Two buildings, including one that once held Shakespeare & Co., are about to be demolished and replaced with new apartment buildings. We had already heard inklings about both of the projects, but now the equipment is set up and the destruction is about to begin.
On 81st and Broadway, developers are getting ready to turn the old three-story “taxpayer” building into an 18-story condo. (Taxpayers were generally put up in the early 20th century to earn enough income to pay the property taxes, with the understanding that they’d be redeveloped later.) This was once the home of the beloved Shakespeare & Co. bookstore. It closed in 1996.
The new building, developed by Alchemy Properties and the Carlyle Group, is expected to have 32 condo units and retail spaces on the first and cellar floors, as well as a roof deck. Thanks to Ira and Terry for the photos and tips.
At 206 West 95th Street, the former Camden Hotel, which once housed people with HIV, is being demolished to make way for a new 10-story apartment building from United Management Corp. and Certes Partners. Scaffolding and permits are up. The top floors will be full-floor apartments, according to The Real Deal. Thanks to Paul for the photo.
The prime lot that I wish would be purchased and demolished to make way for market rate apts is the kluge on the SW corner of 96th from Broadway down to West End. It is disgusting and absolutely gross to walk on that side of the street. I would have no problem with housing going in there. Since no one lives there now, it would add housing and would improve that lot.
266 West 96 Street is the site of a nonactive MTA substation. The other two property owners on the site include the Salvation Army at 268 West 96 Street, and the Midtown NAACP at 270 West 96 Street.
The West Side Federation of Senior and Supportive Housing (WSFSH) is working to develop affordable housing at 266 W 96 St.
The units will be rented to families and senior citizens from the neighborhood.
There is more to a neighborhood than new market rate apartments. (WSR did some reporting on this).
thanks Dannyboy. good information.
That is an ugly block. The city should buy the underused buildings and make a park.
What a privileged and moneyed opinion you’ve expressed. You could always buy new eyes to keep from having to look at undesireable parts of New York, at least until everything has been developed into the gross state of luxury New York we have today.
that block includes a Salvation Army thrift store and the NAACP offices, as well as an MTA power facility, and a Gristedes.
I guess those are things you don’t want to look at.
Leaving aside what is in the buildings on that block, I think it would be hard to argue that it is a beautiful block. I too would like to see something prettier on that block too – even if they contain exactly the same occupants.
So much for WSR’s plea for civility. Your hostility towards me seems misplaced. All I said was I’d like more market rate apartments (e.g. rentals) to be built–there was nothing about luxury, privilege or moneyed in anything I said. Your anonymous nastiness says more about you than me. Yes, I’d prefer housing for people over abandoned buildings covered in pigeon poop. I happen to think there is a shortage of market rate housing in NYC.
There is actually a glut of “market rate” housing in Manhattan which, if you read the NY Times Real Estate section, you would be aware of. Landlords are offering 1-2 months free rent, paying real estate commissions, etc. to fill those “market rate” apts. There is a dearth of affordable housing, i.e. middle-class folks who can’t afford to spend $2000 for a studio, or $3,000 for a one bedroom apt. (the going rate for semi-decent UWS apts with no doormen or services). That would be an excellent use of that block.
So much for WSR’s plea for civility and anyway, your hostility seems misplaced. I said market rate and apartments, meaning rentals. I didn’t say luxury condos. Your anonymous nastiness to me seems to reflect more about you than anything I wrote. Yes, I would like apts for people rather than an abandoned building covered in pigeon droppings than is currently used as a toilet and trash heap by passersby. I fail to see why housing for people is a bad thing.
That second photo is West 101 street. That’s coming down??? Or west 95th which is not pictured?
Pretty certain it’s 95th but let us know if we’re mistaken!
Yes, it’s West 95th Street. I’m often on the block. There have been crews emptying contents and (I suppose) pipes, wiring, gates, doors, etc. etc. It will be coming down. Hope it’s only 10 stories… there were earlier reports it was to be taller.
What are those monsters going up across the street from Zabars?
I have loved the UWS for over 30 years over the East Side because we had bona fide architecture. Now it is just condos by Kruschev. Blech.
1.) Last I checked, the Upper East Side had many examples of fine, vintage architecture, such as many of the buildings along Fifth and Park Avenues.
2.) “Now it is just condos by Kruschev.”
A fulfillment of the infamous “We will bury you”– by characterless condos?
Only one monster going up across from Zabar’s – as reported here. https://www.westsiderag.com/2015/11/04/plans-revealed-for-new-building-on-corner-of-80th-street-and-broadway The building on the northeast corner of 80th and Broadway is having facade work done.
Haven’t lived there in years, but Essentials was my go to place 🙁
Essentials had a good selection of affordable toys, kids’ books, and stationery items upstairs.
Holiday decorations were inexpensive.
There are too many luxury condos (empty) and not enough small businesses left in UWS.
Please oh please let there be a grocery store. I can adjust to no light left in the neighborhood, but it’s nearly impossible to go shopping for food without wanting to blow my brains out.
No one shops in a traditional grocery store anymore especially in Manhattan because they don’t cook every meal at home. Likewise there are delivery services and take out to boot.
perhaps this is true for you, but is not correct.
266 West 96 was planned to be supported/affordable housing for seniors. The deal was the city got it for a song from the MTA, but the city had to take on any liability. When Sackman built his building on the eastside of wea between 95/96 soil testing showed toxic chemicals. Further testing showed a plum of toxic chemicals emanated from the soil under the former substation down and across wea. Its expensive and lengthy removal would be required before anything could be built there
Unless a private developer is brought in and allow a very good deal nothing will be done with the site. Coalition for a livable west side had a series of articles on this including a diagram showing the toxic plum, people tried to us to stop sackman.
That I did not know! Thank you for the info.
No reasonable person would insist on removal of all the soil under that building. In a reasonable world, the toxic soil is nothing that a couple feet of solid concrete wouldn’t stop. Same simple solution as used at Chernobyl and other far more toxic sites around the world.
It’s not like there are calls to evacuate and tear down all the buildings downhill from that site which are also apparently sitting on top of that same chemical leached soil.
I had not heard that Chernobyl was occupied once again?
Whether it is safe to seal toxins in or not depends on the nature of the contamination. If it can be contained safely, that makes sense – but if it is continuing to spread, or would seep through concrete, it may not. This is one of the places where knowing the facts and the science can be the difference between a cancer cluster and a safe containment.
I can envision the sales material for that new building now:
“Don’t worry – all the toxic soil is sealed of with the finest Chernobyl-certified concrete money can buy.”
Most marketing reads: “Life Reimagined” or “Living Redefined”
I’m expecting: “Life Finally Worth Living”
“Toxic Soil” is the current offensive action taken against Senior Housing and Supportive Housing.
and you thought that you live in a community.
Another subway stairwell would be nice. So crowded already.
Great suggestion. Reopening the stairwell would also make things much safer.
Very glad to finally see something good happen on West 95th Street but sorry to see that great old facade go. And it would be nice if the developer would take advantage of the commercial zoning that’s allowed there as a restaurant or wine bar would do well on that block. Regarding the comments about West 96th Street, yes, the south side of that block is a garbage-strewn mess and something needs to be done. However, adding even more low-income housing is not the answer for an area that is already far too oversaturated with shelters and supportive housing.
The housing is intended for people with limited means that need housing. Evidently it is not an “area that is already far too oversaturated with shelters and supportive housing.”
“perhaps this is true for you, but is not correct.”
Paul, there is a need for additional housing for Seniors in the neighborhood; there is not too much housing for seniors, but too little.
What is not correct?
So Paul RL, you choose option #2: “Seniors and families will not have housing.”
Fortunately, we live in a neighborhood where the majority disagrees with you.
Dannyboy, there are plenty of people, young and old, families and singles, that wish to pay cheaper rent or buy a cheaper home because they can’t afford their current one. If I lose my job and can’t afford my mortgage, I wouldn’t expect that I have a divine right to stay in my neighborhood just because I’m already here. In principle I don’t believe in artificially regulating the cost of a neighborhood, whether it be rent control, subsidized housing, or other means, at least to the vast extent it occurs in ours. Neighborhoods change and people move around, and I happen think that’s healthy for a community. Hope this helps with your questions.
“The units will be rented to families and senior citizens from the neighborhood.”
What do you suggest for the Seniors and families in our neighborhood that need housing:
1. get out of your neighborhood because ‘for many of us long-term residents in the area, enough is enough.’, or just
2. you Seniors and families will not have housing?
Dannyboy, I recognize that there is a need for various types of supportive housing everywhere. But for years, the West 90’s and 100’s have suffered from being overburdened with a disproportionate amount. So while other neighborhoods improve, the quality of life here has declined for residents and businesses alike. Wanna replace one of the many dangerous shelters in the area for well-run WSFSH housing? I’m in! But ram even more supportive housing down our throats? No way. You may disagree, but for many of us long-term residents in the area, enough is enough.
I wish they would reopen the 91st Street station on the 1 line. That would be really great! And I agree that some comments were unduly harsh about West 96th Street. I believe that the buildings there should be refurbished into housing for HIV patients and those seeking reentry into society from the New York Department of Corrections. So we need 18-story buildings containing 32 condos?