SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Completed Project Threads Archive (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=348)
-   -   NEW YORK | The Spiral (509 W. 34th) | 1,041 FT | 66 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=184944)

artspook May 25, 2016 10:32 AM

from a distance this heap looks like . .
. . "the P A R T Y C A K E building !" . .
YaY !! . . Shove some pretty candles into that flat top . .

Sometimes a gifted architect may focus too hard on the details,
. . to the point that he's blind to the ridiculously obvious.
Workers may enjoy their terraces, . .
but the rest of the city has to behold the spectacle.

O-tacular May 25, 2016 5:41 PM

Count me among those unimpressed with the BIG design. Ingels does amazing work but this and 2 WTC really look lackluster to me.

NYguy Jul 28, 2016 2:01 PM

http://www.wsj.com/articles/blackroc...unt-1469643587

BlackRock Fills Wall Street Void in Headquarters Hunt
Asset manager has narrowed search for new headquarters down to three sites in Manhattan



By Sarah Krouse
July 27, 2016


Quote:

BlackRock Inc. is presenting New York real-estate developers with something they haven’t seen in a while—a financial firm that is looking to grow.

While big banks and hedge funds are in retreat and emptying out space, the asset management giant is deciding whether to move into a new global headquarters and is narrowing its review of sites being developed in Manhattan down to three.

The 850,000-square-foot deal will be among the biggest leases of the year for the city and a contrast to the direction of the banking industry.

....BlackRock’s search has become the focal point for brokers looking to lock in one of the highest profile tenants now examining space. The firm is considering sites at the Hudson Yards development on the far West Side, neighboring Manhattan West and the World Trade Center development in lower Manhattan, according to people familiar with the matter, in addition to remaining in its current space.

TREPYE Jul 28, 2016 2:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILNY (Post 7451507)
Similar to 2 WTC, this project will end up in Recycle Bin. This is a concept for now and I do not think anybody with even a little sense of aesthetics will approve that box.

I hope so cuz this design really does sucks.

The more supertalls Bjarke designs the more it is apparent that he does not do this niche of architecture very well. Please stick to low and mid rises Bjarke Ingels Group, thanks.

TREPYE Jul 28, 2016 2:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc (Post 7451073)
it could win an award as laziest, most uninspired design of all the supertalls.

This is bad but the lazy award goes without any question IMO to 432 Park by Vinoly.... No architect was really needed to design it; just engineers to ensure that they could go high enough without the risk of collapsing using basically a glorified pile of cement with holes (windows) in it.

Camstonisland Jul 28, 2016 3:00 PM

Quote:

This is bad but the lazy award goes without any question IMO to 432 Park by Vinoly.... No architect was really needed to design it; just engineers to ensure that they could go high enough without the risk of collapsing using basically a glorified pile of cement with holes (windows) in it.
I agree that 432 park is uninspired, but at least it adds a peak to an otherwise as of now uninteresting section of the skyline (I was on layover in Laguardia, and 432 looked amazing from the tarmac as a silhouette). The Spire won't add anything significant to the area skyline wise.

DCReid Jul 28, 2016 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 7515107)
http://www.wsj.com/articles/blackroc...unt-1469643587

BlackRock Fills Wall Street Void in Headquarters Hunt
Asset manager has narrowed search for new headquarters down to three sites in Manhattan



By Sarah Krouse
July 27, 2016

This site is not being consider according to another article - they are considering: The Durst Organization’s One World Trade Center, the Related Companies and Oxford Properties Group’s Hudson Yards and Brookfield Property Partners’ Manhattan West. Per -
http://therealdeal.com/2016/07/27/bl...ree-locations/

chris08876 Jul 28, 2016 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCReid (Post 7515837)
This site is not being consider according to another article - they are considering: The Durst Organization’s One World Trade Center, the Related Companies and Oxford Properties Group’s Hudson Yards and Brookfield Property Partners’ Manhattan West. Per -
http://therealdeal.com/2016/07/27/bl...ree-locations/

I wish Blackrock would consider WTC2. Would be a great tenant and suit the original design, plus it could finally, finally help get that stalled project rising.

But at the same time, I can see why they wouldn't. Silverstein is too greedy. Plus a $3 billion+ tower would naturally command high rents.

NYguy Sep 28, 2016 10:21 PM

http://therealdeal.com/2016/09/28/bl...ds-for-new-hq/

BlackRock targets Hudson Yards for new HQ
Asset management giant is looking for as much as 1M sf of office space



September 28, 2016


Quote:

BlackRock has set its sights on Hudson Yards for a new headquarters as big as 1 million square feet.

The company currently rents around 700,000 square feet in two buildings – Fisher Brothers and Soho China’s 55 East 52nd Street and Rudin Management’s 40 East 52nd Street. The lease at 55 East 52nd is due to expire in 2023. In February, The Real Deal reported BlackRock had tapped a JLL team led by Peter Riguardi to find a new, larger office space.

By July, the company had shortlisted three possible new locations: The Durst Organization’s One World Trade Center, the Related Companies and Oxford Properties Group’s Hudson Yards, and Brookfield Property Partners’ Manhattan West. The company is also still holding onto the option of staying at its current location.

But, according to Crain’s, BlackRock is now considering two proposed towers in the Hudson Yards neighborhood. One is 50 Hudson Yards, developed by Related and Oxford, which is located on West 33rd Street and 10th Avenue. The other is Tishman Speyer’s building, the Spiral, which is planned for one block north of 50 Hudson Yards and will span 2.85 million square feet.

Zerton Sep 28, 2016 10:25 PM

It's a pretty cool way to give every floor some outdoor space.

chris08876 Sep 28, 2016 11:50 PM

I hope Blackrock considers this now that I think about it versus its competition like 50 Hudson. IDK, I just think a tower like will be harder to fill versus 50 HY. Would be nice to get this off the ground. Plus 50 HY isn't really that stellar IMO.

http://m6.i.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1...jGoKxjc.w4.jpg

NYguy Sep 29, 2016 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876 (Post 7577668)
I hope Blackrock considers this now that I think about it versus its competition like 50 Hudson. IDK, I just think a tower like will be harder to fill versus 50 HY. Would be nice to get this off the ground. Plus 50 HY isn't really that stellar IMO.

We really haven't seen a final design for 50 Hudson yet. But both towers are relatively the same size, accounting for half of the so called "four corners" towers of the Hudson Yards (the other two being 3 Hudson Blvd and 55 Hudson Yards (which isn't being built to its full potential).

citybooster Sep 29, 2016 5:18 AM

It still will be a nice tower, but this was the spot which could have been a soaring centerpiece for the West Side, the Hudson Spire designation being a placeholder but something 1,500 ft or more could have and should have gone here. Now we have the zig zagging garden gimmick tower of BIG and Bjark Ingels.:hell: As if he didn't screw up World Trade Center II badly enough.

They really settled here though.. barely supertall. Height isn't everything of course, but this spot screamed for the most prominent placement in the West Side. Thinking about the Spiral going up just bums me now,lol... great for them though if they can get Black Rock as their anchor tenant.

Shwayze1994 Sep 29, 2016 9:22 AM

I hope they choose 50 Hudson, honestly Related hasn't designed a bad tower at the complex, so expect that trend to continue. Also it would put more pressure on Tishman to redesign this site and hopefully it would reflect the sites potential. Maybe a mixed use tower, of office, hotel, and residential.

faridnyc Sep 29, 2016 11:39 AM

Good bye Hudson spire they must come back to This Tower cause it Will be the signature Tower of the Hudson yards

NYguy Sep 29, 2016 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by citybooster (Post 7577926)
It still will be a nice tower, but this was the spot which could have been a soaring centerpiece for the West Side, the Hudson Spire designation being a placeholder but something 1,500 ft or more could have and should have gone here. Now we have the zig zagging garden gimmick tower of BIG and Bjark Ingels.:hell: As if he didn't screw up World Trade Center II badly enough.

They really settled here though.. barely supertall. Height isn't everything of course, but this spot screamed for the most prominent placement in the West Side. Thinking about the Spiral going up just bums me now,lol... great for them though if they can get Black Rock as their anchor tenant.

They didn't settle anything. Tishman Speyer isn't some amateur development company looking to make a statment. The Hudson Yards was rezoned by the City to allow for large scale office construction - something the City needs. I know a lot of cities don't need the big 2 - 3 msf office towers, but New York does. This is the spot where you build that. A soaring residential can go anywhere, on much smaller lots, as we are already seeing.

Tishman made the right (grownup) call here. Take note.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork Sep 29, 2016 8:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 7578032)
They didn't settle anything. Tishman Speyer isn't some amateur development company looking to make a statment. The Hudson Yards was rezoned by the City to allow for large scale office construction - something the City needs. I know a lot of cities don't need the big 2 - 3 msf office towers, but New York does. This is the spot where you build that. A soaring residential can go anywhere, on much smaller lots, as we are already seeing.

Tishman made the right (grownup) call here. Take note.

While it's a good financial decision for Tishman lets not sit here acting like this is good architecture. It is no doubt a missed opportunity from a design stand point.

chris08876 Sep 30, 2016 12:47 AM

Tishman Speyer files plans for $3.2B Hudson Yards tower :cheers:

Quote:

Everything is spiraling into place for Tishman Speyer.

The developer officially filed plans Thursday for the Spiral, an office skyscraper that is slated to cost $3.2 billion. Plans filed with the city’s Department of Buildings call for a 2.2 million-square-foot tower, but Tishman Speyer is marketing the property at 2.85 million square feet.

The Spiral, named after its design feature of a continuous band of terraces that wrap around the building, will rise 65 stories to a height of 1,005 feet, and has an alternate address of 509 West 34th Street. It is being designed by Bjarke Ingels TRData LogoTINY, the Danish architect behind the 2 World Trade Center redesign and VIA57.

In 2014, Tishman Speyer, headed by Rob Speyer, paid about $438 million for the parcels that make up the site. Later that year, it applied for a $170 million, 25-year tax break at the project.

According to the DOB plans, the ground floor will have retail space — Tishman Speyer has said in marketing materials there will be about 27,000 square feet of retail — while the second through 62nd floors of the building will be office space. Asset management giant BlackRock is considering the building, along with neighboring 50 Hudson Yards, for its new headquarters.
===========================
TRD

NYguy Sep 30, 2016 1:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork (Post 7578615)
While it's a good financial decision for Tishman lets not sit here acting like this is good architecture. It is no doubt a missed opportunity from a design stand point.

Why shoyld we act like it's bad architecture? I don't see anything bad about it. It's a solidly designed office skyscraper. Will everyone love it? Of course not. But not everyone loves everything. If the Hudson Spire mockup had been built, you woyld have people whining over it.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork Sep 30, 2016 1:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 7578883)
Why shoyld we act like it's bad architecture? I don't see anything bad about it. It's a solidly designed office skyscraper. Will everyone love it? Of course not. But not everyone loves everything. If the Hudson Spire mockup had been built, you woyld have people whining over it.


Yes, yes i know. In the same right the square office towers that we all love on Park avenue are stellar.
This tower is sub par to whats being built at the Hudson Yards so in the context of its surrounding development
its nothing extraordinary. This also isn't BIG's most innovative work so in some regard this tower does leave a lot to be desired.
In terms of good design the mock-up and height of the tower portrayed previously for the site was more exciting
so you can't expect people to be jumping for joy over this. It is a matter of opinion and if this was built on Lexington or Madison ave.
perhaps people would be more eager to want to see this design rise but like I said given its location we just expected better. I don't think you'll disagree.

NYguy Sep 30, 2016 2:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork (Post 7578889)
Yes, yes i know. In the same right the square office towers that we all love on Park avenue are stellar.
This tower is sub par to whats being built at the Hudson Yards so in the context of its surrounding development its nothing extraordinary.

It could be better, they all could be better. But keep in mind this isn't the signature tower of the Hudson Yards. Likewise, 3 Hudson Blvd isn't the signature tower of the area, and neither will 50 Hudson or Manhattan West be. That's not to say that the designs should be crappy, but they are the shiny new toys the companies that keep New York the hub that it is want. (Look at my signature :)) If anything, you could argue that 30 Hudson, which I like, should have been pushed to be more than it is. Or the Freedom Tower. But I think we should keep in mind that now our tallest towers are on the residential side (with some hit and miss as well) and many cities would love to get the new office and residential towers we are getting. Yes, we are spoiled.

NYguy Sep 30, 2016 2:55 AM

All of the permits filed today (9/29/16)


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01

Quote:

ERECTION OF NEW BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION FENCE

Building Height (ft.): 962
Building Stories: 64

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=02

Quote:

STRUCTURAL WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEW BUILDING.


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=03

Quote:

FOUNDATION WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEW BUILDING


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=04

Quote:

MECHANICAL WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEW BUILDING APPLICATION


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=05

Quote:

PLUMBING WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEW BUILDING

ILNY Sep 30, 2016 3:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork (Post 7578615)
While it's a good financial decision for Tishman lets not sit here acting like this is good architecture. It is no doubt a missed opportunity from a design stand point.

I never thought I would say that, but this behemoth is even more ugly than 2 WTC. If that design is ever built, this will no doubt be the ugliest supertall in New York. If they had Ig-Architecture prices, here is the winner.
BIG should change their name to IG.

citybooster Sep 30, 2016 3:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILNY (Post 7578950)
I never thought I would say that, but this behemoth is even more ugly than 2 WTC. If that design is ever built, this will no doubt be the ugliest supertall in New York. If they had Ig-Architecture prices, here is the winner.
BIG should change their name to IG.

Again remember that this property was the spot on where the Hudson Spire concept was promoted. With the size and scope of this plot it SHOULD have been Tishman's opportunity to make the centerpiece of the West Side development. Now it's less than 1,000 FT? This spot should have produced something extraordinary, not merely a nice generic functioning tower with a silly BIG gimmick. Epic fail by Tishman and they should get called on it. I totally concur with your take on this insult of a tower... this begged for a masterpiece. Far short the results so far.

citybooster Sep 30, 2016 6:07 AM

Reading more the height doesn't include some kind of crown or mechanical topping which would likely give it bare supertall status of 1,005 ft or so. I appreciate that the square footage will likely in total be closer to the 2.8 mil that Tishman is saying. But this could have been a marvel, a true standout with the height originally envisioned...even if the crown or spiral would have capped more likely at 1,500-1,600 ft... that would be 300 ft or so taller than 30 Hudson and among the supertalls in the area none else is likely to go over 1,100 ft...though who knows if the Frank Mc Court property nearby will ever get going and aim for heights of at least 1,400ft like had been speculated. It's crazy...the Spiral is scheduled to be done by 2019, which is in development terms just around the corner with groundbreaking likely early next year. The Hudson Spiral was a vision that many thought was a decade in the future if not longer.. yet two years after initial speculation Tishman has the full property and chose to build wider instead of higher... so many people were captivated by the thoughts of what a realized Hudson Spire would look like(I know fully well it was a placeholder and a vision until a future developer was ready to build there)and as much as I try to appreciate what BIG and Tishman want, It just seems they have blown a tremendous opportunity to build a landmark for 21st century New York on the West Side.

I would say 99% of the time I agree with NYguy... he's been an institution here and really knows his stuff and really is passionate about New York City. This time though I just can't find myself in agreement.. we'll get used to the Spiral(instead of Hudson Spire,alas) and maybe I'm being too negative on Ingels and BIG(though I really see more gimmick than vision here, as with WTC2.) But it's hard to get excited about it when it could have been an exclamation point for a new century skyline. Hopefully there is one coming up somewhere maybe we don't have any idea about yet. It will be a fine building and the West Side is really going to emerge as a grand new neighborhood in the next few years but so far only the incomparable magnificence of 30 Hudson will clearly stand out as a modern icon, and that will be as much for its massive street presence as its height. Bordered by a number of very nice mainly glassy towers between 800 and 1,100 ft as complementary and subordinate... Tishman just should have been more bold and daring. That's all I have to say, just my preference though it is a given now that we'll get the BIG design. Maybe it's also hard to let go because the BIG design still looks like the one that will be built at WTC 2 once Larry Silverstein gets a commitment big enough to justify commencing on that long awaited tower and while having some admirers, from some angles very hard to get excited about.

chris08876 Oct 6, 2016 10:26 PM

Potential Tenant in the market.

==================

Pfizer to seek more modern headquarters in Manhattan

Quote:

Pfizer Inc, the largest U.S. drugmaker, said on Thursday it aims to sell its world headquarters buildings in midtown Manhattan by the end of 2017 and begin moving into more modern facilities in Manhattan no sooner than the first half of 2019.

"This move is being driven by the significant investment that would be required to bring the buildings to modern standards," Pfizer said in a statement.

Pfizer spokeswoman Joan Campion said the company notified employees of the plans on Wednesday. The drugmaker intends to lease rather than buy a new headquarters, she told Reuters.

Pfizer's headquarters include two buildings in midtown Manhattan with about 1 million square feet of space. Pfizer began occupying the buildings at 235 and 219 East 42nd Street in 1961. A newer complex would have more work space and room for collaboration, Campion said.

Pfizer, founded in 1849 in New York City's borough of Brooklyn, said it has not yet chosen the new location.

A large majority of headquarters-based employees will move to the more modern facility, Pfizer said. Some could be reassigned to other sites in the metropolitan area.

Pfizer's plans follow its decision in April to abandon its proposed $160 billion purchase of Botox-maker Allergan Plc. The deal would have moved the company's tax address to Dublin, thereby sharply lowering its effective tax rate.

Pfizer terminated the deal after the U.S. Treasury proposed new regulations that would have removed many of the tax advantages.
=========================
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-pf...-idUSKCN1261UO

De Minimis NY Oct 7, 2016 2:11 PM

I know this is pulling us a bit off topic, but the bigger news here is the sale of 235 E 42nd... That's going to see an FAR bump from 15 to at least 21.5 under the proposed rezoning (with opportunities to get up to 24.5 through added bonuses), all of which may increase an additional 10% if REBNY gets its way.

This is 100% going to get redeveloped under the new zoning, and, given how far it is to the east (fronting on 2nd Ave), it's going to have a very prominent position on the skyline as viewed from Brooklyn/Queens.

C. Oct 7, 2016 5:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876 (Post 7577668)
I hope Blackrock considers this now that I think about it versus its competition like 50 Hudson. IDK, I just think a tower like will be harder to fill versus 50 HY. Would be nice to get this off the ground. Plus 50 HY isn't really that stellar IMO.

http://m6.i.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1...jGoKxjc.w4.jpg

Not a fan of this building.

ILNY Oct 7, 2016 6:21 PM

^ Bjarke's inspiration came from this.

http://sun-surfer.com/photos/2012/02...marra-Iraq.jpg

http://sun-surfer.com/photos/2012/02...marra-Iraq.jpg

chris08876 Oct 7, 2016 10:03 PM

^^^

A caramel wedding cake? :runaway:

NYguy Oct 13, 2016 3:42 AM

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...state-20161010

BlackRock's relocation would shake city's office market and policymakers
Midtown east, downtown struggling to compete with far West Side



Greg David By Greg David
October 9, 2016


Quote:

Whenever BlackRock speaks, the markets quake. When BlackRock picks a location for its headquarters, the city’s office market will tremble. And the de Blasio administration could find itself under an unwelcome spotlight.

Consider this a tale of the city’s three most important office markets.

BlackRock—one of the world’s largest money managers—occupies two buildings just off Park Avenue, once the most prestigious address in midtown. But employers including Citigroup and Major League Baseball have been leaving midtown east because the buildings there are old—66 ½ years, on average—and outmoded for the way large corporations configure their operations.

BlackRock considered and then ruled out anchoring Larry Silverstein’s 2 World Trade Center tower. In January, Fox and News Corp. similarly backed out of an almost-completed deal to move to the building, which offers low rents through large city subsidies.

Now BlackRock is eyeing the far West Side. It could relocate to Hudson Yards, the great legacy of the Bloomberg administration, or to a tower that Tishman Speyer is planning one block north. It would be in good company at either location, as Hudson Yards’ developer, the Related Cos., has lured a list of well-known names: Coach, Milbank Tweed, KKR, SAP and Time Warner, to name a few. They are moving into the most modern office space anywhere, helped by significant tax breaks.

Although BlackRock might stay in midtown, as Fox and News Corp. did, the odds of a move seem good.

Here’s what the BlackRock story tells us about the city’s three major office districts:

- Downtown continues to struggle to lure the high-profile, big-name tenants it needs to fill the new skyscrapers at the World Trade Center site. Whether it can do so remains an open question, especially if the city’s economy weakens.

- The far West Side is established as the go-to location for successful companies that want to make it clear they are the best in their business. Its future seems secure.

- Midtown east is in danger of seeing its tenants slip away unless the de Blasio administration can finally push through a rezoning to allow a handful of new office buildings and modernization of old ones—something the Bloomberg administration failed at three years ago.

The de Blasio administration did green-light the SL Green Tower opposite Grand Central Terminal in a nifty deal that produced at least $220 million in improvements at the transit hub. But one building won’t solve the problem.

The latest de Blasio proposal seems to have broader support, possibly because it is forgoing money for transit improvements to instead help the landmark churches in the area sell their air rights—a decision made to neutralize a potential opponent. But it has been three years since the Bloomberg midtown east effort crashed. Time is a-wasting for the help the area needs.

chris08876 Nov 8, 2016 11:26 PM

Tishman Speyer pays $78 million to boost the size of its Hudson Yards tower

Quote:

Tishman Speyer purchased $78 million worth of air rights from the city and state earlier this year to boost the size of its planned 65-story office tower in the Hudson Yards district, Crain's has learned.

The developer recently filed plans to build a nearly 3 million-square-foot office tower called the Spiral on a full-block site between West 34th and West 35th streets along Hudson Boulevard. It's unclear when construction on the tower, located at 66 Hudson Blvd., will begin since the developer is looking for an anchor tenant first. BlackRock is considering the tower for its new headquarters.

The air rights were purchased from the city and state's joint reservoir of development rights associated with the eastern rail yards, one of two swaths of tracks rezoned in 2004 to accommodate 12.6 million square feet of development on platforms built above the yards. The Related Cos. later won the rights to the project, and is currently working on the complex's first phase.


The 2004 rezoning created additional square feet of development in the eastern rail yards that could be sold to other project developers throughout the Hudson Yards district. So far, the city and state have sold nearly 1 million square feet of these rights for a collective $190 million. There is roughly 3.6 million square feet remaining.

This would be Tishman's second air rights purchase for the Spiral. In the summer of 2015, the developer acquired nearly $30 million worth of development rights from the Imperatore family, according to The Real Deal. Tishman also spent $25 million on tenant buyouts after purchasing the land itself in two transactions totaling $438 million. With the additional development rights from the eastern rail yards, which were bought in March, the tower's size is now billed at about 350,000 square feet more than what could have originally been built on the site assemblage.

Related also purchased air rights this year directly from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, spending $18 million for 60,000 square feet. The rights were mostly used to increase the size of the firm's planned tower at 35 Hudson Yards, a residential and hotel project.
=============================
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article..._medium=social

hunser Nov 9, 2016 12:36 AM

Oh come on now! 3 million sq ft? This should be at least 1,600' and not barely 1,000'. A missed opportunity ... :frog:

NYguy Nov 9, 2016 9:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876 (Post 7616811)
Tishman Speyer pays $78 million to boost the size of its Hudson Yards tower


=============================
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article..._medium=social


This is what's always been planned. The rezoning of the Hudson Yards sites were always dependent on getting extra development rights from the railyards to get the full FAR. It's why Related's proposal for 55 Hudson is smaller than Extell's proposal for that site would have been. Related declined to get the max FAR for that site.

NYguy Nov 15, 2016 3:18 PM

I expect that they will be updating filings to show the 2.85 msf tower. The current filing still shows the 2.2 msf version...


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01

Yesh222 Nov 15, 2016 5:30 PM

2.85 msf could have been huge here. It will still make an impact, especially from the street level and midtown, but this could have been skyline-defining. Oof.

jsbrook Nov 15, 2016 6:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesh222 (Post 7623294)
2.85 msf could have been huge here. It will still make an impact, especially from the street level and midtown, but this could have been skyline-defining. Oof.

What? I believe it IS 2.85 msf. They are just not using that to build tremendously tall. Lots of valid reasons for that.

NYguy Nov 15, 2016 8:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesh222 (Post 7623294)
2.85 msf could have been huge here. It will still make an impact, especially from the street level and midtown, but this could have been skyline-defining. Oof.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsbrook (Post 7623395)
What? I believe it IS 2.85 msf. They are just not using that to build tremendously tall. Lots of valid reasons for that.


Yeah, it is HUGE. And that will be clear especially from street level. They are taking advantage of the ability to build large floorplates here, something not possible in other areas of Manhattan. One Vanderbilt will be a 1.6 msf tower, but with smaller floorplates. The purpose of the Hudson Yards wasn't just to build tall towers, though the outcome will be exactly that. The purpose was to provide for the large scale office towers that we are seeing.



http://m4.i.pbase.com/o9/06/102706/1...0Fsr9nq.w2.jpg

Yesh222 Nov 17, 2016 6:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsbrook (Post 7623395)
What? I believe it IS 2.85 msf. They are just not using that to build tremendously tall. Lots of valid reasons for that.

Yeah, by huge I meant really tall. That's why I said it will have major street-level impact but not be skyline-defining.

Submariner Nov 17, 2016 2:08 PM

My wife made mention to me today on the train that BlackRock seems intent on moving into Hudson Yards. She was at a party with her manager a few days ago and the manager was talking about their relocation plans. Initially, they were to stay in Midtown (at the two buildings they currently occupy) then decided to look elsewhere - primarily Hudson Yards and 2WTC. One of the yet-to-be constructed buildings will be the likely spot for their move.

Hearsay and speculation, but that's the word on the office floor.

artspook Nov 18, 2016 2:04 AM

this is too squat & biockzie to be named "the spiral" . .
instead it should be titled . .
dead trees on stairs wrapping ugly square footage . .

NYguy Nov 18, 2016 5:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Submariner (Post 7625336)
My wife made mention to me today on the train that BlackRock seems intent on moving into Hudson Yards. She was at a party with her manager a few days ago and the manager was talking about their relocation plans. Initially, they were to stay in Midtown (at the two buildings they currently occupy) then decided to look elsewhere - primarily Hudson Yards and 2WTC. One of the yet-to-be constructed buildings will be the likely spot for their move.

Hearsay and speculation, but that's the word on the office floor.


Good work. Keep badgering her on the train until she caves in, or decides she's had enough of you. :)

Submariner Nov 18, 2016 8:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 7626877)
Good work. Keep badgering her on the train until she caves in, or decides she's had enough of you. :)

"Your honor...I will give up my claims on all of our assets if she just tells me when Blackrock is moving to Hudson Yards."

NYguy Nov 22, 2016 2:25 PM

^ Maybe you should take her on a tour of the site, tell her she will soon be able to climb the Vessel (the artpiece).

NYguy Nov 22, 2016 3:11 PM

http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-usa...-idUKKBN13H1GJ

Famed Plaza District fades as Manhattan office landscape shifts


http://s1.reutersmedia.net/resources...=LYNXMPECAL0V2


By Herbert Lash
November 22, 2016


Quote:

Lower leasing costs, more efficient office space and the hope of projecting an image more appealing to millennials are leading hedge funds and large corporations to leave Manhattan's most-coveted business district for a rejuvenated Downtown and the trendy far West Side.

The construction of gigantic new office buildings that allow tenants to use 20 percent less space is pressuring prices and driving firms like consultants BCG and law firm WilmerHale out of the tony Plaza District in Midtown Manhattan.

In the latest potential blow to the area surrounding the elegant Plaza Hotel - the city's most coveted business address for decades - asset manager BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) is poised to lease 850,000 square feet at a planned 58-story tower at the new Hudson Yards development on the far West Side.

Also spurring the slow exodus is the notion that the area just southeast of Central Park, which includes the Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue, is showing its age and fails to satisfy the city's burgeoning millennial workforce.

Buildings along Park Avenue in the half-square-mile Plaza section of Midtown on average were built in 1960. The area roughly runs from 50th to 59th streets and is bounded by Lexington and Sixth Avenues.

"For large, dynamic companies, these older buildings don't work as well, they just don't," said Bill Montana, senior managing director at New York-based Savills Studley, a unit of global real estate firm Savills Plc (SVS.L).

The new buildings are significantly more efficient and large companies use the space to compete for top talent, Montana said.

Four towers with an average height of 69 stories that are under construction by Related Cos, Brookfield Properties and the Moinian Group at Hudson Yards already are pressuring prices. Five other behemoths have been proposed for the far West Side.


Average leasing rates for 62 "trophy" buildings in Midtown have slid a touch more than 1 percent in October from a post-recession peak last year of $99.43 a square foot, which capped a 33 percent increase since 2009, real estate specialist Jones Lang LaSalle said.

Asking rents for the Plaza District averaged $95.47 a square foot for Class A buildings in the third quarter, compared to $66.05 a square foot for space in the World Trade Center in Lower Manhattan, real estate firm Colliers International (CIGI.TO) said.

BlackRock would like to add a cafeteria and auditorium, amenities that are missing at its two offices across the street from each other on 52nd Street, said a source with knowledge of the real estate search.

The move, which would involve about 2,800 staff, but has not been finalized, is as good or better financially than to stay, the source said. Projected rents for anchor tenants in the Plaza District when BlackRock's leases are up in 2023 are much higher.


A BlackRock spokesman declined to comment.

There is no new, large-scale construction underway in the Plaza District, though landlords have ordered major renovations such as a $325 million makeover at the old Time-Life Building on Sixth Avenue that has been rebranded 1271 Avenue of the Americas.

LEASING RATES FOR 'TROPHY' BUILDINGS SLIP

To be sure, no one is writing the area off. The Plaza still has cachet for many.

"Midtown will always prosper," said Cynthia Wasserberger, a managing director at JLL in New York. "Those landlords have to react a little differently to how they're going to fill the hole left behind."

Earlier this year JLL said almost half the world's 428 hedge funds with at least $1 billion in assets had New York offices.

Of those 208 sites, 94 percent were in Midtown Manhattan, with almost two-thirds located in the Plaza District, JLL said. One marquee hedge fund, Citadel LLC, in February agreed to pay a record $300 a square foot for part of the penthouse at 425 Park Avenue, according to media reports.

Citadel's average rent will be $175 a square foot on average after its other floors are included. Citadel declined to comment.

Still, high-profile names have left or will soon, such as private equity firm KKR's planned move from the Solow Building on West 57th Street, often called the city's most prestigious building, to Hudson Yards. The move is seen as highly symbolic.

The Plaza District has been losing ground for a while. It has been the third-lowest recipient of corporate cross-market relocations in Manhattan since 2011, when leases of more than 50,000 square feet are examined, according to Colliers.

But the Plaza, the city's biggest sub-market, has seen the largest departure of companies that have moved from Midtown, Midtown South or the downtown business centers in the almost six-year period up to mid-September, a Colliers report said.

During that time Midtown lost 30 tenants, a dozen of those from the Plaza, including five that moved to new construction, Colliers said in its "Manhattan Without Borders" report.

A drop-off in leasing demand is particularly apparent in the Plaza District, where the increase in available space surged by almost 4 percentage points in the third quarter to 12.9 percent from a year-ago, according to a recent Savills Studley report.

"There is a very strong base of people who still want to be in the Plaza District, myself included," Montana said. "For a lot of younger people, that's not what they aspire to. So the demand is less for the Plaza District because of building stock and because of change in taste."

a very long weekend Nov 22, 2016 11:22 PM

^ super good news. an exodus of these large tenants toward the far west side that gets all these buildings up will put a lot of pressure on the city/state/feds to upgrade penn station. plus all it should speed the residential components (particularly covering the second half of the actual hudson yards), which will help as any new housing does in manhattan. and who knows, maybe one day they'll build the infill station on the 7 line too. or rebuild javits. anyway, midtown's loss is the city's gain.

Speculator Nov 25, 2016 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a very long weekend (Post 7630670)
^ super good news. an exodus of these large tenants toward the far west side that gets all these buildings up will put a lot of pressure on the city/state/feds to upgrade penn station. plus all it should speed the residential components (particularly covering the second half of the actual hudson yards), which will help as any new housing does in manhattan. and who knows, maybe one day they'll build the infill station on the 7 line too. or rebuild javits. anyway, midtown's loss is the city's gain.

You mean more of an upgrade than what is happening now and over the next 4 years?

mrnyc Nov 28, 2016 5:51 PM

the spiral of banality

NYguy Nov 30, 2016 8:26 PM

https://commercialobserver.com/2016/...-right-moment/

The Spiral
Size: 2.8 million square feet
Developer: Tishman Speyer



Quote:

Once upon a time, Tishman Speyer could have been the developer of what’s today the Hudson Yards complex. But because the market wasn’t right, executives decided not to build a city within a city on top of a rail yard.

Now, however, the owner of Rockefeller Center and the Chrysler Building has its chance to shine on the Far West Side. Tishman Speyer has ambitious plans with The Spiral, a 2.8-million-square-foot office tower along 10th Avenue between West 34th and West 35th Streets (its official address will be 66 Hudson Boulevard). Starchitect Bjarke Ingels designed the 1,005-foot tower. His concept includes greenery going on the spiraled terraces of the building that at the bottom links to the end of the High Line.

Tishman Speyer, which declined to comment via a spokesman, still has a ways to go on the project (one of two properties it plans to construct on the Far West Side). The developer has secured $1 billion in equity from unidentified international investors, Bloomberg reported in February. Part of that money has been used to pay for development rights, which Tishman Speyer has purchased from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

But before the trees of the High Line start hitting the skyline, a couple of things need to happen. Namely, Tishman Speyer needs a large-scale tenant to occupy a decent chunk of the building, which rivals 1 World Trade Center and the Empire State Building in terms of square footage.

Financing for the project has also yet to be announced for the project, which means they’re likely relying on a tenant to sign.

Private equity giant Blackrock is rumored to be the prime candidate to anchor the building. But in recent weeks, reports have indicated that the mega-money manager is leaning toward 50 Hudson Yards, a planned office tower under development by Related Companies and Oxford Properties Group at 10th Avenue and West 34th Street.

“There’s always a question whether market demand is sufficient to fill the space,” Anderson said of overall development on the Far West Side. “Right now supply is growing rapidly and the question is whether there’s sufficient demand to fill it. Only time will tell.”

TechTalkGuy Nov 30, 2016 9:57 PM

:previous: In other words; The Spiral and 2 WTC have something in common, they are unable to attract interest. :uhh:


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.