#15 on the proposed list.
What’s interesting is that there wasn’t big projects here before. You would assume the bridges area would be a hot spot for development. Oh well.
This project could be interesting. I wonder if more supertalls will pop up nearby?
It will likely be more context and filler in the area, but I could see a couple more standouts in the area as well. Anything to visually connect/tie in this area with the financial district and I am good!
Is there anything major proposed closer to the Manhattan Bridge?
What you should say is not yet. With the amount of development happening I won’t be surprised if something will soon be proposed
I can’t wait!!! The green terracotta is gonna make it one of the most unique buildings in Manhattan.
Oh come on. Wtf. Hopefully they can get pass this. I’m tired of this NIMBYism BS. Nonstop cycle at this point.
Aww shoot, here we go again.
General vibes with the LES towers and the legal battles.
These will rise in time but damn… they are making it a struggle.
They should think about what they could build on their legal land area.
changed back Hmm. I put this thread under “NIMBY Watch” because there are continual lawsuits being thrown at it, the “green amendment” being invoked because people think that construction will cause residents in the area to get asthma, when the FDR Drive is literally next door to their neighborhood with trucks blasting by. Why aren’t they invoking the green amendment to remove the FDR DRIVE? Idiocy.
Also… the leaseholder is suing. So now it has a zoning issue attached to it as well.
So in all, this development is currently being scourged by full force NIMBYism. But this has been going on for years, ever since the plans came out. Hopefully Extell/developers figure their way through these different issues.
Source: State’s ‘Green Amendment’ Evoked in Lawsuit Against Two Bridges Mega-Development – Streetsblog New York City
I don’t know if this tower or even 259 Clinton St was included in the lawsuit (the Green Amendment one) filed with 260 South St. Generally, I’m not even aware of any recent lawsuits with this project in particular, they are only legal setbacks, not lawsuits.
I don’t like nimby-ism ideology either, but this recent setback doesn’t sound like an issue of nimby-ism, it seems like JDS was trying to move forward with the project without the permission of the leaseholder/others and acted as if they were just onboard without question. That’s not nimbyism, I wouldn’t want someone building something on top of me without permission. So yes, that is a zoning issue, but not one attached to normal NIMBY complaints like the green amendment lawsuit entails.
Overall, it seems like Chetrit’s 260 South St project has been the one to meet the most legal challenges of all the Two Bridge developments, much more than this project (JDS) and 259 Clinton St/One Manhattan Square (both Extell).
Oooh, okay. Hopefully these events don’t deter the development in general. I’m hoping they find a way to build around the disputed lot.
No commercial vehicles allowed on the FDR. That might make this construction worse for asthma than the FDR.