September 20, 2007
Six Towers Proposed for East River Development
Yesterday, developer Sheldon Solow's ambitious plans to redefine the East River skyline were examined in the Sun, as he is presenting the plans to a Community Board today. Solow proposes to build six towers south of the United Nations along the East River, with over 5 million square feet of residential, commercial and retail space.
So far, some residents and officials have met with Solow and his company, East River Realty, but one community board member says that Solow doesn't want to change the design or density of the project. The City Council, as well as City Planning Commission, needs to approve the project, and City Council member Daniel Garodnick tells the Sun, "I have serious concerns about the project. The buildings are too big, and too dense for the neighborhood."
We thought the rendering with the heights of the proposed buildings (middle) and the chart showing what the buildings would bring (below), both from the environmental impact statement, were interesting - they are big. Curbed says apparently Whole Foods is interested in space in one of the buildings.
Here's the environmental impact impact statement (PDF) for the project. Solow is described as litigious and interested in design. He is also a big presence on 57th Street - already owns 9 West 57th and 6 West 57th - but is looking at buying 12 West 57th.
|
it's on the east side so, you know, no one really cares.
hopefully they will charge 2250 for a studio, like they do in l.i.c.
Maybe city councilman garodnick should remember the city has a chronic housing shortage and he should consider that when he tries to downsize the project.
The city's already too dense you numbnut. Mayeb we should start taking it to the next - and inevitable - level.
that is a massive development. i have to wonder when manhattan will reach critical mass with the amount of people it can handle.
There is no such thing as critical mass. The sky is the limit, literally.
New York City is far less dense than many cities in the world.
Only the rich and products of liberal universities are against new development. The people need affordable housing, and as long as the supply falls drastically short of demand, prices will continue to be high.
There is only one solution to the housing crisis in this city: build more housing. If there were 1000 buildings like this being built throughout the city, studios would be $500 a month instead of $2250. Wake up!!!
Yeah, MT you tell 'em boy!! Stop pickin' on those nice ultra rich folks who want a nice view! Let the nice developer man do what he wants. Everyone just shut up, cuz MT and the rich folks know what's best!!!!
Yuch.
One gets the feeling sometimes that non-repetetive architecture has been outlawed. Maybe we can import some guys from London?
Christ, I can't believe I just said that... but look at those drawings.. jees!
London? Try Chicago or Dubai. Now they know how to build some buildings.
#5: It's such a hard call. We don't have enough housing to meet demands BUT our infrastructure is already overtaxed and can't handle that many more residents. If we build more housing, we also need to improve subways, power grids, sanitation, etc.
Will we raise taxes to pay for this? And will developers kick in or will they receive tax breaks instead?
1) there should be a limit on bldg heights- not taller than the tallest building
2) will there be a public park?
3) parking should be a joy
40 city of darkness without any character- only banks, duane reades, and shitbucks
tallest bldg in the area
that's going to be affordable housing? really?
WOW! Do you think they will have a Starbucks in every building or just the tall ones?
#5 Love your sexy tough rhetoric and agree with your brilliant notion: I hope we are able to build 1000 more of these monstrosities since that would make Manhattan such a desirable place to dwell. Ayn Rand is in da house!
I need a trust fund!
The city doesn't need more housing. The city needs more affordable housing. I'm sure this will be not be the case.
MT - Let me get this straight. The city is already too dense, so let's NOT downsize??? What?
MT and #5 - If only these were towers full of rent-stabilized apartments. But no. These are lux condos. From everything I've heard, there aren't gonna be ANY affordable apartments, even though that's what all the elected types have been pushing for.
More disney/las vegas for the rich and wannabe rich. Disgusting. We need affordable housing in New York. Period. There is NOTHING on the political horizon which can realistically support it. Who is speaking for it among our illustious politicians who have any clout to fight these f*cking developers? Folks who don't think this is an issue are tourists. Wake up.
There are four other boros in NYC and that is where affordable housing should go. Period.
The price of steel, other materials, energy, labor, and land pretty much decide what the minimum rent or sale price on a condo is going to be. Any affordable housing in Manhattan is going to be massively subsidized (not likely) and will end up going to a secretary making $35,000 a year (not you).
Oh yeah. Nice to hear you weighing in on this 19 and 20.
The "(not you)" says it all about who guest 20 is.
And as far as the "other boros" are concerned (guest 19) as a solution to affordable housing... The vision of a Manhattan for the rich surrounded by balkanized outer boroughs is politically and economically naive. Its easy to connect the dots of current economic ideas. But life is more expansive than that. Get a vision, a social vision, and work for that. Don't be chump.
more supply = lower rent
I think it's funny that all these people think buildings with expensive apartments don't lower rents for everybody else. Where do you think the people who can afford these apartments come from? Thin air? They arrive from other apartments, which, now vacant will cost less than they otherwise would have. If you want to submit that they come from the suburbs, or some other exogenous location, I would propose to you that these people have no barrier to entry, since they are "rich" and would already be here if they so desired. So, just use common sense, and cheer new supply. It means lower rent for everyone.
22-
Last time (and everytime) I checked, when an apartment is vacated, the rent goes up, not down.
23 - you must be young
whatever, dude.
24-
Show me an apartment that get cheaper when it is vacated and I wil change my post handle to Stupid. Unless you are trying to apply Supply and Demand 101 to the greed market in NYC, in which case you should definitely change your name.
supply and demand for NYC real estate does not apply here. thank goodness lead is still available.
it looks like whoever designed the playstation 2 slim edition is designing these buildings as well :)
To the dumbass who thinks more supply equals lower rates. LOOK AT THE LAST 5 YEARS WHEN SUPPLY IS THE HIGHEST IN HISTORY OF NYC, DO YOU SEE LOWER PRICES? IDIOT?
I think there's a variety of things at work here, from foreign and out-of-town investors who are buying apartments as investment properties and leaving them unoccupied to the increasing gap between between rich and poor.
I don't think there is a right to affordable housing, but I do think the city will suffer when everyone but the very wealthy had been priced out.
Failing that I think the only thing that will change the situation would be another stock market crash or severe recession.
26- Look at the data - All apt types in LES are cheaper subsequent to July, on average. You don't have to say anything, you can just post a blank message from Stupid.
http://www.tregny.com/manhattan-apt-rental-report.jsp#les-lower-east-side