DOCSLIB.ORG

Hudson Yards FGEIS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hudson Yards FGEIS TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 3: Analytical Framework..............................................................................3-1 A. INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................3-1 B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS.....................................................................3-1 1. LEGISLATIVE APPLICABILITY......................................................................................3-1 2. GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (GEIS)..............................................3-1 3. PROCESS OVERVIEW...................................................................................................3-2 a) Establishing a Lead Agency......................................................................................................................3-2 b) Determination of Significance ..................................................................................................................3-2 c) Scoping .........................................................................................................................................................3-3 d) Preparation of the DGEIS ..........................................................................................................................3-3 e) Public Review..............................................................................................................................................3-4 f) Preparation and Completion of the FGEIS.............................................................................................3-4 g) Statement of Findings.................................................................................................................................3-4 h) Summary of SEQRA/CEQR Schedule ....................................................................................................3-5 C. COORDINATION WITH OTHER REVIEW PROCESSES.............................................3-5 1. UNIFORM LAND USE REVIEW PROCEDURE (ULURP)...................................................3-5 2. WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION..................................................................................3-6 3. EMINENT DOMAIN (CONDEMNATION) .........................................................................3-6 4. GENERAL PROJECT PLANS..........................................................................................3-7 D. LIST OF PRINCIPAL ACTIONS...................................................................................3-8 1. REZONING AND RELATED LAND USE ACTIONS.............................................................3-8 2. NO. 7 SUBWAY EXTENSION.........................................................................................3-8 3. CONVENTION CENTER EXPANSION..............................................................................3-8 4. MULTI-USE FACILITY.................................................................................................3-9 E. FRAMEWORK FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSES................................................3-9 1. SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS........................................................................3-9 2. REASONABLE WORST-CASE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO (RWCDS).............................. 3-10 3. ANALYSIS YEARS..................................................................................................... 3-20 a) 2010.............................................................................................................................................................3-20 b) 2025.............................................................................................................................................................3-20 c) Construction Periods.................................................................................................................................3-21 4. DEFINITION OF PROJECT AREA.................................................................................. 3-21 5. DEFINITION OF STUDY AREAS................................................................................... 3-22 6. DEFINITION OF THE FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION, 2010 AND 2025 .......... 3-22 a) Relationship to Other Project Area Actions.........................................................................................3-23 7. ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................ 3-24 3-i No. 7 Subway Extension—Hudson Yards Rezoning and Development Program FGEIS LIST OF TABLES TABLE 3-1 PROJECTED RESIDENTIAL POPULATION AND HOUSING UNITS.................................................................3-12 TABLE 3-2 RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE PROJECT AREA ................................................................................................3-13 TABLE 3-3 DEVELOPMENT UNDER CONSTRUCTION OR PROPOSED OUTSIDE THE PROJECT AREA EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED IN THE FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION.........................................................3-14 TABLE 3-4 2010 PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT SITES WITHOUT MSG RELOCATION ..................................................3-15 TABLE 3-5 2025 PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT SITES WITHOUT MSG RELOCATION ..................................................3-16 TABLE 3-6 2010 PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT SITES WITH MSG RELOCATION.........................................................3-17 TABLE 3-7 2025 PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT SITES WITH MSG RELOCATION.........................................................3-18 TABLE 3-8 DEVELOPMENT UNDER CONSTRUCTION OR PROPOSED IN THE PROJECT AREA AND PRIMARY STUDY AREA, EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED IN THE FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED ACTION..............3-19 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 3-1 PROJECT AREA 3-ii Chapter 3: Analytical Framework A. INTRODUCTION The No. 7 Subway Extension—Hudson Yards Rezoning and Redevelopment Program is a multifaceted and far-reaching public initiative to create the development opportunities necessary to help sustain economic growth in New York City (the City). The size and scope of the Proposed Action have led to the determination that the Proposed Action may generate significant environmental impacts and, as a result, that a comprehensive Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) should be prepared. A Generic EIS (GEIS) is an appropriate vehicle to evaluate environmental impacts of a proposed program, such as the Proposed Action, having wide applications, including new or significant changes to existing land use plans, development plans, and zoning regulations. This chapter outlines the procedural framework utilized to comply with environmental review regulations and identifies the necessary approvals, actions, and schedule to implement the Proposed Action. In addition, the chapter provides an overview of the analytical framework used to guide the GEIS technical analyses presented in subsequent chapters of this document. B. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS All agencies of government at the State, County, and local level within New York, except the State Legislature and the courts, must comply with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The City has further promulgated local regulations, the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR), to specifically implement the SEQRA for actions within the City, to take into account the special circumstances of the City. To understand the environmental consequences of their decision-making, and to afford the public an opportunity to participate in identifying such consequences, all discretionary decisions of an agency to approve, fund, or directly undertake an action are subject to review under the SEQRA/CEQR, unless explicitly excluded or exempted under the regulations. Discretionary decisions involve choices to be made by the decision-makers that determine whether and how an action (as described in Chapter 2, “Description of the Proposed Action”) is to be taken. Non-discretionary or ministerial decisions for which the only determination of an action’s approval is verification of compliance with specific and pre-determined criteria (e.g., issuance of a building permit) are not subject to the SEQRA/CEQR. Discretionary actions by numerous agencies would be required for the Proposed Action. As set forth below, the SEQRA/CEQR process for this FGEIS follows a prescribed path, to enable the agencies to make informed decisions. 1. Legislative Applicability This document has been prepared pursuant to the SEQRA, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, and its implementing regulations (6 NYCRR Part 617) and CEQR requirements as established in Executive Order No. 90, 1977, and as set forth in its implementing Rules and Procedures, Title 62, Chapter 5, of the Rules of the City of New York. 2. Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) This document has been prepared under the regulatory framework for GEISs. As described above, this framework is appropriate for decisions relating to multiple and broad actions that often cover a 3-1 No. 7 Subway Extension—Hudson Yards Rezoning and Development Program FGEIS large geographic area. In particular, the reason for preparing a GEIS under the guidelines of the SEQRA and CEQR is that there are multiple decisions associated with the Proposed Action, not all of which may be fully implemented as currently anticipated, and because some of the actions encompass a broad land area. The studies contained in this FGEIS: provide analysis criteria and assessments that enable the decision-makers to understand
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4 Anization Exempt from Incc,^ a Tax Return Of
    OMB NO ,s4s-oo47 Return of a1g4 anization Exempt From Incc,^ a Tax Form 990 Under section 501 (c), 527, or 4947(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (except black lung 2008 benefit trust or private foundation ) • . - Department of the Treasury return uirements Internal Revenue Service ► The organization9 maY have to use a coPY of this to satessatisfy state re Portm9 re4 A Cnr the innR calendar vpar nr tw voar haninninn 7/1 /9lr1R _ and Pndinn 13/3r)/9009 Please B Check if applicable C Name of organization Trustees of Princeton University-Alumni Organizations and Classes D Employer identification number use IRS Address change label or Doing Business As 22-2711242 or q Name change print Number and street (or P 0 box if mail is not delivered to street address) Room/suite E Telephone number . q Initial return See do Princeton University, 701 Carne g ie Center 438 609 258 3080 specific q Termination City or town, state or country , and ZIP + 4 Instruc- q Amended return Lions. Princeton NJ 08540 G Gross receipts $ 5 , 249 , 822 q q Application pending F Name and address of principal officer H(a) Is this a group return for affiliates ? X Yes [iii] No Shirle M Til g hman , One Nassau Hall , Princeton , NJ 08544 H(b) Are all affiliates included? q No I Tax-exempt status : qX 501 (c) ( 3) .4 (insert no.) q 4947(a)(1) or q 527 If "No," attach a list (see instructions) 9126 J Website : ► www. p rinceton . edu H (c ) Grou p exem ption number ► q of legal K Type of organization q Corporation q Trust q Association Other ► L Year of formation M State domicile Summa ry I Briefly describe the organization's mission or most significant activities : The primary_ exemptpurp_ose of the Princeton University_ _ Organizations is to further the interests and welfare of Princeton University .
    [Show full text]
  • New York Fourth Quarter 2001 Analyzes: CBD Office Retail Apartments Suburban Office Industrial Local Economy Real a Publication of the Global New York Vol
    NATIONAL REAL ESTATE INDEX M M ETRO New York ETRO Vol. 32 Fourth Quarter 2001 M M ARKET ARKET Analyzes: Reports: CBD Office Property Prices Retail Property Rents Apartments Sector Forecasts Suburban Office Demographic Highlights Industrial Job Formation Trends Local Economy Economic Base Profile Educational Achievement Tax Structure F F Quality of Life Factors ACTS ACTS A publication of the National Real Estate Index Global Real Analytics New York Vol. 32 ✯ The National Real Estate Index extends its deepest sympathies and condolences to the victims of the World Trade Center, Pentagon and Pennsylvania tragedies and their families and friends. We would also like to extend our gratitude to the rescue workers, medical personnel and other professionals and citizens who have come to the aid of those affected. Report Format This report is organized as follows. Section I costs and availability are detailed in Section VI. provides a snapshot that highlights the key eco- A series of other important factors, including nomic, demographic and real estate-related retail sales trends and international trade, are findings of the study. Sections II through IX reported in Section VII. Local and state fiscal provide an in-depth look (generally in a tabular policies, including taxes and federal spending, format) at the key economic, demographic, pub- are highlighted in Section VIII. Several key lic policy, and quality of life factors that can quality-of-life considerations are summarized in affect the demand for real estate. Section IX. In Section II, recent population trends are In Section X, local market price, rent and capi- reported. Section III analyzes the local eco- talization rate trends for the preceding 12 months nomic base and current labor force and job for- are reported.
    [Show full text]
  • Asking Rents Remain Stable Despite Faltering Leasing Activity
    MARKETVIEW SNAPSHOT Midtown Manhattan Office, May 2020 Asking rents remain stable despite faltering leasing activity Figure 1: Midtown Market Activity Apr. 2020 Mar. 2020 Apr. 2019 YTD 2019 YTD 2020 Leasing Activity 0.40 MSF 0.85 MSF 1.85 MSF 5.77 MSF 4.50 MSF Renewals 0.28 MSF 0.22 MSF 0.48 MSF 1.47 MSF 1.56 MSF Absorption (0.11) MSF (0.25) MSF 0.20 MSF (1.22) MSF (1.27) MSF Availability Rate 11.8% 11.8% 10.7% Vacancy Rate 8.0% 7.9% 7.6% Average Asking Rent $87.77 PSF $87.00 PSF $88.20 PSF Taking Rent Index 92.8% 93.2% 94.0% Source: CBRE Research, May 2020. MARKET HIGHLIGHTS • Monthly leasing activity totaled 405,000 sq. ft., 72% below the five-year monthly average of 1.43 million sq. ft. • Year-to-date leasing activity was down 22% from the same period last year. • Renewals totaled 277,000 sq. ft. in April, bringing the year-to-date total to 1.56 million sq. ft. • The availability rate was flat month-over-month but up 110 basis points (bps) year-over-year. • Net absorption was negative 109,000 sq. ft. in April, bringing the year-to-date total to negative 1.27 million sq. ft. • The average asking rent was essentially flat both month-over-month and year-over-year. • Sublease availability was 2.5%, with an average asking rent of $66.63 per sq. ft., up 18% year-over-year. Figure 2: Top Lease Transactions Size (Sq.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Securities and Exchange Commission Form
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 8-K CURRENT REPORT Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): April 26, 2012 (April 25, 2012) SL GREEN REALTY CORP. (EXACT NAME OF REGISTRANT AS SPECIFIED IN ITS CHARTER) MARYLAND (STATE OF INCORPORATION) 1-13199 13-3956775 (COMMISSION FILE NUMBER) (IRS EMPLOYER ID. NUMBER) 420 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10170 (ADDRESS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICES) (ZIP CODE) (212) 594-2700 (REGISTRANT’S TELEPHONE NUMBER, INCLUDING AREA CODE) Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions: o Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) o Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) o Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) o Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) Item 2.02. Results of Operations and Financial Condition Following the issuance of a press release on April 25, 2012 announcing the Company’s results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2012, the Company intends to make available supplemental information regarding the Company’s operations that is too voluminous for a press release. The Company is attaching the press release as Exhibit 99.1 and the supplemental package as Exhibit 99.2 to this Current Report on Form 8-K.
    [Show full text]
  • Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax
    0• • -19/ OMB No 1545-0047 Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax 009 Form 990 Under section 501(c), 527, or 4947 (a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (except black lung benefit trust or private foundation ) • . - . Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service ► The organization may have to use a copy of this return to satisfy state reporting requirements . A For the 2009 calendar year or tax year beg inning 7/1/2009 and endin 6/30/2010 Please B Check if applicable C Name of organization Trustees of Princeton Universi ty-Alumni Organizations and Classes D Employer identification number - use IRS q Address change label or Doing Business As 22-2711242 q Name change print or Number and street (or P 0 box if mall is not delivered to street address) Room/suite E Telephone number typ q Initial return See c/o Princeton Universi ty, 701 Carneg ie Center 438 (609) 258-3080 q Terminated Specific City or town , state or country, and ZIP + 4 lnstruc- q Amended return tions Princeton NJ 08540 G Gross receipts $ 5 , 529 , 459 q Application pending F Name and address of principal officer H(a) Is this a group return for affiliates? qX No IShirley M . Tilg hman , One Nassau Hall , Princeton , NJ 08544 H(b) Are all affiliates Included? q Yes 191 No I Tax-exempt status q 501 (c) ( 3) ' (Insert no) q 4947 (a)(1) or q 527 If "No," attach a list (see instructions) J Website : ► www p rinceton edu H(c) Grou exem ption number ► 9126 q q q q K Form of organization Corporation Trust Association Other ► L Year of formation M State of legal domicile Summa ry 1 Briefly describe the organization ' s mission or most significant activities .
    [Show full text]
  • Palmer's Views of New York, Past and Present
    COPy RIGHT /909 BY ROH'-HT M. PAl-WER . /A MS TZZjEB— Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library Gift of Seymour B. Durst Old York Library ov<~ £io sr fc\ \ 3 PALMER'S VIEWS- 2—PALMER'S VIEWS VIEW OF FORT AMSTERDAM on the Manhattan. (Original in Holland.) Erected 1623, finished 1635 by Gov- ernor Van Twiller. Peter Minuit bought the Island, about 22,000 acres, for $24, a few baubles, beads and some rum. VIEW OF BATTERY PARK as it appeared in the more recent past, yet a marked contrast with the present-day view as seen on opposite page, showing the Whitehall Building, etc. L PALMKR'S VIEWS— Jersey Shore. Battery Park. Pennsylvania Freight Depots. Battery Place. Washington Street. WHITEHALL BUILDING, Battery Place, West to Washington Street, overlooking Hudson River and Battery Park, twenty stories, 254 feet high; one of the most conspicuous office buildings in the city as seen from the harbor, commanding view of New York Bay, New Jersey and South Brooklyn. General offices of the Otis Elevator Co., incorporated November, 1898, with branch offices in all principal cities. Otis elevators are successfully used in the tallest structures of the largest cities in the world. Eiffel Tower, 1,000 feet high, Metropolitan Life Tower, Singer Building, Hudson Terminal Buildings, etc.. etc. 4—PALMER'S VIEWS THE OLD FORT, built by Peter Minuit, 1626, was on site of present Custom House. (A.) White house built on Strand by Governor Stuyvesant; (B.) House built by Jacob Leisler ; first brick house on Manhattan. (C.) The "Strand." now Whitehall Street; (D.) Pearl Street; (E.) Rampart, now State Street; (G.) Mouth of Broad NEW AMSTERDAM, a small city on Manhattan Island, New Holland, North America, now St.
    [Show full text]
  • Times Square Redevelopment: a Below Grade View
    Missouri University of Science and Technology Scholars' Mine International Conference on Case Histories in (2004) - Fifth International Conference on Case Geotechnical Engineering Histories in Geotechnical Engineering 15 Apr 2004, 10:45am - 12:00pm Times Square Redevelopment: A Below Grade View Tony D. Canale Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York, New York James L. Kaufman Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York, New York George J. Tamaro Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York, New York Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge Part of the Geotechnical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Canale, Tony D.; Kaufman, James L.; and Tamaro, George J., "Times Square Redevelopment: A Below Grade View" (2004). International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 6. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge/5icchge/session11/6 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. This Article - Conference proceedings is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars' Mine. It has been accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering by an authorized administrator of Scholars' Mine. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TIMES SQUARE REDEVELOPMENT: A BELOW GRADE VIEW Paper No. 11.07 Tony D. Canale, PE James L. Kaufman, PE George J. Tamaro, PE Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers New York, NY (USA) New York, NY (USA) New York, NY (USA) ABSTRACT The paper describes the design and construction of the foundations for two new high-rise structures in New York City (NYC).
    [Show full text]
  • August 11, 2020 Times Square Tower Will Light up New Tomorrow for Manhattan
    August 11, 2020 Link to Article Times Square tower will light up new tomorrow for Manhattan L+L Holding Company is pushing ahead with its landmark Times Square development, TSX Broadway. With an entire facade embedded with LED lights, the building is set to become the world’s largest billboard when it opens in 2022. Located in one of the world’s most visited tourist destinations, drawing some 50 million visitors a year, the development could serve as a beacon of light to a post-COVID New York as it works to recover from a pandemic that has grounded both locals and tourists that were the lifeblood of Times Square. “While Times Square is quiet today as the City continues the hard work of recovering from COVID-19, significant ongoing construction progress at TSX Broadway serves as a reminder that Times Square has a bright future,” said David Orowitz, Managing Director at L&L Holding Company. “The addition of Times Square’s first outdoor stage, coupled with a 580-foot tall sign display, innovative experiences to be revealed inside TSX Broadway and new performances at the renowned Palace Theatre will usher in Times Square’s next era in the post-pandemic world.” The existing 29-year-old building at 1568 Broadway is being demolished using a technique that requires hardening of the building’s elevator shafts to create debris chutes to allow for easy removal of the structure. Demolition of the former DoubleTree Hotel has reached the 23rd floor level and the installation of the T5 truss, the far western X brace, has commenced and is currently at level 4.
    [Show full text]
  • HOW to MAKE $$$ in NYC TECH As the City’S Most Vibrant Sector Matures, Ways to Get in on the Growth Multiply
    CRAINSNEW YORK BUSINESS NEW YORK BUSINESS® FEBRUARY 6 - 12, 2017 | PRICE $3.00 HOW TO MAKE $$$ IN NYC TECH As the city’s most vibrant sector matures, ways to get in on the growth multiply. Just ask DataGryd’s NEW YORK BIZ Peter Feldman Page 17 FEELS TRUMP’S TRAVEL BAN P. 7 AND P. 9 BANKING ON BROADWAY CITY WANTS BIGGER SLICE OF AIR-RIGHTS PIE P. 19 OUT-OF- STATE CARS DRIVE THIS NEW YORKER CRAZY P. 20 VOL. XXXIII, NO. 6 WWW.CRAINSNEWYORK.COM NEWSPAPER P001_CN_20170206.indd 1 2/3/17 7:19 PM Dr. Richard Merkin and PRESENT THE Heritage Healthcare Innovation Awards 2017 NOMINATIONS NOW OPEN Who will make up the class of 2017? We are looking for exceptional leaders, pioneers and trailblazers in New York healthcare for the 2017 Heritage Healthcare Innovation Awards. These prestigious awards will recognize the best of today’s healthcare clinicians, administrators and researchers who are making measurable improvements in health status, improving access to healthcare, positively impacting patient quality of care and demonstrating long term aff ordability. Nominations close March 31st and finalists will be honored at a luncheon in NYC on May 22nd Mark Wagar, President, Heritage Medical Systems, Master of Ceremonies Finalists will be awarded in the following categories: ■ Heritage Innovation in Healthcare Delivery Award ■ Heritage Research Investigators in Translational Medicine Award ■ Heritage Healthcare Leadership Award ■ Heritage Healthcare Organizational Leadership Award ■ Heritage Innovators in Healthcare Award For more information, visit crainsnewyork.com/heritage The judging and selection process for fi nalists and winners in the 2017 Heritage Healthcare Innovation Awards is independent of the Crain’s New York Business newsroom Crain'sCN018148.indd Heritage 2017 1 Full Page MECH.indd 1 1/18/171/19/17 11:1212:19 AMPM FEBRUARY 6 - 12, 2017 CRAINSNEW YORK BUSINESS FROM THE NEWSROOM | JEREMY SMERD IN THIS ISSUE It’s Queens’ turn 4 AGENDA 5 IN CASE YOU MISSED IT MANHATTAN HAS THE HIGH LINE.
    [Show full text]
  • Or the Double Erasure of Times Square
    Twice-Twice-ToldTold Stories: or the double erasure of limesTimes SquareSqu are Things must bbee twice-toldtwice-tald inin orderarder tota bbee sasafefe lyly rederedeemedemed fromfmm timtimee and dedecacayi 1. The cocontemporaryntemporary space of Manhattan is suffering from a series of DOisneyficationsisneyfications andand Theme Park simusimulations.lations. Christine Boyer Professor of ArchitecturArchitecturee and Times Square/42nd StrStreet,eet, for exaexample,mple, the mmeetingeeting of two trtrianglesiangles that form an "X" at 42nd Street,Street, was Urbanism School of ArchArchitectureitecture once was the populpopularar enteentertarta inminmentent districtdistrict of vaudevillevaudeville andand the BroadwBroadwayay theater. Princeton University. ThiThiss rorowdywdy playground hhasas been theth e cecentrantra l public pplacelace where New Yorkers havehave cecelebratedlebrated New YearsYears'' © Eve since the earearlyly twentieth cecentury.ntury. Del documento, Frequented bbyy thousands of daily cocommmmututeersrs who aarriverrive viavia its labyrinthlabyrinthianian subway system, TTimesimes Square/42nd StrStreeteet is intimatelyintimately linked to the eentntireire mmetropolitanetropolitan regegion.ion. It hhasas been, as ititss namnamee designates, theth e llocationocation of great newspapernewspaper and radio headquarters. los autores. But aatt thithiss very mommomentent in time,time, TimTimeses Square/42ndSquare/42nd Street is bebeinging rrenderedendered by DisOisneyney and turnedturn ed intointo a wax museum with the likeess
    [Show full text]
  • Jun 27 1995 a B S T R a C T
    FROM HARDCORE TO SOFT CORE: RECONSTRUCTING THE IMAGE OF TIMES SQUARE AND THE COMMODIFICATION OF PLACE by Kevin P. Sullivan B.A., History and International Relations, Tufts University, 1986 M.A., History, Columbia University, 1989 Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of City Planning (M.C.P.) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 1995 © 1995 Kevin P. Sullivan All Rights Reserved The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paperand electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. Signature of Author t~ i Department of Urban Studies and Planning Certified by............ Professor Lawrence J. Vale Assistant Professor of Urban Studies and Planning Thesis Supervisor A ccepted by .............................................................................................................. .... Professor Langley C. Keyes Chairman, Department Committee for Graduate Students MASSACHUISETTS NSTTI)TF rv -, JUN 27 1995 A B S T R A C T Since the 1970s, cities have looked to the histories and traditions of place to provide new settings for consumption as both people and economic production have become more mobile. Festival marketplaces, historic districts and restored waterfronts have familiar elements in new urban typology of place and integral components of many citys' urban redevelopment strategies. In places like Faneuil Hall and South Street Seaport historic architecture provides the stage set for the reconstruction of an image that is rooted in the past but which has been redeployed for new commercial uses. The image of Times Square as the neon-lit backdrop for fantasy and desire has been a unique and enduring icon of American popular culture.
    [Show full text]
  • City Charter §1301(1)(B) FY 2016, Volume III
    Annual Investment Projects Report Pursuant to City Charter §1301(1)(b) FY 2016, Volume III January 30, 2017 NEW YORK CITY. MAKE IT HERE. 110 William Street New York, NY 10038 Land Sale List Closing Postal No. Project Name Date Address City State Code Total Purchase Price 1 Mount Hope Community Center, Inc. 2/8/2005 55 East 175th Street Bronx NY 10453 $436,500.00 2 West-Chambers Street Associates, LLC 2/9/2005 177 West Street New York NY 10007 $40,448,220.00 3 Erma Realty, LLC #1 (2005) 3/1/2005 2074 Atlantic Avenue Brooklyn NY 11233 $210,000.00 4 Kingswood Partners LLC 4/29/2005 1630 East 15th Street Brooklyn NY 11229 $2,022,979.00 5 Modi Realty Inc #1 (2005) 3/31/2005 149 Powell Street Brooklyn NY 11212 $275,000.00 6 121-125 Development Realty, LLC 7/7/2005 121 East 110th Street New York NY 10029 $1,300,000.00 7 Charleston Enterprises, LLC 2/15/2005 West Shore Expressway Staten Island NY 10309 $15,000,000.00 8 20 Rewe Street, LTD. 7/12/2005 Cherry Street Brooklyn NY 11211 $407,664.00 9 Museum of Arts and Design 10/19/2005 990 8th Avenue New York NY 10019 $17,050,000.00 10 NY Brush, LLC 3/14/2006 650 Brush Avenue Bronx NY 10465 $4,250,000.00 11 Related Retail Hub, LLC 2/16/2006 2984 3rd Avenue Bronx NY 10455 $1,050,000.00 12 270 Greenwich Street Associates LLC 12/14/2005 270 Greenwich Street New York NY 10007 $110,082,967.00 13 Generation Next Of Zerega, LLC 4/26/2006 635 Seward Avenue Bronx NY 10473 $1,211,250.00 14 Plaza 163 LLC 4/12/2006 446 East 164 Street Bronx NY 10456 $722,636.50 15 Clarendon Holding Co., Inc.
    [Show full text]