Gothamist: City Wants Mega Buildings on the Far West Side

brushpicks

Tue, 22 May 2007 20:27:21 -0500

Uhmm.. change of topic a bit..I hope they build a collection of GREAT ARCHITECTURE over there (low-rise, midrise, highrise and yes, supertall to megatall) and not the same boring, banal "contextual" buildings and boxes. It really pisses me off how some developers advertise their projects as "the best of" in development when all they are are fugly structures borne out of myopia and lack of ambition (well, except to just exclusively make money).. Im disappointed with WTC's blah architecture (except for the GORGEOUS calatrava station) so I hope the HY would shine..

Frigga

Sun, 20 May 2007 20:01:39 -0500

"a good variety of restaurants, ranginf from mcD's to Olive Garden, Red Lobster" Uhhhhh . . .

berty

Sun, 20 May 2007 16:49:22 -0500

"NYC has been this way since the beginning. Achievers always came here. Housing was always scarce and expensive (tenements and projects anyone)" #32, not true. Manhattan ALWAYS had very affordable neighborhoods until the late 80s/early 90s. Tenements were built as housing for workers; they were cheap. Housing projects were built to provide affordable housing and to replace crumbling tenements. What's happened is that the pricing distinctions between neighborhoods has vanished. While it is true that New York has always been a magnet for the smart and ambitious, there was a time when those people could live cheaply until they made it (think Soho in the 60s), and then usually moved to higher rent areas. That process of creative experimentation was responsible for the cultural center that NYC has become. Unfortunately, that is no longer true. How much longer can NYC remain a cultural incubator without being able to attract and retain innovators? Without substantial funding on the part of select individuals (trust funds), it's pretty unlikely. Not a good sign for the next 50 years.

poiuy

Thu, 17 May 2007 17:19:57 -0500

"a good variety of restaurants, rangin from mcD's to Olive Garden, Red Lobster" What a variety!

PhillipJFry

Thu, 17 May 2007 16:57:07 -0500

Well, I don't know about subsidized housing, but we have to all realize that if they keep building buildings like this then we will all see cheaper housing. Do you guys no see this happening with the sheer amount of luxury condos popping up? Sure it will take a lot of construction before there can be a vacancy rate that actually would lower prices somewhat. But more housing is what New York needs, at any price. The market will adjust. The rich folk living elsewhere in the city will move in and make room in the places they leave vacant. It's supply and demand, folks, if they can't fill the houses then they'll lower the prices.

craig d

Thu, 17 May 2007 16:49:42 -0500

SP, give me a break. NYC has been this way since the beginning. Achievers always came here. Housing was always scarce and expensive (tenements and projects anyone). It is part of Americana - if you can make it here you can make it anywhere... this line didn't come out last year... LOL. NY has always been where achievers go to make there place in the world. The city would not be what it is if this was not the case. Creating public subsidies which was tried in the 50s and 60s did not help the problem and created permanent areas of poverty crime and segregation. Can we finally move on? Let the market play out.

realismist

Thu, 17 May 2007 16:42:51 -0500

SP: that's such a straw-man argument. Of course part of the draw here is all that NY encompasses. My point is that the underlying engine is the dollar. That doesn't soil the great culture and diversity that is here. The "rat race" as you call it makes those things possible.

SP

Thu, 17 May 2007 16:29:51 -0500

there was a time, not long ago, when the satisfaction of living here came from participating in the diverse culture and community of NYC, not the rat race to make piles of money and basking in self satisfaction and perceived superiority.

realetist

Thu, 17 May 2007 16:11:35 -0500

jenna: socialism works so well in France doesn't it? Face it, you love NY because people love to be here. They love to be here because of the satisfaction they gain from "making it" here, which is all about earning money. Take that away (socialism) and NY would die.

bob

Thu, 17 May 2007 16:02:57 -0500

You should not raise your family in Manhattan if you are "families making 30-60K / per year". duh!

paolo

Thu, 17 May 2007 15:03:32 -0500

if you like the socialism, go to Venezuela. i recently got out of there to America. we not need more housing project like there. please excuse my English is bad,

spacedoubt

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:59:06 -0500

Dear 17 I never said anyting about supporting subsidized housing.

jenna

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:59:05 -0500

hey dont knock socialism equality for all, got a problem with that? personally i think the entire site would make a great park...on par with central park & prospect park...but with wtarefront! . . maybe some towers at the east edge overlooking it all, mixed income with retail

Po-boy

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:53:35 -0500

me! its as if you just got back from socialist fantasy-camp.

mel

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:45:46 -0500

ok this is what should be built 10-12 apt buildings, 100% affordbale housing for families making 30-60K / per year adequate parking for all residents some retail like grocery a store (like finefare, keyfood..NOT another whole foods) as someone else posted, a store like walmart or costcos would be nice a movie theatre a good variety of restaurants, ranginf from mcD's to Olive Garden, Red Lobster priority job opportunities for and job openings in the city, so that these residents are fully employed at least one church medical center (east side hospitals are too far)

Anonymous

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:36:29 -0500

20 - you should write for the Onion. You're hysterical!

jess

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:35:21 -0500

there should be a law that mandates all new cosntruction include housing for people making

Dan Doctor Evil

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:31:21 -0500

I know a broad swath of land where the Bloomberg administration should build: GROUND ZERO. Remember Ground Zero? It's still nothing. Dan Doctoroff and Bloomberg care more about building luxury buildings uptown than actually rebuilding the symbol of our broken New York. Dan Doctoroff is included in the Bloomberg package you voted for: Luxury projects masquerading as affordable housing, funded on the taxpayer's dime--this is what you voted for (they've already done this many times. Those new luxury high-rises going up around the city have been given subsidies originally intended for affordable housing).

Craig D.

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:29:48 -0500

18, by subsidizing housing all you do is move the employers salary costs to the tax payer. If the employer cannot get any employees to fill a position due to the salary being inadequate to find housing in an qrea, they either have to raise the hourly rate or close down. By subsidizing housing, all you are doing is keeping the wages depressed and have the tax payer foot the difference. A truly dumb solution in my book.

Charles

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:25:08 -0500

I also think that some of the demands for affordable housing in the middle of Manhattan are ridiculous and for that to happen would require changing existing economic structures, which TPTB have no interest in changing. But...some of you dont realize that even the *Bronx* is getting expensive for people now. Salaries have not kept pace with even market rate apartments in the outer boroughs. And it's not feasible or sustainable to push all the burger flippers and retail workers (news flash, those are usually jobs that are not careers, and many of those people are young and studying to do something else that will make them more $) farther and farther out into the metro area and then ferry them in. Someone has to do those jobs (not even counting nurses, teachers, taxi drivers, etc.), they are actually important to keeping the city running and they should have a decent affordable place to live. Or they will leave-and there is not enough incentive-i.e. decent affordable housing-for someone to come in and replace them. So, dismissing them and telling them to live in an outer borough is becoming less and less of a feasible option. The whole metro area is becoming a joke on the order of a Third World city with the economic and housing disparities.

zeng

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:23:30 -0500

"You may have money, but you don't know anything about economics." that is probably the most ridiculous statement i've ever seen coming out of someones mouth who with the same breath is demanding subsidized housing. WTF? LOL

realismist

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:22:55 -0500

13: I'm not rich. I can afford to live in Manhattan through my own efforts and hard work. I have no objection to some affordable housing on this site. What I cannot stand is idiots saying "100% affordable housing!!!" I probably shouldn't respond but these people appear to believe that's a viable option. Ultimately, the desire to live in Manhattan (the pressure of high prices) is the same pressure that causes people to complain about the high prices and want a free ride. The free ride is, of course, impossible and it's childish to ask for it.

zeng

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:22:38 -0500

bigbox

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:15:43 -0500

this site is ideal for big box stores...costco, walmart, etc...thats what manhattan desparately needs...its too expensive here plus it will create jobs

spacedoubt

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:14:31 -0500

Ugh! That "rich and damn proud of it" sentiment (and, with a vehemence, I might add) is so '80s. Boy, is that boring! Not to mention faux nationalistic. "This land is for those who can afford it. If you don't like it, get lost" What a shallow perspective. A healthy market is inclusive, not exclusive. You may have money, but you don't know anything about economics.

realistism

Thu, 17 May 2007 14:02:07 -0500

7: housing is not a right, you have to work and pay for it. Without money to pay for it, you are homeless - get it? Nothing entitles you to living in the most expensive part of the most expensive city in America. Go live upstate or in the midwest, I hear they have great deals on rent there. Capitalism is not the scapegoat when you can't afford to live exactly where you want to. That's life right? We can't all have the best car, or the prettiest woman, or the best home just because we think we deserve it.

get lost!

Thu, 17 May 2007 13:58:15 -0500

it should be 100% affordable housing i hate greedy developers and landlords we have a right to live here too! You have the right to live here if you can afford it. No one should subsidize your rent just because you make $7/hr flipping burgers. Move to Queens or Bronx if you can't afford Manhattan.

helen

Thu, 17 May 2007 13:56:36 -0500

these monstors will cast a shadow over half of manhattan...gotham city was a ficticious city in a comic book, but seems like our urban planners wnat to reproduce that in the real world...good bye new york

helen

Thu, 17 May 2007 13:54:30 -0500

jmchez

Thu, 17 May 2007 13:52:54 -0500

I remember being amazed that people actually expected cheap apartments with harbor views in Battery Park City. Then I thought about it and concluded that chutzpah is not bad if others are foolish enough to fall for it. Never hurts to ask. Where do I sign up for my subsidized river front apartment?

mel

Thu, 17 May 2007 13:51:59 -0500

there are enough condos and luxury housing in manhattan!! why should i have to commute from the bronx just cuz i'm not a lawyer... and i have every right to live here, even on so-called "prime property"...i'm a human being. housing is a human right new york is nothing w/o regular people like me keep pushing us out..whose gonna be left??

realist

Thu, 17 May 2007 13:44:11 -0500

Sorry, free rent people, you aren't entitled to prime Manhattan property because you're poor. I'm all for building affordable housing, in the Bronx. Next complaint will be the standard "the buildings are too tawwlll". Can't wait for that one.

mel

Thu, 17 May 2007 13:21:53 -0500

it should be 100% affordable housing i hate greedy developers and landlords we have a right to live here too!

pedestrian

Thu, 17 May 2007 13:21:24 -0500

Good. Jersey commuters could use more office space near Penn Station, since they won't get access to Grand Central any time soon.

Mr Mordon

Thu, 17 May 2007 12:38:18 -0500

Move upstate if you want more trees. This is New York City, not Binghamton.

SP

Thu, 17 May 2007 12:23:00 -0500

Screw that, we have enough goddam buildings as it is, we need more PARKS, with REAL GRASS and trees.

edEx

Thu, 17 May 2007 12:20:54 -0500

as long as they're not using prime river property to build low-income housing or a stadium i'm all for it.