[MarshallKnight]

I like them. Very clean.

Interesting to think about what their relationship will be with the final phase of the Hudson Park & Boulevard:

If we do wind up with a version of the "sports bridge," or at least some suspended park space over the Lincoln Tunnel entrance, it'd be cool to give these towers a direct connection to it above street level.

 

[MarshallKnight]

Damn. My gut says that's too good to be true (those are the same architects who designed that beautiful hotel in Brooklyn that was never really intended to be built), but I hope to hell I'm wrong.

 

[MarshallKnight]

^^ I was just going to wonder aloud (or internet-aloud, whatever) whether capping the tunnel entrance was a possibility. Some of the most exciting projects out here in LA are the possibility of building cap parks over a number of freeway trenches. It would certainly help the walkability of the neighborhood.

Also, thanks for putting that map together! Just curious, what's the color key -- Blue, Yellow, Black, Beige?

 

[MarshallKnight]

1100 ft is probably the maximum allowance like 215 west 57th being denoted as 1550 ft. Right now it depends on what Silverstein wants to build.

This is what I was thinking. It makes sense to file a permit for the maximum as-of-right project, regardless of what you're actually going to build.

Can someone remind me whether we expect these to be rentals or condos? It seems like a weird area to try cashing in on the luxury condo boom (which is what I think a 1100 footer would suggest).

 

[MarshallKnight]

It is my hope one day that they could eventually build platform over the Lincoln tunnel and Dywer avenue roadways especially between 9th and 10th avenues from 30th street all the way up above 42nd street to create more housing.

I love that idea, I just wonder if the trench is deep enough to build over the top of. In any case, I expect someone to try. Along with the cantilever and elevated walkway trends, these platforms are the likeliest strategy for creating more buildable square footage in Manhattan.

Well, and more landfill, I guess. But I think the hurricane issue is going to deter anyone from seriously considering that.

 

[MarshallKnight]

I too hope (and suspect) that that's a massing model, but I do like the proportions. It's not too bulky, nor too thin.

 

[MarshallKnight]

^^ That's exactly right. Because of the lower ceiling heights, this building will have 106 actual floors (go to the diagram on the previous page and start counting), totaling 1.14MM sf of residential space, far more than even significantly taller towers like 432 Park or 111 W. 57th will have.

 

[MarshallKnight]

But it'll be good to have a supertall luxury residential tower with some 'bulk' to an extent (judging from the massing models)

Well I think the point is, it's not actually going to be a luxury tower, at least not primarily. Hence the low ceiling heights and all those units. A lot of it will be affordable housing, but even the market rate units won't be targeted at the top-of-market buyers.

I find it refreshing that developers feel they can build supertalls for tenants other than the super-rich, and I believe that's part of the reason CB4 District Manager Benfatto is so supportive. I also agree with his sentiment that the retail should not be strictly ultra-luxury brands; rather, the kind of stores that the mere mortals living in the tower will shop at -- but I do think that may prove contentious, if the rest of the shopping along Hudson Blvd. is as high end as it appears it will be.

 

[MarshallKnight]

l understood 30 park to be limestone. Are you being sarcastic about the panels being concrete?

You have to go back to when they first started placing the panels, and you'll see a number of posts that show it's unequivocally pre-cast concrete. A lot of us were bummed, although it doesn't look as bad as you might suspect.

It's fair to call 30 Park's concrete-for-limestone substitution penny pinching -- it's an ultra-luxury building, and had been advertised as being limstone-clad all along -- but 520 W. 41st is a different beast altogether. It's explicitly not targeted at the luxury market, so for us to expect something spectacular is a little deluded. The design will be fine, even if it winds up being plain; the size is good for the area; and it sets a good precedent in terms of supertalls that don't only cater to the super-rich. I think that's plenty to be happy about.

 

[MarshallKnight]

That's just a massing model, not a proper, representative render, although the diagram suggests boxy too. I don't think we'll see anything too crazy, and that's probably a good thing.

 

[MarshallKnight]

If they closed on it, they must have a pretty good sense that they're going to get their way in the land-use review. Here's hoping.

 

[MarshallKnight]

Yeah, it's not luxury housing, just regular floor heights. If this were condos it would probably be 1400 feet, but I think Silverstein has recognized that the market doesn't need more high end condos; it needs thousands of units that everyday employees can utilize, especially in the heart of a burgeoning new office district.

 

[MarshallKnight]

Man, that's too bad, although to be honest, not entirely expected. I'm sure the site will be snapped up quickly, but I wouldn't expect a supertall here. The supertall residentials that have gotten off the ground have without exception been of the ultra-luxury variety, and this simply isn't an ultra-luxury location. Unfortunately, since Silverstein was the first to try to break the mold with a "middle class" residential supertall, his throwing in the towel will probably discourage other developers from trying the same.

Still, this site has tons of potential for one, or even a couple towers that, if not actually supertalls, can still stand out. Anything taller than its neighbors to the immediate North would be nice. I love the possibility of that archway design making a comeback -- it would be a great fit on an increasingly experimental waterfront (W57, the bronze SHoP towers, Mercedes House) -- although that possibility seems slim.

Or maybe we could even get a -- gasp -- office building!

 

[MarshallKnight]

The wording of that quote is really confusing. Does that mean they did not actually sell it? Or does it mean they did sell it, but not because of affordable housing issues?