Brochure Offers Peek at Ground Level of New Broadway Development
A rendering from the brochure for 1865 Broadway’s retail spaces.
A new brochure meant to attract commercial tenants offers a new ground-level view of the 33-story luxury residential tower being built at 1865 Broadway at the corner of 61st street in the former home of the American Bible Society.
There are four levels of retail space for rent — two above ground and two underground — encompassing just over 70,000 square feet. The ceilings of some retail shops may be as high as 37 feet, depending on the configuration. They’re expected to be ready for occupancy in the first quarter of 2019.
The building will have 172 apartments. They will be a mix of rentals and condo units, City Realty reports.
The firm marketing the space, JLL, notes that the nearby area has a high-income population that likes to shop.
More retail, yay!
and all the people in it are white, young and cool–typical UWS folk!
I live in this general and have many black friends who live here. FYI.
I think Julia is making a point about the ads for the retail space being full of white people.
Julia, why would you post a lie like that? If they open an eye doctor there, I’d encourage you to have your eyes checked. Oh, and how do you know if they are “cool” or not?
Very sad that you make it a racial issue.
@ the three comments in reply to Julia;
Look at the artwork accompanying the article. It is from the developer. I take Julia’s comment as the taking of offense at the developer’s depiction of the neighborhood population as universally young, white, and urbane.
Her criticism is spot on.
SHAME ON YOU!
note that they use “average” (Mean) household income and not the more commonly-used “Median.”
the “average” is affected by the multi-billionaires. even in a rich district like this, the median will be much lower.
the average HH income must refer to only residents. I don’t know how they would find HH income for people who work in the area. does anyone know or have a guess?
I used to work for a credit card company – household income down to the zip + 4 level is readily available from credit rating agencies and or other market data providers. It might even be available in some public data, obviously the IRS has that data at the granular level.
Oh wait, work in the area. Hmm. Well certainly there’s location based and self reported data out there too…not sure who the aggregators / vendors would be.
BTW excellent point about mean vs median. Averages lie but lies are useful…
Bruce is correct and to be statistically more relevant we may also need the Standard Deviation.
Actually you are all wrong. Average is what matters here because they are making the pitch that it is a good place for shops. Those building this or renting the space want to know the total available money to be spent at their shops, not what the median is.
All area demographics are readily available free from the Bureau of Labor Statistics on their website. Readers can double check data on population, with breakdowns on age and other characteristics, HH income, HH size, number of owners vs. renters, and a range of other metrics. So feast your eyes.
… and apparently only extremely beautiful people cross the street at 61st, according to the brochure.
late-stage capitalism is devouring its own.
That and the errant vehicles.
“The firm marketing the space, JLL, notes that the nearby area has a high-income population that likes to shop.”
If they “noted” that about my neighborhood I’d be offended by the superficiality.
reply to Dannyboy:
sadly, this is what is becoming of our beloved Upper West Side.
A recent NY Times article noted that the E. Side is keeping is maintaining its character as a neighborhood better.
Well, it seems like a good time to buy Amazon stock, since the
only super market in the neighborhood is Whole Foods. With 30 stories. of apartments with a minimum of ten tenents per
floor and a maximum. of twenty tenents…that’s 300 to 600
more people shopping there every day.
Why, because the like of shopping is inherently superficial?
No.
I included the quotation in my Comment for easy reading.
Take a look.
Any affordable units?
They’re *all* affordable. You just have to be a banker or an oligarch to be able to afford them. Haven’t you met your new neighbors yet?
Welcome to the Upper Wealth Side!
“Upper Wealth”
That’s great!
(well the expression is great, the reality of it, not-so-much)
Can we fill all the open spots for retail already on Broadway before building new? So many vacant stores…
I think the Average HH should be higher. In my building you would have to make at least 300 K just to afford the rent.
This looks really cool. Sometimes when the weather is lousy my family goes to the Time Warner Center just to have a place to stretch and walk around.
Glad to know there will be more options in the neighborhood to do similar things.
The description is spot on for the area in and around Columbus Circle.
Looks nice to me, the more retail the better and hopefully commercial rents will go down.
However, I can’t believe I’m actually reading comments that take offense to a depiction of good-looking, affluent people that like to shop in the neighborhood. It actually feels like the type of lash-out jealousy to which kids in junior high school are prone. What is it that you are exactly judging here?
“What is it that you are exactly judging here?”
The fact that a neighborhood that was once wonderfully heterogeneous and welcoming to people from all walks of life is now becoming exclusively the domain of “good-looking [DOG WHISTLE!], affluent people”.
well said, Cato. thank you.
Neighborhoods change, and sorry, but we don’t live in a time capsule. When you and other Young Catos moved into the neighborhood, I’m sure your older neighbors lamented the change in demographics or wealth. It’s no different now. And I’ve got news for you – just because somebody is good looking and wealthy, it doesn’t mean that they’re bad people. It’s childish to think that way.
Agreed Rob. Just because a single depiction of youngish, good-looking people(I for one could not discern that because it’s impossible to see their faces closeup) is advertised and villified doesn’t mean the UWS can’t still be heterogeneous and welcoming to all walks of life.
“hopefully commercial rents will go down.” NOT
Just the opposite. It will have an inflationary effect on neighboring rents.
here’s my beef with the brochure:
the developer is depicting the UWS not as it actually is but as they would LIKE IT to be. This means 100% young, attractive people, few if any minorities, no seniors, no people who are disabled or overweight or inexpensively dressed.
apparently the vast majority of the people who are actually walking on UWS streets do not attract “upscale” retail tenants. So the rich developer has to pretend we don’t exist.
and perhaps that is their deepest wish.
No worries about retail cannibalization?
How many chain stores can exist on the West Side particularly with the prominence of ecommerce over traditional stores.
Baffled by real estate industry’s SOP – development with “shopping”/more chain stores.
Please tell me Khloe (K) is just a rendering choice and not an actual tenant…My UWS is a place that is Kardashian-Jenner free.
I’m excited about the arrival of the new Khloe Kardashian store. Khloe is my favorite Kardashian and I’m sure she will add a touch of glamour and sophistication to that fuddy-duddy corner of the neighborhood.
I’m going to have to give some thought to the concept of a “favorite Kardashian”.
Once I get over this sudden, throbbing headache……
Have these people seen 72nd Street lately? So many empty store fronts you just got to wonder what Greg Bishop the alleged Commissioner of Small Business Services is doing about this. Or, is he another Deblasio hack being paid by our tax dollars and doing nothing.
When most people think of the UWS, they have a certain mental image. Most of the area below 72nd Street, with a few exceptions, is now far from that image – it is like a different neighborhood – it should be called Midtown Northwest (MNW). The area above 72nd isn’t 100% true to its history either but it is a lot closer.
well said
Exactly. While there is an epidemic of empty stores in the 70s, 80s and beyond, the majority are smaller spaces that are appropriate for local service stores, quirky boutiques and cafes. They could not accommodate the kind of mass retail that is planned for 61st St, which requires huge open interiors, loading docks, multiple floors, etc. That’s midtown retail, not neighborhood retail and the two should not be conflated. What the real UWS needs is a reasonable system of retail rent regulation to help fill our empty stores with the things and services we really need,use and enjoy, not glitzy high fashion.
Hey Filatura, I’m thinking that the city and state should get involved and reasonably regulate your salary.
Isn’t that the same as you wanting to take away potential income from property owners who already pay absurd property taxes?
True.
This “mall” will be an extension of the mall at a Time-Warner. That has as much to do with the Upper West Side of 86-96 Streets as Midtown has to Queens.
Will there be public restrooms?