And why can’t we build huge mixed use arcologies like Tokyo Midtown or Roppongi Hills? It’ll put less pressure on the subway if people don’t have to ride it to go from home to work or shop.
2 Likes
That’s the kind of stuff I wonder. I keep saying, a lot of this housing crisis is self-induce or at least a huge element in the equation. Why on Earth we don’t build big and the type of mass units needed is beyond me. And I’m not even kidding when I say large amounts of units are build else wear. Aside from East Asia, even bloody Egypt has things on a large scale. 12k units is a slap in the face given the scarcity of land. Even in Manhattan, towers less than 700 units are just a terrible misallocation of land.
These units could be build in walk able areas too with good transit options.The city needs to rethink its zoning. Under Bloomberg, swatches were rezoned, but it needs to go further.
The market for rent able units $1700-3000/month is massive. A niche target range that would do very well if the supply was there. Likewise for purchasable units between $300k-1mil. Only way to make some of these developments worthwhile is to increase the unit counts. Developers will build, if the city doesn’t restrict the potential.
Would be nice if FAR in some districts went away. Rezoning needs to be re looked at. Hopefully we will get a mayor and administration with a grand vision in due time.
Hopefully some politician is reading this post. We need bigger ideas!
When I see people leaving NYC, that is a failure right there. Eh… here’s to wishful thinking I guess.
It should really be 120k affordable and then add market rate to help fund some of the buildout. Especially if they are talking a new train line.
1 Like
unless there’s a Robert Moses waiting in the wings that we don’t know about, the SY will take a century to even come close to filling out…surely our housing crisis will by that time surpass our penchant for failed 20th century ideologies with “a post modernist twist”…no?
You think that with all of the money from the new real estate they’d at least be able to completely cover the tracks instead of leaving that open gash down the middle.
2 Likes
This is a joke. There’s no will in our leadership to tackle problems aggressively. Deliberate mediocrity.
The report mentions that they’ve been talking extensively with Amtrak and MTA engineers and determined that only 80% of the yards could be decked over. I’d like a look at the details of their findings. There would obviously be operational issues caused by building a deck over the main line; shutting down Amtrak and the LIRR into Manhattan for the duration of construction would obviously be fraught, but that’s a political calculation, not an engineering one.
Setting that aside then, it appears the primary engineering issue is the grade of the main line tracks. They’re much higher than the tracks to the North, as illustrated in this cross section from the executive summary:
The proposed at-grade pedestrian and vehicular bridges over the main line are possible because they can be suspended from overhead, but a deck would need a large support structure, and would therefore have to be much higher than the first deck.
A quick and dirty cut/paste to illustrate:
So you wouldn’t get a continuous streetscape from end to end. More like a wall or artificial hill that street traffic would need to ascend and descend again, just to cross the neighborhood. Tbh, I agree with the logic here: an open train trench with at-grade bridges is preferable to a forced ascent-and-descent.
I guess the alternative would be re-grading the main line to make the whole yard flat. I’m sure the funds could be procured thanks to all the prime real estate getting created… but again, to do so would presumably mean shutting down the Acela and the LIRR for however many years that project would take.
5 Likes
I wonder if they could build a tunnel to run the tracks through whilst leaving whats there open until the tunnel is finished (since the tracks eventually go to a tunnel anyways). I assume the extra real estate alone wouldn’t cover the additional cost but over a long period of time the taxes could (maybe? idk; I guess not having an noisy open track would also make the adjacent land increase in value)
And since this is all a pipe dream anyways maybe the space once occupied by the tracks could serve as an overflow storage system for street drains during heavy rain/floods.
5 Likes
1 Like
3 Likes
I’d love to see Javits moved here (obviously after decking) and increased to be even bigger than Mccormick Place in Chicago.
I don’t want to see any new housing impacted though, but I think there’s enough track space for both.
And ofc this wouldn’t happen for a long while, Javits had a huge expansion recently and sunnyside isn’t even decked over yet.
2 Likes
- Amtrak is also planning major upgrades at Sunnyside Yardthat will enable more efficient maintenance practices and prepare for new trains scheduled to enter service in the coming years. That contract award is expected later in 2024.
Source:
6 Likes