CB4’s Full Board Votes Its Disapproval of Hudson Yards Casino Bid
The non-binding Jan. 6 vote, which technically relates to a casino-related zoning overhaul that Related Co. & Wynn Resorts are pursuing, was unanimous. Related is seeking to earn one of three downstate casino licenses being handed out by the state this year.
| 08 Jan 2025 | 06:34
A rendering of what Related Co.’s & Wynn’s $12 billion casino bid in Hudson Yards would look like. On Jan. 6, CB4 issued an unanimous motion of disapproval concerning the bid. (
)
Gary LaBarbera, the President of the Building and Construction Trades Council, rallying in favor of Related’s $12 billion Hudson Yards casino bid on Oct. 23. He has citied estimates that it will create up to 35,000 union construction jobs and 5,000 permanent union careers. (
)
Community Board 4 issued an unanimous vote of disapproval for Related Co.’s & Wynn Resorts’ $12 billion Hudson Yards casino bid on Jan. 6, less than a month after one of its subcommittees did the same on Dec. 12.
The developer is seeking one of three downstate casino licenses being handed out by NYS this year, and while non-binding, the vote could be deemed a decisive barometer of local opposition.
It’s technically a vote of dissatisfaction with zoning changes being sought by Related, which would overturn a 2009 agreement governing Hudson Yards. That agreement 15 years earlier had outlined the creation of at least 3,454 units of housing, 4.3 acres of public space, and the maintenance of multiple public access points. Related’s proposed zoning changes would reduce the amount of housing units in the special district to 2,000, in addition to altering height limits to allow for the construction of two commercial towers.
Related has defended the casino bid by arguing that building & maintaining it would create 5,000 permanent union careers and between 30,000 and 35,000 construction jobs, gaining support from labor unions.
In a letter written to NYC Planning Commissioner Dan Garodnick, which was already drafted before the vote was held, CB4 outlined why it believed Related’s desired zoning changes would damage the neighborhood.
They addressed housing first, writing that “today’s housing demands are the top priority of the City and our elected officials. Recent votes show that creating housing is above all other considerations.” They also said that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the casino proposal, which Related issued itself, “shows catastrophic traffic and air quality impacts on our neighborhoods that remain unmitigated in the applicant’s own analysis.”
Jan. 6’s CB4 vote will surely bolster the “Protect the High Line” campaign, which was started by the Friends of the High Line, the nonprofit that manages the elevated West Side parkway. Its northernmost reaches empty into Hudson Yards, and campaigners believe Related’s casino bid would disrupt the experience of park users.
In a statement sent to Straus News, Friends of the High Line Director Allan Van Capelle called CB4’s vote “historic and courageous.”
“Friends of the High Line is ready to start work tomorrow with other community stakeholders to develop and build support for a new plan that takes advantage of the public assets in front of us...I encourage Related to withdraw its application and join a community-led effort to start over–quickly–to reimagine the site for public good,” Van Capelle concluded.
The co-founder of The High Line, Joshua David, was even more blunt during the public comment session of the CB4 meeting. “The proposal is a disgrace. It reeks of greed and disregard for the well-being of this community,” he said, before adding that it makes a “mockery” of the 2009 zoning agreement.
David said he believes that the proposal would create “a garish Las Vegas-style monstrosity that has no place on Manhattan’s West Side.” He received a fair amount of applause.
Karen Jacob, a nearby resident that noted she has volunteered for The High Line in the past, echoed CB4 by speaking against the proposed zoning overhaul’s reduction in housing: “Now, more than ever...the number-one need in New York is more housing and more affordable housing.”