NEW YORK | 247 Cherry Street | 1,013 FT | 77 FLOORS

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by 10023

The best neighborhoods in NYC, even Manhattan, dont have many skyscrapers.

If that's the case, then no problem. Move everybody over to the "best" neighborhoods.

It's the skyscrapers of New York that allow the "best" neighborhoods to exists.

[NYguy]

http://thevillager.com/2018/10/28/re...ors-submitted/

Relocation plan for Two Bridges seniors submitted




October 28, 2018
BY SYDNEY PEREIRA

The Department of Housing and Urban Development has told The Villager that a relocation plan has been submitted for residents at a senior housing complex in the Two Bridges neighborhood.

A number of seniors at 80 Rutgers Slip are expected to require relocation as a result of a proposed 80-story tower by JDS Development, which is one of four new towers that are planned in the neighborhood.

Two Bridges Neighborhood Council has formally submitted the relocation plan, which is pending final approval, according to HUD spokesperson Olga Alvarez.

Victor Papa, the president of Two Bridges Neighborhood Council, confirmed the organization has submitted a relocation plan, as well. Papa contended that discussions with the seniors and their families have been positive.

“Our method here is to try to keep every family in the building,” he said. “They are people who are vulnerable and who we have to be very, very careful with. Which is why we have met with them several times and their families, and each time we meet with them, we gave them choices.”

Two social workers who work in the building, plus a relocation specialist, attend these individual meetings, Papa said. The relocation specialist is from SAV Enterprises, a relocation firm that touts itself as having relocated 19,000 families in the U.S. and has been recognized with a “best practices” award by HUD.

As it stands, tenants in up to 19 apartments at 80 Rutgers Slip could be impacted, pending City Planning approval of the projects and a finalized building design from JDS.

Under the plan, tenants from 10 of those apartments would be relocated into JDS Development’s new building at 247 Cherry St., which would be run by Two Bridges Neighborhood Council and Settlement Housing Fund.

Nine units in 80 Rutgers Slip currently remain vacant in order to accommodate some of the relocated seniors during construction, Papa added. He said they are working with JDS to alter the building design to decrease impacted apartments.

A source with direct knowledge of the development at 247 Cherry St. told The Villager back in August that design changes have already lowered the number of apartments that will have to go offline from 19 to 10.

Expected additional vacancies between now and the construction start date, residents choosing to leave the building, and possible design changes will allow the nonprofits to relocate all impacted residents within the building, according to Papa.

The owners of the building, Two Bridges Neighborhood Council, will be required to comply with HUD’s “uniform relocation assistance” regulations, according to the HUD spokesperson.

Both HUD and H.D.C. have to approve the final plan before tenants would receive formal notices, according to HDC spokesperson Stephanie Mavronicolas, who said that HUD is expecting a proposed plan soon.

[NYguy]

Gale Brewer does here "what a world, what a world" impression...


http://gothamist.com/2018/11/09/char...roposition.php

The third proposal, creating a term limit of four consecutive two-year terms for Community Board members (currently there is no term limit for CB members, who are appointed by their Borough Presidents), passed 72% to 23%.

...Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer was less jazzed. Brewer said that Prop 2 could have been accomplished through some City Council legislation, and that Prop 3 will drain Community Boards of New Yorkers with valuable city planning experience, which takes a long time to accrue.

"[Eight years] goes so fast, just to train them in land use, takes at least 5 or 6 years. I was on the City Council for 12 years, I know what it's like to try to get something accomplished. I got most of the work done in the 3rd term to be honest with you," Brewer told Gothamist.

"Eight years is not enough to be the counter to the developer, and the land use attorney, and the land use engineer from the developer. Think about Hudson Yards, think about Essex Crossing...The people who are part of the community board for these projects, I need them in the future. The land use attorneys, I know them all, they have been around since I started this work in 1978, okay? All of them, who work for developers."

"Think of the skyscrapers to come! All those buildings! Who will stop them now! What a world! What a world!"



• Video Link

[NYguy]

https://www.cityandstateny.com/artic...le-brewer.html

Everybody loves Gale
Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer may be the city’s most popular politician. So why won’t she run for mayor?





By JEFF COLTIN
NOVEMBER 19, 2018

Gale Brewer’s peers in politics are in awe of her public schedule, holding the Manhattan borough president’s endurance in an esteem most people reserve for Olympic marathon runners or Bruce Springsteen on a world tour.

“I would be dead if I had Gale Brewer’s schedule every single day,” said New York City Councilman Keith Powers, of Manhattan.

“The running joke is that Gale Brewer has a clone,” echoed New York City Councilwoman Carlina Rivera, also of Manhattan. “She’s everywhere. She always makes an appearance.”

“Gale is amazing! I don’t know how she keeps up,” said Manhattan Councilwoman Margaret Chin. “When I go to events with her, especially in the evening, I’ll say, ‘Gale, this is my last one. I’m going home.’ And she’s still got four or five on her list.”

If there’s one exception to the Gale Brewer love fest, it’s real estate developers, who would prefer that Brewer did a little less “showing up.” As borough president, Brewer has an advisory vote on Manhattan projects going through the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure, or ULURP. It’s a vote she has used, consistently, to oppose major projects, like the 2018 rezoning of Inwood, or to attempt to scale them down, like a planned tower for the South Street Seaport. She said a lot of factors go into in her decisions, including an intense focus on building more affordable housing, but her vote often seems to come down to what she is hearing from other Manhattanites at meetings and events. “I do listen to the community, because I think not a lot of people are listening to the community,” she said. And what has she determined? “We don’t want the tallest building in the city. We just don’t. At least, I don’t. Others may.”

But to the pro-development set, Brewer is a NIMBY who says not in my backyard to any project, siding with residents of the affected neighborhood over the greater needs of the city. Real estate developers are conspicuously absent from Brewer’s campaign finance reports, both in 2017 when she ran essentially unopposed for re-election, and in 2013, when she beat a crowded field in the Democratic primary. But Brewer has won the respect of some of her toughest critics.

Brewer, meanwhile, is rumored to be considering running for her old City Council seat again. Asked to confirm, she avoids her usual straight talk and dodged the question. But she did shut down any thought of pursuing a citywide office. “I love Manhattan,” she said. “I’ll leave it at that. I’m not a five-borough person. I love my borough.”

https://prod.cityandstateny.com/site..._678382054.jpg

[chris08876]

^^^^^^^^^

That's some fine satire.

Everyone hates Gale. They should make a show about that, since they made a show about "Everybody Hates Chris".

She should not run for mayor btw. I'd rather have the guy who sits outside of Penn Station with the broken Beats by Dre than Gale as mayor.

“I’ll leave it at that. I’m not a five-borough person. I love my borough.”

The only sad part is that she's the borough president for Manhattan. The one place that doesn't need the NIMBY swine.

Put her in Staten Island or even Ho-Ho-Kus. Actually, Ho-Ho-Kus would make sense.

We need to think upwards. Gale is like that grenade that always hangs out near the hot chicks, and when your spitting your game with the phat hot chick, Gale starts talking about Jesus and being a good Christian. Not what we want. We wanna get some action tonight.

Somehow this relates to development. Point is, she is a pestering fly that delays development. Her efforts help us be less competitive. We need to continue to build upwards. More density, more growth.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by chris08876

We need to think upwards. Gale is like that grenade that always hangs out near the hot chicks, and when your spitting your game with the phat hot chick, Gale starts talking about Jesus and being a good Christian. Not what we want. We wanna get some action tonight.

Somehow this relates to development. Point is, she is a pestering fly that delays development. Her efforts help us be less competitive. We need to continue to build upwards. More density, more growth.

Haha I like that analogy. She's the not-so-attractive cock blocking friend for sure. And honestly I'll never forgive her ever for the Tower Verre height cut.

How much can she actually do here though? Other than delay... is it realistic to think we'll still be seeing this building rise?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

And honestly I'll never forgive her ever for the Tower Verre height cut.

How much can she actually do here though? Other than delay... is it realistic to think we'll still be seeing this building rise?

The Tower Verre cut wasn't on her, that was on Amanda Burden. But she's been trying to push through an amendment to halt the development of this tower and it's neighbors, and just generally a pain in the ass for any development in Manhattan.


https://citylimits.org/2018/10/16/pr...s-skyscrapers/

Two Bridges used to be an Urban Renewal Area, where the city sought to remove blight and create mixed-income housing and employment opportunities. In 1972, the area was designated as a Large-Scale Residential Development (LSRD) area, a district in which the city allows flexibility to normal land-use regulations in order to facilitate the most space-efficient and beneficial site plans for large apartment buildings that span multiple property lots.

In previous reporting, the Department of City Planning told City Limits that activating the ULURP in the case of the four Two Bridges buildings was legally impossible because the developers were only asking for “minor modifications” to existing regulations. Councilwoman Margaret Chin and Borough President Gale Brewer have filed a zoning text amendment that would subject the three proposals to a full public review under the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) earlier this year. The zoning text amendment would replace the “minor modification” with a requirement that developers get a “special permit” to build in the area. Special permits require a project to go through the ULURP process.

[NYguy]

https://nypost.com/2018/11/24/famous...oon-be-ruined/

Famous view of Empire State Building could soon be ruined





By Melissa Klein
November 24, 2018

It’s a view that’s prompted thousands of Instagram likes, and it could soon be deleted.

Photographers flock to cobblestone Washington Street in DUMBO to capture the Empire State Building in the distance, perfectly framed by the steel arch of the Manhattan Bridge.

But an analysis by the Municipal Art Society found that two proposed skyscrapers on the Manhattan side of the East River could obliterate the landmark.

“A person standing on the street … where previously you would see the Empire State Building, you will now see part of this development,” said Tara Kelly, vice president of policy and programs at the Municipal Art Society, which has done in-house modeling of the project.

The high-rises at 260 South St., which is now a parking lot, are one of three proposed projects in the area known as Two Bridges for its proximity to the Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges.

The towers, one at 62 stories and the other at 69, will share the same four-story base. Another rental building, a “super tall” 1,008-foot tower at 247 Cherry St. would have 79 floors. A third rental building of up to 62 stories is proposed for 259 Clinton St.

The developments have generated intense opposition by residents.

“You have 6,000 new people coming to the neighborhood that was inundated by Sandy,” Kelly said. “We really think that this is something that requires much more community input, much further study.”

The city Planning Commission is expected to vote on the projects, but a date has not been set.

I"m pretty sure it's the view of the bridge between the buildings that people (most of them anyway) are focused on. I've even seen paintings of it , with no ESB in sight. But the whole thing is ridiculous. There are a number of views of the ESB that will be blocked by various developments.

[chris08876]

Its incredibly selfish. Blocking views? Though luck!

Can't just hold up housing and future opportunity for the sake of the views for a select group of folks.

No one is entitled to shit. The entitlement is through the roof with these folks. They really need their ego dissolved and to realize that they are shit in life. They need to see the bigger picture of how a city works.

If everybody was to bitch about having their views blocked, and let's say these opinions were actually protected meaning blocking developments, the city would come to a standstill.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Famous view of Empire State Building could soon be ruined

Eh, I can look at it from elsewhere. Build away

[NYguy]

I'm posting this one just for the clueless comments, though some will make you want to scratch your eyes out.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ng-threat.html

Concrete bungle: Outrage over plans to block one of New York's most famous views of the Empire State Building with two new skyscrapers

By DAILYMAIL.COM REPORTER
25 November 2018

One of New York's most iconic views is in danger of disappearing completely. Tourists have headed to Brooklyn's Dumbo neighborhood for decades to photograph the Empire State Building from afar, perfectly framed by the Manhattan Bridge arch. But this beloved landmark could be ruined due to a new city proposal for three brand new high-rise buildings in Manhattan's Two Bridges neighborhood.

'A person standing on the street...where previously you would see the Empire State Building, you will now see part of this development', Municipal Art Society spokesman Tara Kelly told the New York Post.

Some commentary...

Larry718, Queens, United States, 29 minutes ago
More people into and already overcrowded and crumbling transit system?!! I'm sure Mayor DeBozo $$$$$ is all for it

Paul118, Belfast, Ireland, 51 minutes ago
Invest in nearby cities and districts instead of building on top of each other in NYC

I.get.back.up.again, Chester, United Kingdom, 6 hours ago
I visited New York for the first time this year and was shocked at how much building work was being done. Building work everywhere

NorCaliGirl, San Francisco, 6 hours ago
Too much development is ruining this once-beautiful jewel of a city

Neil Loot, london, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
...but it was development that made the city a "jewel" ... can't have both ways.

texusa, Houston, United States, 7 hours ago
The cesspool gets deeper

AHA001, Dallas, United States, 7 hours ago
Well, where else are all of those new Amazon employees supposed to go? (This eye-roll is for you, Jeff B.)

Batangtramo, Downtown Los Angeles, United States, 8 hours ago
Are they serious? They're making all this noise for the "view?"

Scott, Dallas, United States, 8 hours ago
New York is already a sewer. What difference will a few new buildings make?

Wethree, Trinity, United States, 6 hours ago
There is no sun on most blocks. Most apartments don't get natural sun light either. Unless you are rich enough to have an apartment taller than those surrounding or by Central Park, and the others, you're in perpetual shadows.

Jillian B, Omaha USA, 3 hours ago
I live in the Midwest, and that sounds awful. Blue skies as far as the eye can see and tons of green space. NYC is still a magical city to me, but I'd get claustrophobic real fast if I lived there.

Chavonne, Eversville - NY, 11 hours ago
Neither Brooklyn nor Manhattan need 6,000 new residents

Panem Et Circenses, Washington DC, United States, 11 hours ago
Iconic view, eh? First time I've seen it in my 58 years.

Michael of NJ, Princeton, United States, 12 hours ago
Everyone wants economic development and jobs, just not the consequences. Money is the only language that counts in NYC

jls13, Glassboro, United States, 12 hours ago
Wait, we're having a debate about a "popular Instagram spot"?! Seriously?! Build your buildings, guys. Stop doing it for the 'gram

njchick89, Burlington Nj, United States, 13 hours ago
given past history do they really think its smart to build matching buildings?

Bane Of Sterling, Sterling, United States, 13 hours ago
I'm pretty sure no one has a legal right to a view. If the new buildings meet zoning requirements they will go up.

Truth_is_here, Truthville, United States, 14 hours ago
Waahhh our view means more than progress. Quit crying and move so you can get a better view of the Empire state building.

D.Lareme, Golden West, United States, 15 hours ago
As if other sky scrapers or the Empire State Building are not blocking a view.

meldrewv, Shropshire countryside, United Kingdom, 15 hours ago
I'll keep the trees, rolling fields, birds and sheep cheers. Must be so miserable packed into concrete and steel

Violet, Tornado Alley, United States, 15 hours ago
Everything boho & affordable in NYC gets gentrified. The East Village, DUMBO, LIC. Why they think it's a good idea to put giant towers so close to lower Mnht? Short memories

tjb001, NYC, United States, 16 hours ago
Ridiculous, it's not like the Brooklyn Bridge or the Empire State Building were placed in their positions to create this view...it was serendipity. NYC needs housing, preferably for the poor and middle-class, but more nonetheless

Gulf Pundit, West Coast of the East Coast, United States, 33 minutes ago
No doubt someone was 'outraged' over the size and scope of the Empire State building almost ninety years ago. The only permanent feature of the NYC skyline is change, and it is an integral part of the city's dynamism.

Some images from the FEIS...

[NYguy]

Now you see it...


https://www.instagram.com/p/Bo_WGZPH1Af/




Now you don't....


https://www.instagram.com/p/BqZFUlEHd7w/




Sometimes you won't...


https://www.instagram.com/p/BoGFNa7grg0/

[yankeesfan1000]

In related news, I've emailed the city council member who covers this district, Margaret Chin, three times to explain how she can claim to be an advocate for affordable housing and making housing more affordable, while proactively trying to block the construction of hundreds of affordable units, and thousands of market rate units in these towers.

Shocker, I have not heard back from her office. I don't know if it does anything, but I would encourage other members to do the same.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000

In related news, I've emailed the city council member who covers this district, Margaret Chin, three times to explain how she can claim to be an advocate for affordable housing and making housing more affordable, while proactively trying to block the construction of hundreds of affordable units, and thousands of market rate units in these towers.

Shocker, I have not heard back from her office. I don't know if it does anything, but I would encourage other members to do the same.

She's too busy dealing with the very NIMBYs she's incited. Those chickens have come home to roost....



http://thevillager.com/2018/11/23/ac...ridges-towers/

Activists slam Chin for ‘supporting’ Two Bridges towers





November 23, 2018
BY SYDNEY PEREIRA

A faction of Lower East Side and Chinatown activists filed an “ethics complaint” against Councilmember Margaret Chin last Wednesday. At a rally announcing the filing, some called Chin a “criminal” and slammed her for what they see as her support for four proposed megatowers in the Two Bridges neighborhood.

For months, various community groups have protested the proposed towers, which are planned for the angle between the Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges.

Chin and Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer have led a charge to slow the multibuilding project, or at least gain leverage through a text amendment filed with the Department of City Planning to force the plan through a lengthier review process, the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure, or ULURP.

But activists call the politicians’ push for ULURP “phony,” dismissing it as a way for Chin to negotiate with developers for “crumbs,” according to David Tieu, an organizer with the Coalition to Protect Chinatown and the Lower East Side.

“All [Chin] wants to do is change the process,” Tieu said. “But it doesn’t matter what process these developments go through. The matter of the fact is that these buildings are illegal.”

Tieu and other organizers filed an ethics complaint with the City Council’s Standards and Ethics Committee, chaired by Staten Island Councilmember Steven Matteo, the Council’s minority leader. Chin also serves on the committee.

However, the ethics complaint proved ineffective — as the City Council promptly rejected the charge.

Jacob Tugendrajch, a City Council spokesperson, said in a statement, “Disagreements between community organizations and councilmembers over land-use decisions do not fall under the purview of the Committee on Standards and Ethics.”

Councilmember Matteo wrote the coalition’s Tieu last Fri., Nov. 16, saying he had reviewed the allegations.

“It is not the responsibility of the committee to investigate policy or land-use disagreements between members of the Council and the public,” Matteo wrote.

A Chin spokesperson called the activists’ action “disturbing” and its timing “suspicious.”

“This shameless attempt to distract communities is disturbing, especially at such a critical moment in our efforts to save the Two Bridges neighborhood from the threat of out-of-scale luxury overdevelopment — a moment that requires all of us to be awake, alert and united,” said Ian Chan. “The timing of this action is suspicious, given that we are continuing to mount pressure on City Planning to give this community a fair chance to stop these proposals.”

The project includes an 80-story building at 247 Cherry St., by JDS Development Group; 63- and 70-story towers at 260 South St., by L+M Development Partners and the CIM Group; and a 62-story tower at 259 Clinton St., by the Starrett Group. The projects are being grouped together as a so-called Large-Scale Residential Development, or L.S.R.D., application.

The Department of City Planning has said the developers’ application is valid as a “minor modification” — a technicality that has kept the projects out of ULURP thus far and gives the City Planning Commission a final say.

At the rally at 250 Broadway last Wed., Nov. 14, Tieu led chants, yelling, “Who’s the criminal? Margaret Chin!” Tieu also attempted to hand-deliver an “ethics complaint” that he and two co-organizers also e-mailed to the City Council. The group spared Brewer from criticism at the rally, however.

Co-organizer Antonio Queylin expressed his frustrations with another project — the first megatower in the area to have “topped-out,” One Manhattan Square, by Extell. Despite including 200 units of affordable housing in an adjacent, separate building, the Extell tower is seen by much of the community as a luxury building fitted with a private bowling alley, pool and basketball court, isolated from the surrounding largely low-income community of color. And, of course, the affordable housing is an entirely separate building.

The four proposed Two Bridges developments will have around 700 units of affordable housing, the largest infusion in Manhattan in decades. In terms of eligibility, the affordable units are expected to be rented to individuals earning either 40, 60 or 120 percent of area median income, or A.M.I.

But, echoing the skepticism that has been voiced during the yearslong process, Queylin said, “They say ‘affordable,’ but it’s not affordable.”

[Zapatan]

That'd be so awesome if all those towers get built.

[NYguy]

https://therealdeal.com/2018/12/05/c...o-bridges/amp/

City Planning approves controversial trio of resi towers in Two Bridges
Projects will add 3K units, including 700 affordable units


E.B. SOLOMONT
DEC 5, 2018

After a bitter and drawn-out review process, the city approved a trio of large-scale residential towers on the Lower East Side waterfront on Wednesday.

In a 10-to-3 vote, the City Planning Commission voted in favor of a controversial application, filed jointly by four developers, to build three residential towers in Two Bridges that together will add 3,000 housing units to the neighborhood. They include JDS Development’s 1,000-unit rental tower at 247 Cherry Street; L+M Development and CIM Group’s 798-foot tower at 260 South Street; and Starrett Corporation’s 730-foot building at 259 Clinton Street.

Combined, the projects represent $4.5 billion worth of investment in the neighborhood, and would add nearly 700 affordable units.

In casting her “yes” vote, CPC Chair Marisa Lago said that from a legal standpoint, the buildings comply with underlying zoning rules in the district. “This is nonetheless a challenging situation because the proposed buildings aren’t minor in scale and will affect the surrounding neighborhood.”

But she cited several benefits to the neighborhood, including wheelchair access to the East Broadway subway station, new public space and the addition of nearly 700 affordable units — “a truly rare opportunity” to add affordable housing in Lower Manhattan. “This represents the largest privately-financed affordable housing development in the city’s history,” she said.

[jackster99]

^Hell yah!!

[Zapatan]

Oh hell yea they did!

Good to know more "affordable" housing is coming to NYC

[chris08876]

Its going to completely transform the LES skyline. I mean, just look what One Manhattan Square has done to it. This is indeed an early Christmas present. A victory for affordable housing, a victory for the future of the LES.

[jackster99]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Its going to completely transform the LES skyline. I mean, just look what One Manhattan Square has done to it. This is indeed an early Christmas present. A victory for affordable housing, a victory for the future of the LES.

It will be incredible if all of these approved towers rise at the same time. It will be like Hudson Yards 2.0