spire this thing should have a spire which can take it just short of 1776', but this will be good enough to take the roof height crown in the US. That would be good enough for me and this will be the jewel of the Yards and maybe of the city.

Although I can definitely see a really ambitious developer from somewhere in this world to build this to its full potential so he can puff out his chest and say I'm the man in the biggest stage in the world. :cheers:
 
#111 ·
I thought the Nordstrom Tower is 1550 to the roof at most. But I'm not sure the phrase "to the roof" will affect much, because the current design doesn't have a spire (and I'm not sure it will have any vanity height). I'd rather this building have a height decrease than be cancelled.
 
This post has been deleted
#113 ·
I see realty agents are doing great job advertising this site. What I don't get is why someone made thread in Proposed Supertalls for an empty plot. But whatever. What I think is that tower at this plot have no chance going as tall as advertised. What is happening right now is clearly an advertising campaign. So obviously they throw numbers much bigger than the actual developer would go with. And so far it works for imagination it seems. At least here everyone's going mental about it ;)
Why do you think so?
 
#115 ·
Of course anything that will be build there will be a supertall. But I'm quite positive it have little chance reaching that 550m mark. It is a maximum theoretic height envisioned by the sellers of the plot, not the developer, who will be most likely more focused on feasibility than on the height, hence the final product will be very likely lower than that.
 
#117 ·
I was just in Washington and I was discussing the 2000 ft height limit with an amigo in the FAA. Apparently, it's not inconceivable that the hight limit could be reversed if the top of a structure were to be equipped with lights that emit enough lumens to penetrate dense fog/ clouds up to 15 miles... Allowing a pilot to maneuver the craft to avoid a mid-air collision.
 
#118 ·
i'm sure there are ways around the height limit, which would probably involve making the top of the structure obvious enough to see at day and night. This probably includes extra warning lights and paint schemes/ other forms of lighting.
 
#120 ·
I have a feeling some people still don´t get what is currently happening in NYC, what it means to have unlimited air rights, and especially what a gargantuan momentum and potential the west side has. The phase one is just a small teaser of what will come. And i am sure this area will house a building no one expects in NYC. Lets go back 5 years ago and imagine saying to someone what will happen on the 57th street what is happening now. This city finally unleashes it´s beast and goes the crazy way it should have for decades.
 
#121 ·
You know what is very appealing with this plot? especially for a foreign entity?

This plot is basically gift wrapped. No acquiring of air rights, no assembling of land or any additional approvals necessary other than the DOB to build this "as of right" tower to 1800' if they so choose.

All is needed is for the buyer to draw up a the plans, design, follow the zoning and of course the biggie, the necessary funding. This development would be a piece of cake.

This may not reach 1,800ft but this can certainly reach 1,550 or 1600' just like the Nordstrom tower was originally planned.

The big difference between the Hudson Spire and the Nordstrom is that the Nordstrom faced several a road blocks that may have influenced the shorter height and a few revisions.

Extell had to deal with re-positioning of its tower and it decided to build a cantilever over a landmarked building that would require approval. The Hudson Spire has none of these issues to deal with.

imo, the Hudson spire would have been a perfect job for AS+GG to design a tower the way they would have liked the Nordstrom to have been built. I believe there are many factors the Nordstrom development faced that has influenced their redesigning.
 
#125 ·
I would love to see Nordstrom go at least 1,500 ft. I'm sure there will be two or three other supertalls in the Central Park area but I highly doubt they would be able to go taller than that though may equal or come close. Just the shadow NIMBYs will be out in full force.... the speculated Shvo Tower if ever built certainly won't be allowed to go much higher. The West Side just makes more sense... I hope HY Starts by rethinking the two new towers just outside of the main HY development(50, 55 Hudson Yards I believe) because the point of the West Side is imagination and creativity, there is such an opportunity to go soaring and majestic and letting New York's tall tower freak flag fly you don't want to waste a plot of land to such underwhelming boxiness. It's like a well known musician who suddenly starts playing jarring notes that are all wrong for the composition ...you don't expect it and it's out of place.
 
#132 ·
London is the busiest airspace in the world by passengers and flight numbers.

Actually by quite a margin. A margin that is increasing over New York (2) and Tokyo (3) every year. And if the Thames Estuary project goes ahead, the gap will jump by around a third.

Also, the 2000ft limit is not a hard limit. The FAA explicitly states that anything over 2000ft can be built if there is public interest and appropriate legal/political/financial shenanigans.

The reason it's not come up is because, well, nothing has come close to 2000ft in America yet.
 
#134 ·
^^ This. If someone's going to build a tower above the ~1400 ft. mark, then money is no object. As we've been discovering with many projects around NYC, that's the point-of-no-return-on-investment so to speak, and anything above that will be a developer cutting into their profits for vanity height. And vanity can definitely be a powerful driver, as we've seen with the types of foreign investors we're hoping for.
 
#135 ·
So many supertalls are in the pipeline in NYC right now, that there's real cachet in being the tallest/biggest/most prestigious. Because tenants are spoiled for choice right now. New York has like a billion square feet of high-end office space going up between now and 2020.

If you're Mega American Corporation X and you want a new headquarters in Manhattan, having the CEO office be the highest office in the whole USA is going to tip the scales.

That's what - I think - makes the Hudson Spire more 'believable' than other pipe dream projects, like the Chicago Spire. I mean, there are more supertalls under construction in NYC then there are supetalls period in my country. The number proposed is frankly absurd. There's a race to the top going on right now and if you're putting billions of dollars on the line, do you really want to end up in ten years' time as the owner of the 'fourteenth tallest building in America'? Who gives a shit about 14th when 1st is just a billion dollars away?
 
#137 ·
If you're Mega American Corporation X and you want a new headquarters in Manhattan, having the CEO office be the highest office in the whole USA is going to tip the scales.
Then why do so many major corporations opt to rent the lowest floor? Because it's cheaper and more convenient. They can pay an extra chunk for naming rights and get the prestige for the company. But CEOs are beholden to shareholders, and if I'm a shareholder, I'm gonna want to know why my CEO paid 50-300% more in order to have the highest offices.

Who gives a shit about 14th when 1st is just a billion dollars away?
The guy who gets to keep his billion dollars.
 
#138 ·
Whatever is built here needs to make economic sense, or at least apparent economic sense to those putting up the money, and to the developers. I don't think an 1,800-foot-tall building at 1.2 million square feet fits that bill, especially given the modest residential component the site can support.
 
#140 ·
Without a doubt whatever gets built there will make economic sense, but let's be honest, in order to get a megatall in NYC, a certain amount of vanity will be part of that decision.
True office and residential are growing taller but there seems to be a limit, for now at least, in terms of how high they're rising, cause much like most developed cities, developers put demand ahead of vanity (look at 30HY and the Nordstrom).
So it will take a developer looking to put his mark on the city to build a megatall, but the good news is, those aren't lacking so the prospect of seeing something really tall here is actually pretty good.
 
This post has been deleted
#149 · (Edited)
That would be the worlds first Vertical Chinatown :D

i hope the Chineese or the Arabs will go all out on this great opportunity.

There hasent really happened anything in max height increase in the US after Sears tower and the old WTC Twins.

And the new World trade centre turning out to be not really taller than the twins, was very disappointing for me.

and also classically New York has had one tower, or twin towers dominating the skyline it should return to this.
 
Top