Seems the glass is all in
18 Likes
I have a Love / Hate relationship with this building (along with 2966 JFK Blvd). LOVE the design & aesthetics, especially those striking angular balconies; HATE that it blocked the view I had of Hudson Yards from my Apt. 
17 Likes
Great pic! Sucks you lost the Hudson yards view. And you will also lose the rest of midtown as imperial tower rises. 
4 Likes
'Twas fun while it lasted 
And to add insult to injury, if 1 JSQ Plaza (2565 JFK) gets built then I’ll loose my remaining views of North Jersey, the Hackensack River and American Dream 
4 Likes
Good reason to ask the landlord for a discount next lease renewal
5 Likes
I truly do not know what to say about the facade of this building. Confusing, perplexing, uninspiring, over-the-top, nonsensical. The lines, the lines the lines, oh no!! THE LINES!!!. Sorry, I got carried away! LOL. Before the facade I thought it had a lot of potential and was looking forward to its completion. Not now.
The facade isn’t even fully installed yet so I don’t recommend being overly critical of the outward appearance just yet. From a quick observation of the photos, they’re putting what I assume is similar to tyvek waterproofing underneath of where the facade will actually be installed.
One of the renderings, for example, shows something completely different because it isn’t even finished yet.
7 Likes
Thanks, I guess I missed the rendering. It makes much more sense now, and, I’ll admit, I should know better than to judge before it is finished. The haphazardness of the vertical lines just thru me for a loop. Shit, I sound so old! Ha ha ha.
5 Likes
Still wondering why the exterior of this building is taking so long to complete. My optimistic assumption is that since these are residential condos instead of rentals, the developer is investing more time and care into the structure
1 Like
Are they condos?! I always thought they are rentals, and thought they were just slow because they are newer developer to JC.
1 Like
So far the wording that’s been used (online) to describe the units are “residential” instead of using “rentals” too. Also, the ratio of units vs. floors is lower than buildings of similar height which means they’re not cramming as many apartments as possible in a single floor - something that’s too common in rental buildings. But I guess we’ll get more details once construction is close to the finish line 
1 Like
One thing that makes me think they are rentals: would be rare to see condos with zero parking like this. This developer is not exactly new to JC but has mostly done much smaller projects, mostly 2-family Bayonne boxes so it makes sense they ran into snags. GN Management. Their website it says the developer started out pumping gas at a gas station when he came to the US. Amazing story.
4 Likes
I believe they are condos!
If you look up the address/tower name, it comes up as a condo building on a site called livabl. I also thought on GN Management it was explicitly referenced as a condominium at some point.
Its possible they are converting it to rentals, but all press so far has definitely referred to this as a condo building. Whenever press uses “residential units” with no mention of rentals, it’s usually a condo building.
2 Likes
Thanks, it’s fascinating! I’ll assume you guys are right! If so, this will by far be the biggest car-free condo building in JC.
2 Likes
Just do want to make sure we are careful when using livabl as a source. It has 413 Summit as condos and it’s a rental building.
3 Likes
Good catch. I guess we’ll find out in a few months whenever they start pre-listing (either on rental sites or condo sites)
2 Likes