HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


    20 Times Square in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #241  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2013, 9:30 AM
Perklol's Avatar
Perklol Perklol is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by tone99loc View Post
Attracts vagrants (for decades), this might be unavoidable
The corner around 8th Avenue on 42nd street right next to the north wing can get pretty "rough". I'm not sure who would want to work or walk around there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #242  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2013, 6:28 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 26,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eveningsong View Post
The corner around 8th Avenue on 42nd street right next to the north wing can get pretty "rough". I'm not sure who would want to work or walk around there.
Some of the highest office and retail rents in Manhattan are on 42nd/8th. It hasn't been remotely rough in at least 20 years.

Now back in the 70's, definitely, and the 80's, to a lesser extent, yeah. The Deuce was rough. By the 90's the area was just fine. Now you have blue chip companies paying sky-high office rents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #243  
Old Posted Jul 28, 2013, 8:59 PM
Perklol's Avatar
Perklol Perklol is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Some of the highest office and retail rents in Manhattan are on 42nd/8th. It hasn't been remotely rough in at least 20 years.

Now back in the 70's, definitely, and the 80's, to a lesser extent, yeah. The Deuce was rough. By the 90's the area was just fine. Now you have blue chip companies paying sky-high office rents.
Fair enough, it's not that bad but it does make the area undesirable
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #244  
Old Posted Jul 29, 2013, 7:14 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 48,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
Some of the highest office and retail rents in Manhattan are on 42nd/8th. It hasn't been remotely rough in at least 20 years.
Exactly. All it takes is a simple walk of the area. Now, if you don't like a sea of tourists, that's one thing. But image of the bus terminal and the area around it is clearly outdated from some.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #245  
Old Posted Jul 29, 2013, 7:41 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 41,906
The whole area is full of new developments especially 42nd street. The canyon has been make fully that extends from the east to west of the island.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #246  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 12:53 AM
Hypothalamus's Avatar
Hypothalamus Hypothalamus is offline
Homo sapiens sapiens
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 3rd planet from the Sun
Posts: 1,666
Crain's New York:

Port commish wants new bus terminal, not WTC
A Port Authority official calls for switching funds from World Trade Center rebuilding to a billion-dollar expansion of the badly overcrowded station that serves 200,000 commuters a day.

BY DANIEL GEIGER
MARCH 21, 2014 1:42 P.M.




Quote:
After years of complaining about the ever-longer lines of buses queued up to get into the overcrowded Port Authority Bus Terminal, local landlords, residents and transit advocates picked up a powerful ally. He is Kenneth Lipper, a former Wall Street executive, deputy mayor under Ed Koch and board member since June of the terminal's owner, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

"We have to bring an end to the idling of all these buses on the streets," Mr. Lipper told Crain's. "I would like to see a brand-new bus terminal, a 21st-century terminal that would be an economic catalyst for the whole development of the West Side as well as a facility that would better accommodate the 65 million riders that come into it each year."

Building it, however, would take $1 billion or more. That is money that the Port Authority—which has already lavished $7.7 billion on rebuilding the World Trade Center site and is funding everything including a massive rehab of LaGuardia Airport and three major bridges—can ill afford.


The need, however, is clear. Opened 64 years ago, the terminal struggles to accommodate the roughly 8,000 buses—as many as 400 an hour--that enter and exit it daily, carrying more than 200,000 mostly New Jersey-based commuters.

But during rush hour, particularly in the evening, 175 or more buses emerging from the Lincoln Tunnel roll not into the terminal but onto surrounding streets. There, belching diesel fumes, they wait their turn to enter, according to Christine Berthet, chairwoman of Community Board 4.

"The amount of buses in the area in recent years has gotten larger," said Ms. Berthet, who lives just two blocks south of the terminal. She said the growing number of businesses and people moving into the area have added their voices to the chorus of complaints.

Now proponents of a fix hope that Mr. Lipper's position could draw attention to the tide of buses parked illegally along West Side arteries, such as 10th Avenue from West 35th to West 42nd streets, snarling traffic and blighting the streetscape. For years, the problem could be brushed off because the Hudson rail yards lay at the periphery of the city, but no longer. Last week, work began on what will become the largest construction project in the country—beginning with a $700 million platform over the eastern rail yards on which the Related Cos. will build millions of square feet of new office, retail and public space.

7-line extension

"Would people tolerate this if it was happening on Park Avenue? Absolutely not," said Jeffrey Katz, chief executive of Sherwood Equities, a real estate investment and development firm that owns several properties in the Hudson Yards area. "It's very impactful to have an important person like Ken Lipper highlight this issue."

Mr. Katz and Ms. Berthet and others hope that Mr. Lipper's comments will also be a harbinger of an about-face for the Port Authority. Although an agency study of potential improvements to the terminal is due next year, the authority failed to fund any upgrades to the facility in its recent $27.6 billion, 10-year capital plan.

Mr. Lipper wants the agency to do it in part by shifting money away from the World Trade Center site. There, the authority is weighing a proposal to provide a guarantee of nearly $1.2 billion in order to allow construction of another office tower, 3 World Trade Center.

Additional money for the terminal project could come from the sale of the millions of square feet of commercial air rights over the bus terminal to developers and through federal transit funds.

"I believe we could put a credible financing package together," Mr. Lipper said.

An ad hoc group of executives and community leaders who have spearheaded opposition to the bus traffic have their eyes on an even more dramatic fix.

The group--which includes Mr. Katz and Ms. Berthet as well as Ann Weisbrod, former head of the Hudson Yards Development Corp., and Jerry Gottesman, chairman of Edison Properties—is trying to raise support for a multibillion-dollar plan to extend the No. 7 subway line under the Hudson River to Secaucus, N.J.

According to Sandy Hornick, a former planner at the Department of City Planning who is also part of the group, if that extension were built, as much as 20% of the New Jersey buses that pile into the terminal could avoid ever having to cross the river, depositing riders instead at the Secaucus depot for a train ride to Manhattan.

"That's a lot of buses that would disappear," Mr. Hornick said. "It would free up everything: the streets, the terminal, the Lincoln Tunnel. It's the best solution for the long term."

The group successfully lobbied Mayor Michael Bloomberg to fund a $250,000 preliminary study of the tunnel and extension that was released last year. It is now looking for $2 million to conduct a more in-depth study that would be a necessary prerequisite for the project to move forward.


Official response

So far, the group says Mayor Bill de Blasio has not expressed interest, nor have other key officials, such as Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Members of the panel are optimistic, however, that government leaders will begin to take notice and act.

"Getting the No. 7 extension to Secaucus off the ground is a big undertaking," said Mr. Gottesman, who owns property in Secaucus and on the West Side. "But I am convinced that after a year or two of lobbying, we'll begin to gain traction, or else I wouldn't be doing this."

For the time being, Mr. Katz and Ms. Berthet are also lobbying for short-term fixes—particularly better, more centralized management of the bus traffic.

"Right now it's like [the Port Authority] is operating an airport without an air-traffic controller," Ms. Berthet said.

Mr. Katz said he spoke with officials from the Port Authority and New Jersey Transit, which runs the majority of the commuter buses coming to the terminal, but has not been able to get them to alter their parking habits.

Buses frequently sit at the curb in front of a West 35th Street parking lot that Mr. Katz owns, on which he hopes to eventually build a residential tower. Cars are blocked from using the lot as a result.

"We don't want to sue, but we absolutely will if we have to," Mr. Katz said. "Hopefully, all the parties will be able to figure out a better solution."
__________________
“If I have done the public any service, it is due to my patient thought.” ― Isaac Newton

~ My Stamford, CT Thread ~~ My Danbury, CT Thread ~

Last edited by Hypothalamus; Mar 23, 2014 at 8:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #247  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 2:49 AM
Towersteve Towersteve is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubeworm View Post
Crain's New York:

Port commish wants new bus terminal, not WTC
A Port Authority official calls for switching funds from World Trade Center rebuilding to a billion-dollar expansion of the badly overcrowded station that serves 200,000 commuters a day.

BY DANIEL GEIGER
MARCH 21, 2014 1:42 P.M.


Great idea. Plenty of towers are going up that can be supported privately. The 7 (or PATH) to NJ and bus terminal are desperately needed. If 3 WTC can't be built with public funds let's put it aside until it can be properly developed privately.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #248  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 3:09 AM
Tectonic Tectonic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 428
Could the sell the rights to build on top of it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #249  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 3:50 AM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,728
I believe so, since it is the PA, and they can basically do whatever they want. I think PA sites technically have no FAR limits, so theoretically they could 'generate' millions of new development rights.

I wonder why De Blasio has not taken that tact in terms of creating new housing... there are loopholes to the system/zoning and sites around the key PA locations (the WTC and the Bus Terminal) would be excellent for tens of thousands of new units.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #250  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 4:39 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by babybackribs2314 View Post
I believe so, since it is the PA, and they can basically do whatever they want. I think PA sites technically have no FAR limits, so theoretically they could 'generate' millions of new development rights.

I wonder why De Blasio has not taken that tact in terms of creating new housing... there are loopholes to the system/zoning and sites around the key PA locations (the WTC and the Bus Terminal) would be excellent for tens of thousands of new units.
That's my understanding too. It's not a coincidence that the Port Authority is looking to maximize profit potential of its westside real estate while also calling for a new bus terminal.

This could be huge!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #251  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 4:55 AM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 41,906
^^^^

Lets hope so. The terminal is overdue for a expansion given the sheer volume it receives. This might become a possible super tall for all we know.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #252  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 5:01 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,834
Interesting read about Bloomberg's plan for a 7 line extension to Secaucus and what it means for the PABT.

Quote:
An ad hoc group of executives and community leaders who have spearheaded opposition to the bus traffic have their eyes on an even more dramatic fix.

The group--which includes Mr. Katz and Ms. Berthet as well as Ann Weisbrod, former head of the Hudson Yards Development Corp., and Jerry Gottesman, chairman of Edison Properties—is trying to raise support for a multibillion-dollar plan to extend the No. 7 subway line under the Hudson River to Secaucus, N.J.

According to Sandy Hornick, a former planner at the Department of City Planning who is also part of the group, if that extension were built, as much as 20% of the New Jersey buses that pile into the terminal could avoid ever having to cross the river, depositing riders instead at the Secaucus depot for a train ride to Manhattan.

"That's a lot of buses that would disappear," Mr. Hornick said. "It would free up everything: the streets, the terminal, the Lincoln Tunnel. It's the best solution for the long term."

The group successfully lobbied Mayor Michael Bloomberg to fund a $250,000 preliminary study of the tunnel and extension that was released last year. It is now looking for $2 million to conduct a more in-depth study that would be a necessary prerequisite for the project to move forward.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #253  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 5:04 AM
Perklol's Avatar
Perklol Perklol is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 1,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris08876 View Post
^^^^

Lets hope so. The terminal is overdue for a expansion given the sheer volume it receives. This might become a possible super tall for all we know.
I agree. They should at least redevelop the north wing and then the rest.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #254  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 4:52 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 26,903
This desperately needs to happen. The PA doesn't need to follow NYC zoning laws, so it's absurd they're sitting on a goldmine next to Times Square that could generate billions if sold to developers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #255  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 6:41 PM
sparkling's Avatar
sparkling sparkling is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
Interesting read about Bloomberg's plan for a 7 line extension to Secaucus and what it means for the PABT.
Is extending the subway into NJ really the best way to reduce congestion? It would cost billions and take probably up to a decade to build whereas other alternatives may be cheaper and faster to complete. Supposedly, the subway would reduce the number of buses coming in Manhattan by 20% so can't they just construct a small bus terminal on the jersey shore to accommodate the buses coming from a few Jersey city (speaking about 20% of all buses) and have speed ferries bringing these people to manhattan, near Hudson Yards so they can quickly get on the 7th train. In need be, an additional tunnel from the river to 8th Av might be drilled to increase subway capacity but in case that's needed, it will be far quicker and cheaper than drilling all the way to NJ.
I have to say, I am no urban planner, have no idea if my plan makes sense or is feasible, but these massive gazzilion dollar public projects always end up way over budget and behind schedule. Just my two cents
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #256  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 7:09 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by sparkling View Post
Is extending the subway into NJ really the best way to reduce congestion? It would cost billions and take probably up to a decade to build whereas other alternatives may be cheaper and faster to complete. Supposedly, the subway would reduce the number of buses coming in Manhattan by 20% so can't they just construct a small bus terminal on the jersey shore to accommodate the buses coming from a few Jersey city (speaking about 20% of all buses) and have speed ferries bringing these people to manhattan, near Hudson Yards so they can quickly get on the 7th train. In need be, an additional tunnel from the river to 8th Av might be drilled to increase subway capacity but in case that's needed, it will be far quicker and cheaper than drilling all the way to NJ.
I have to say, I am no urban planner, have no idea if my plan makes sense or is feasible, but these massive gazzilion dollar public projects always end up way over budget and behind schedule. Just my two cents
I'll add that it's not just PABT riders, that really a small side benefit. The 7 line extension would primarily be to reduce the amount of NJT trans heading into Penn Station, which is already severely congested. IIRC, 200,000 daily riders pass through Seacacus Junction. Some of which would transfer to the 7. The 7 line extension should be considered as an alternative to the defunct ARC project and evaluated against Gateway since they're designed for similar purposes. A new tunnel under the Hudson is absolutely needed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #257  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 8:01 PM
sparkling's Avatar
sparkling sparkling is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 765
Quote:
Originally Posted by CIA View Post
I'll add that it's not just PABT riders, that really a small side benefit. The 7 line extension would primarily be to reduce the amount of NJT trans heading into Penn Station, which is already severely congested. IIRC, 200,000 daily riders pass through Seacacus Junction. Some of which would transfer to the 7. The 7 line extension should be considered as an alternative to the defunct ARC project and evaluated against Gateway since they're designed for similar purposes. A new tunnel under the Hudson is absolutely needed.
Hi CIA, I simply don't like the idea of drilling a new tunnel-too much money and time and it will only handle small percentage of the NJ commuters. if we can come up with better alternatives to get these people here quickly without breaking the bank, I will be a happy panda. Are there any other viable alternatives than building that subway extension though, I am not so sure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #258  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2014, 9:06 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,834
Sparkling, are you aware of Gateway?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_Project

The 7 line extension is unlikely to happen anytime soon, but a new tunnel under the Hudson likely will be built in the near future. The current tunnels are all nearing or at capacity. A tunnel was funded as part of the ARC project until Christie pulled the plug.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #259  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2014, 1:26 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 48,775
^ Let's not get off topic with this rail discussion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tectonic View Post
Could the sell the rights to build on top of it?
That's been the plan all along, the only difference being that the plan was to build directly above the terminal. That's been the intent since the extension was built, but it has never happened.


Quote:
The proposed air rights development will add approximately 1.3 million square feet of sustainable first-class office space above the terminal and allow for significant improvements to the terminal facility, including new mass transit opportunities for commuters through increased bus capacity and the renovation of approximately 40,000 square feet within the existing North Wing for retail use.

Theoretically, it would be easier to sell the air rights to build off site, but consider the immediate area where the development rights could go. There is a site directly south of the terminal that could benefit from an air rights transfer. Once they sale the air rights off site, the developers would then have to follow City zoning.










But for now, it's just an idea.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #260  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2014, 10:17 PM
NYrocks NYrocks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2
Is the development above the Port Authority Bus Terminal still a possibility? I think someone had posted about the planned having been shelved (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/ny...-terminal.html), and about the new development using the 20TS name, but their posts were moved / deleted.

Personally, I wouldn't want to skip out at lunch to find a bite to eat around there. I'd come back into work in a bad mood every afternoon. I'm not sure whether it's the weight or the type of pedestrian traffic which is the cause. <he says trying not to sound snobbish or alarmist>
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:21 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.