SkyscraperPage Forum - NEW YORK | 270 Park Ave | 1,389 FT

Prev 1 2 345 6 7 8 14 54 89 Next

Viewing Page 4 of 89

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)

- Supertall Construction (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=323)

- - NEW YORK | 270 Park Ave | 1,389 FT | 57 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=232215)

NYguy

Mar 6, 2018 7:47 AM

The redevelopment would be quite a spectacle, all visible from the deck at Top of the Rock...

andrew.ratner

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4648/3...59bffbe0_k.jpg

yankeesfan1000

Mar 6, 2018 1:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amanita (Post 8108635)

...I don't know as much about 245- if that one were mine, I might look at a reclad to give it a fresh new look. I was looking through its official website last night, and it's a Brookfield building. They seem to be taking pretty good care of it, and keeping it up to date, in a similar fashion to 277.
However I'm not surprised to see Pfizer on the list- like 270 Park Avenue, it's owned and occupied by one company as far as I know, which makes it a target for the same reason...

I used to work in 245, and I'd be willing to bet it gets demo'd. Owner is looking to sell, and as one of those articles NYGuy posted stated, “Financial companies of Chase’s size and complexity can’t just refurbish a dinosaur and say, ‘We can squeeze in a little more fiber-optic cable.’ They need to design their own electronics, sustainability features and redundant systems, which you can only fully do in a new building.” I was on one of the nicer trading floors, and it was still pretty bleh, especially in comparison to the floors at other firms.

It's more complicated, because as you noted, there isn't a single tenant in 245. But if 245 got replaced, a brand new, Class A building, with potentially custom built out spaces for tenants, across from GCT, the rents would be astronomical. For general reference Citadel is paying $175 /sf, and $300 /sf for the upper floors at 425 Park Ave. I think that's the nail in the coffin for 245. 277 is one of the better buildings on Park though, which surprisingly isn't saying much. I'd bet 250 and 280 Park get the wrecking ball too.

JMKeynes

Mar 6, 2018 2:50 PM

245 is heinous. I’d like to see a 1,500’ mixed use there with a apartments at the top.

JSsocal

Mar 6, 2018 3:06 PM

245 is as ugly as they come, a full block building and it has an elevator shaft wall on its exterior smh.

277 Is far inferior to 270, not worth fighting over imo

299 is ugly bland and poor proportioned. The worst part is NYC has 3 of them...
(See 1345 6th ave & Paramount Plaza).

237 park ave would also be good to go. It has a great atrium but its small and charmless otherwise

BoM Trespasser

Mar 6, 2018 3:30 PM

I have never been inside 270 ParK Ave. But I have worked in other mid century office buildings, they can look okay from the outside but inside lots of columns making for rabbit warren effect, dirty beige look to everything and surprisingly little natural light coming through old windows. Outdoor terraces to enjoy a break or corporate gathering on a warm spring day? Only in the beautiful new building a few blocks away.

NYguy

Mar 6, 2018 4:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000 (Post 8109236)

if 245 got replaced, a brand new, Class A building, with potentially custom built out spaces for tenants, across from GCT, the rents would be astronomical. For general reference Citadel is paying $175 /sf, and $300 /sf for the upper floors at 425 Park Ave. I think that's the nail in the coffin for 245. 277 is one of the better buildings on Park though, which surprisingly isn't saying much. I'd bet 250 and 280 Park get the wrecking ball too.

Everybody will be looking to improve in one form or another. The other significance of the midtown east rezoning is that it allows developers to build larger buildings, where before they couldn't even build towers of the same size on site unless they kept a portion of the old building intact, which is the route L&L took with 425 Park.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSsocal (Post 8109332)

299 is ugly bland and poor proportioned. The worst part is NYC has 3 of them...

That one will likely get a makeover soon..

https://nypost.com/2018/03/05/299-pa...-a-new-tenant/

Quote:

By Steve Cuozzo
March 5, 2018

A new tenant is coming to Fisher Brothers’ 299 Park Ave. — Traxys Group, which signed for 29,771 square feet. Traxys, a commodity trader-merchant in metals and natural resources, will move next year from 825 Third Ave.

The signing brings 299 Park Ave. to 85 percent leased.

The tower will begin a major capital improvement program this year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoM Trespasser (Post 8109368)

Open space and terraces, double height floors, these are just some of the things that make modern office buildings more attractive to employees, beyond what other needs tenants require in today's market. Chase will take up temporary space at 390 Madison, another building that was able to reposition itself for todays market, a hybrid of old and new.

https://www.cpexecutive.com/post/jpm...-office-tower/

by Keith Loria
Mar 06, 2018

Quote:

JPMorgan Chase has signed a 10-year lease at 390 Madison Ave., a 32-story office redevelopment being done by a joint venture between L&L Holding Co. and Clarion Partners LLC, acting on behalf of the New York State Common Retirement Fund.

The joint venture is currently transforming the former 380 Madison, re-massing the 850,000-square-foot property through the demolition of 3 million pounds of concrete and more than 160,000 square feet to make room for the addition of several new floors atop the existing structure.

In 2017, the developers finished the tower’s structural transformation, increasing the old 24-story building by 108 feet to its new height of 32 stories and 373 feet. The original mid-20th century high-rise will now feature massive column-free spans, high ceilings, modern infrastructure, a new façade of transparent, floor-to-ceiling glass and 13 outdoor terraces.

Under the terms of the deal, JPMorgan Chase will occupy 436,905 square feet, encompassing 16 office floors and two street-level retail spaces. The office space includes a conference center, multiple outdoor terraces and several double-height amenity areas. A Chase bank branch will take up one of the ground floor spaces.

https://media.atre.yardi.com/2/66041...jpg?preset=max

Amanita

Mar 6, 2018 7:58 PM

I like to tell people that 299 Park and 1345 6th are virtual twins (Same architect, same developer), just that one is two years younger and bigger. 1345's facade has been beautifully maintained, sleek and piercing black. 299's got the same facade, but it's due for refurbishing, which is probably what they're talking about.
I also love how Paramount Plaza looks like it could kick ass and take names- black steel, glass, and badassery. 277 has some of that black glass and badass going for it too, but with a bit of elegance- the fact that its pinstripes are spaced further apart than many other buildings with pinstripe facades helps them read better from a distance, and its tall crown is nice too. I also like its "tail"- a lot of buildings of that time period (including 270) had similar tails or bustles, which I think were a relic of the building codes at the time and their setback requirements. Dare I say it 277's got a nicer tail than even 270.

I've seen a number of buildings with those exposed brick or concrete elevator cores, and every time I do, I think "Somebody needs some body art!" Seriously, some of those would look really cool with murals or interesting geometric patterns applied to them. In 245's case, even a reclad would do that one a world of good- replace the brick with modern glass and terra cotta, and do something with that elevator core wall to either camouflage it or make it look cool.

artspook

Mar 7, 2018 2:03 AM

a 1200 ft tower on this stretch of Park Ave will be magnificent . . (unless its ugly) . .
but if they hadn't announced which building, that they were going to demolish for it,
I'd have said, destroy any one of them, maybe even the Seagram . .
but please leave 270 Park . .
I am not a huge fan of 60's boxy modernism . .
I loved the twins , the secretariat, UN Trump, but very few others . .
most visually reek of "cheap" . . (like all the others around 270)
But I love the skidmore owings & merrill tower's elegant proportion,
the many vertical silver rails that richly shoot up the building's height
separating glass panes . . and its high light vertical lobby . .
(which used to be red when Union Carbide headquartered there) . .
it's just something uplifting that you sense, when you walk by it . .
there's a distinctive haute je ne sais quoi . .
check out this month's "Luxe." magazine . . there's a great picture of it
brand new . . cleanly towering over everything in the neighborhood . .

Crawford

Mar 7, 2018 2:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSsocal (Post 8109332)

237 park ave would also be good to go. It has a great atrium but its small and charmless otherwise

That's been an on-and-off development site for 20 years now. 237 Park (which is really on Lex) will be demolished, eventually.

It isn't particularly small, though. It's about the same size as 270 Park (1.2 million sq. ft.)

NYguy

Mar 7, 2018 5:11 AM

Amanita

Mar 7, 2018 5:28 AM

^Nice pics. I've got a good shot of 277's "tail" section, but I've never gotten a good one of 270's. Quite a few buildings around that time period had them (1290 6th avenue has quite the tail on her too!), probably a relic of setback requirements.

NYguy

Mar 7, 2018 5:36 AM

^ The thing about the 270 base (and tower) is that it terminates the Vanderbilt vista, so it's easier to get a look at even when you're not next to it. I expect the new tower will do the same.

NYguy

Mar 7, 2018 7:40 AM

https://archpaper.com/2018/03/please...bide-building/

The Union Carbide building should be torn down

By MATT SHAW
March 6, 2018

Quote:

When news broke last week about JP Morgan Chase’s plans to tear down 270 Park Avenue, otherwise known as the Union Carbide Building, by Skidmore Owings & Merrill (SOM), the New York architecture community predictably went up in arms. Critics like New York Magazine’s Justin Davidson lambasted the plans as “obscene,” while Curbed’s Alexandra Lange called the plan “shortsighted.”

But after the initial shock at such a huge building being torn down has faded—it would be the tallest building to be voluntarily demolished—there has still been little to no convincing argument offered for JP Morgan Chase to save the building.

The Union Carbide building should be torn down. In fact, we should cheer as it falls because it represents the worst of midcentury American corporate architecture, something that at the time was totalizing, banal, repetitive, and dogmatic—when everything began to look similar.

JSsocal

Mar 7, 2018 2:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 8110707)

https://archpaper.com/2018/03/please...bide-building/

The Union Carbide building should be torn down

By MATT SHAW
March 6, 2018

Yikes what a twat. So what, save lever house and seagram and we're done saving midcentury modern buildings?

If his argument is that "they all look the same" & "1960s people were bad people and don't deserve to be remembered" then he shouldn't be writing editorials for AN.

This city saves districts and districts of row houses and prewar buildings even though they're markedly similar.

---------------------------

This project is still worth it, a new 1,200' building is exciting. But we should note that what's here now is exceptional.

Remember, they tore down the Waldorf Astoria for the Empire State Building. What's existing can be great, and what's to come can also be great.

Crawford

Mar 7, 2018 2:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSsocal (Post 8110862)

So what, save lever house and seagram and we're done saving midcentury modern buildings?

On Park Ave., yeah. There are no other midcentury bldgs on Park worth saving.

Union Carbide occupied this bldg from 1960 to 1981, when it moved its global HQ to Danbury, CT, during the great corporate HQ exodus from Manhattan to leafy suburbia. It then, like most Park Avenue towers, became a Wall Street bldg., more or less, eventually becoming Chase Manhattan HQ, and then Chase-JP Morgan HQ.

JSsocal

Mar 7, 2018 3:09 PM

^Oh well on Park that's a different story. The only other building the LPC's considered there which I'm on the fence about is 445 park

NYguy

Mar 7, 2018 8:12 PM

There are enough landmarks in the district. The issue has been visited, and revisited. That isn't the issue here anyway. The issue is whether the city was going to allow the district to fade as a top business district, and the answer was no (and why would it?). Chase, formerly one of the business intent on leaving, has decided to stay, largely due to the city's own rezoning. That, along with the rezoning of the Hudson Yards, has shown that the city can have a hand in its own fate. Let's not try to act like we're taking down Penn Station here.

http://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/...el-on-park-ave

PRESERVATIONISTS FIGHT TO SAVE MID-CENTURY MARVEL IN MIDTOWN

By Michael Scotto
March 6, 2018

Quote:

.....Supporters say demolishing this building is not just important to JP Morgan Chase but also to the de Blasio administration's efforts to modernize this business district.

Chase says the current building is too small for its workforce. The man who helped to write the rezoning plan says if Chase were to build elsewhere in the city it would be a blow to Midtown.

"JP Morgan's decision on where it would locate was perhaps the most important decision that would determine the future of East Midtown, and this is now a very positive development," said Carl Weisbrod, former NYC Planning Commission Chairman.

But preservationists say the de Blasio administration needs to think more about saving the city's history.

"I think preservation is not a priority of this administration," said Tara Kelly of the Municipal Arts Society.

They warn that if Chase does not change its mind, they will look at legal options to save the building.

JSsocal

Mar 7, 2018 8:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 8111379)

There are enough landmarks in the district.

There's more to add. The Lincoln Building for example.
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/MID/MID149-B01.jpg

JMKeynes

Mar 7, 2018 8:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 8111379)

I'd like to know where all of these morons were over the past ten years when scores of gorgeous, old buildings were razed.

Amanita

Mar 8, 2018 12:40 AM

^I would not be surprised if some of those "Morons" tried to save those too. If we could refrain from childish name calling, that'd be great.

Busy Bee

Mar 8, 2018 12:44 AM

*Cough* Bancroft *Cough*

sbarn

Mar 8, 2018 3:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSsocal (Post 8111413)

There's more to add. The Lincoln Building for example.
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/MID/MID149-B01.jpg

This building should absolutely be landmarked.

Prezrezc

Mar 8, 2018 3:28 AM

Why would it *not* be?

That and the Chanin are perhaps the two most underappreciated/overlooked period towers in the City.

And calling an obsolescent utilitarian crackerbox a "marvel" is like calling the Waldorf-Astoria a commie block.

NYguy

Mar 8, 2018 4:15 PM

I've thought about what parts of this building could or should be saved, but I honestly couldn't think of any. But the point is, it's coming down, so the preservationists should put their efforts into deciding which pieces they want to save for posterity, and work on that.

https://therealdeal.com/2018/03/08/t...ill-disappear/

The world’s largest voluntary demolition will be done in pieces. Here’s how 270 Park will disappear

By Kathryn Brenzel
March 08, 2018

Quote:

From the outside, the demolition of 270 Park Avenue will look like a painfully tame round of Jenga. Inside, crews will meticulously tear apart 60 years worth of history.

Quote:

Chapter 33 of the city’s building code is a demolition contractor’s “bible,” said Luis Valderruten, a structural engineer with Breeze Demolition. The law spells out how to take apart a building piece-by-piece and the various precautions required along the way.

First, the city’s building code requires owners to remove or contain harmful substances before demolition begins. Once that’s done, the building will be completely enclosed with netting to contain the site (scaffolding is also often used, but due to the Park Avenue tower’s height, a cocoon system is a more likely choice here).

All windows will be removed, along with fixtures, skylights and doors. From there, floors are disassembled from the top down. Mini-excavators, along with handheld tools, are used to break up the concrete slabs. Contractors have also employed demolition robots to take on this role (AECOM Tishman did it at 30 Hudson Yards) but the technology remains a rare feature of jobs in the city. Acetylene torches are used to cut apart steel beams and framing, and structural columns — which are the last to be removed — will be broken into smaller pieces.

Quote:

Stock said it takes about a week to take apart each floor, though contractors will probably aim to work at a faster pace. So, for the Park Avenue tower, it’ll likely take roughly a year for the building to disappear.

Busy Bee

Mar 8, 2018 4:54 PM

Quote:

From there, floors are disassembled from the top down.

I'm so glad they cleared that up

Amanita

Mar 8, 2018 7:22 PM

Ugh, I felt ill reading that. Poor 270 Park :(

NYguy

Mar 8, 2018 8:29 PM

I wonder if there will be a cam to watch the development take shape. But more importantly, I want to know when the review process kicks off so we can get some details.

dc_denizen

Mar 9, 2018 1:26 AM

never liked the chase tower, but man..

NYguy

Mar 9, 2018 2:54 AM

http://www.manhattanexpressnews.nyc/...town-rezoning/

JPMorgan Chase’s Big Plans on Park Ave. Create First Skirmish Under East Midtown Rezoning

http://www.manhattanexpressnews.nyc/...age-1-copy.jpg

Added by paul on March 8, 2018

Quote:

.....right out of the box, the first major redevelopment project announced under the rezoning — JPMorgan Chase’s construction of a 2.5 million square-foot world headquarters at the site of its 52-story building at 270 Park Ave., between E. 47th and 48th Sts. — is drawing fire from preservation advocates as well as architectural critics.

In a Feb. 21 letter to the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission, Simeon Bankoff, executive director of the Historic Districts Council, voiced alarm at JPMorgan Chase’s announcement, noting, “The building was designed by Gordon Bunshaft and Natalie de Blois of Skidmore Owings and Merrill [SOM] and is recognized as a very significant example of midcentury corporate Modernism as practiced by the masters of the form. It is especially remarkable as an acknowledged work by a female architect in the male-dominated field of architectural design. This is one of the buildings which defined New York City as the capital of the 20th Century, strongly situated in the corridors of post-war power.”

Quote:

For all the building’s merits as architecture worthy of preservation, however, advocates for saving 270 Park face a steep political hurdle — unanimous support among local and state officials for JPMorgan Chase’s plan.

“This is our plan for East Midtown in action,” Mayor Bill de Blasio stated in the company’s Feb. 21 press release. “Good jobs, modern buildings, and concrete improvements that will make East Midtown stronger for the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who work here. We look forward to working with JPMorgan Chase as it doubles-down on New York as its international home.”

In the same release, Governor Andrew Cuomo said, “JPMorgan Chase’s commitment to build their new, state-of-the-art corporate headquarters and support thousands of jobs here in New York is proof that our economic development strategies are successful, and I look forward to working with them to keep New York State’s momentum moving forward.”

Quote:

The appeal by the Historic Districts Council and other preservationists — including the New York Landmarks Conservancy and Docomomo US — represents a huge political ask of the LPC, which though an independent agency is ultimately under mayoral control. Bankoff acknowledged as much. “The LPC is a mayoral agency,” he said. “This is a very tough thing. It’s very hard for an agency to go against their boss.”

Quote:

In an emailed statement, a spokesperson for the LPC told the newspaper, regarding 270 Park, “Further consideration of this building as a landmark is not among the Commission’s priorities at this time. As part of the interagency East Midtown rezoning initiative, the Commission evaluated buildings in the area, including this one. As a result, we prioritized and designated 12 iconic buildings that represented the key periods of development in the area as individual landmarks, but the JPMorgan Chase building was not among them.

.....Notably, the LPC’s 1995 designation report on the Pepsi-Cola Building, at 500 Park Ave. at E. 59th St., notes the leading role played by SOM architect Natalie de Blois, who also worked on Lever House, at 390 Park at E. 54th St.

Skyguy_7

Mar 9, 2018 3:45 AM

Why go through all this trouble when Chase could easily be the anchor tenant at a trophy tower at Hudson yards, WTC, 1 Vanderbilt, etc. Is it THAT prime of a location?

Amanita

Mar 9, 2018 4:58 AM

^Yeah, 1 Vanderbilt is already under construction, they could move in a LOT faster.

BoM Trespasser

Mar 9, 2018 4:25 PM

TD Bank is the anchor tenant at 1 Vanderbilt. Maybe 2 big banks don't want to share same building. Also JP Morgan wants to consolidate many thousands of employees and I don't think there would be enough space.

JMKeynes

Mar 9, 2018 4:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 8113495)

Why go through all this trouble when Chase could easily be the anchor tenant at a trophy tower at Hudson yards, WTC, 1 Vanderbilt, etc. Is it THAT prime of a location?

Only in NY. This is a city with unlimited money.

Zerton

Mar 9, 2018 5:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 8113495)

Why go through all this trouble when Chase could easily be the anchor tenant at a trophy tower at Hudson yards, WTC, 1 Vanderbilt, etc. Is it THAT prime of a location?

They're getting a major tax break because the city wants to revitalize east Midtown. It has older building stock. 1 Vanderbilt is also benefiting from this.

Edit: That's wrong. Rezoning - not tax break.

Crawford

Mar 9, 2018 9:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyguy_7 (Post 8113495)

Why go through all this trouble when Chase could easily be the anchor tenant at a trophy tower at Hudson yards, WTC, 1 Vanderbilt, etc. Is it THAT prime of a location?

Why go through all the trouble of moving to another neighborhood, forcing like 15,000 employees to have different (often worse) commutes?

1 Vanderbilt is already spoken for, and is not designed for investment banks. The banks have very specific requirements re. trading floors, floorplate size, redundancy, etc.

Crawford

Mar 9, 2018 9:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zerton (Post 8114042)

They're getting a major tax break because the city wants to revitalize east Midtown. It has older building stock. 1 Vanderbilt is also benefiting from this.

I don't think there's any tax break associated with building in this neighborhood.

I'm fairly certain the opposite is true. To receive zoning approvals you basically have to pay for major transit/infrastructure improvements, like to the tune of hundreds of millions.

JMKeynes

Mar 9, 2018 9:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crawford (Post 8114496)

That’s true.

This is something that could only happen in the financial capital of the world where money is endless.

Dac150

Mar 10, 2018 11:45 PM

Fascinating to read up a little on the deconstruction process … once its gets going I'm sure many who are unaware of what's going on will be very confused. I'm starting to come around on this … it's important that Midtown position itself for the future … to lose JPMC would be a big blow. Park Avenue in particular has already lost / will lose several marquee tenants.

chris08876

Mar 11, 2018 12:18 AM

^^^^

The hope is that the Midtown East rezoning would revitalize the area. Granted the new player in town, Hudson Yards (And its proxy neighborhoods), are quickly becoming a mecca for business, but with the zoning benefits, hopefully the increase in Class-A space, the increase in sq-footage, and a friendlier development stance will invigorate Midtown East.

NYguy

Mar 13, 2018 4:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150 (Post 8115419)

Glad you're coming around to the big picture.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bfj1GHOl...en-by=aiasnyit

https://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram...ODU4Ng%3D%3D.2

JMKeynes

Mar 13, 2018 5:18 PM

If Mr. Rogers were here, he’d ask: "Boys and girls, can you say 'Greatest city in the world?'"

Prezrezc

Mar 13, 2018 6:16 PM

Indeed...

In what other city in the country are you going to see so much rising all around you that the piecemeal dismantling of a 700' skyscraper will hardly be noticed in any way?

If such had taken place even ten years ago---no...five---it would've garnered national attention.

NYguy

Mar 13, 2018 10:03 PM

^ It'll still get some attention, mainly because we don't see this often. But really not as big a deal in the overall scheme of New York. If a skyscraper comes down in the forest, will anyone notice?

https://www.economist.com/news/unite...t-shifting-its

New York’s gargantuan development is shifting its centre westward
The east side has plans to wrest it back

https://www.economist.com/sites/defa...310_USP505.jpg

Mar 8th 2018

Quote:

THE far west side of Manhattan’s midtown is a hive of activity. Lorries buzz in and out ferrying materials, cranes dot the skyline. Construction workers in hard hats shout instructions at each other and exchange cheerful gibes. Each week the cityscape changes as new high-rises get taller. New Yorkers, who once had little reason to go to the parcel of land called Hudson Yards, are starting to see a new glossy neighbourhood emerge.

For decades this part of Manhattan was not just on the wrong side of the tracks, it was the tracks.

Quote:

The area stretching from 30th to 41st Street and from 8th to 11th Avenues had been zoned for manufacturing, which has all but disappeared from Manhattan. A failed Olympic bid served as a catalyst for development for Mr Bloomberg, who worried about white-collar jobs migrating to New Jersey. He persuaded the city to pay for an extension of a subway line, the first expansion of the transport system in three decades.

...The result is Hudson Yards, the largest private property development by square footage in America’s history. The 28-acre (11-hectare) site will be complete by 2025. By then, 125,000 people will work, visit or live in Hudson Yards, which includes five office high-rises, eight residential buildings and a retail complex with 100 shops and restaurants. The new district will have more office space than Palo Alto, California. One of the new towers will have an observation deck higher than the Empire State Building. A public school is in the works, as well as 14 acres of public open space.

Quote:

That means leaving behind thousands of square metres of empty floor space in Midtown East, once the most coveted site for offices and still the city’s most expensive commercial space. More than 300 of the 400 buildings in the district were built before 1961. Their average age is 73.

Quote:

The 73-block area got a boost last summer when the city council agreed to a re-zoning plan, allowing the development of 6.5m square feet of new office space. After considering moving to Hudson Yards, JPMorgan Chase, America’s biggest bank, announced last month that it had decided to stay on the east side. It intends to demolish its 60-year old home and build a new 70-storey high-rise on Park Avenue. Other plans are sure to follow, but it will take time to build out the area, perhaps as long as two decades.

...Manhattan once had two main business districts, says Keith DeCoster of Savills Studley, a brokerage. Midtown East competed with the city’s financial district for decades. Now, including Hudson Yards and the Flatiron district, it has four.

https://www.economist.com/sites/defa...310_USM908.png

Prezrezc

Mar 13, 2018 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 8118762)

If a skyscraper comes down in the forest, will anyone notice?

Well, it's sure likely it won't make much of a noise, considering how it'll be deconstructed.

But now that it's basically occluded by taller structures from almost every direction, I kinda doubt anyone will notice that much.

I wonder what this "cocoon" covering described in an earlier posted article will look like.

NYguy

Mar 14, 2018 5:19 AM

It won't go quietly into the night in regards to the would be preservationists, but in a busy city where even taller towers going up don't make much of a stir, in that regard, no.

https://nypost.com/2018/03/13/jpmorg...s-controversy/

JPMorgan’s air rights transaction stirs controversy

By Lois Weiss
March 13, 2018

Quote:

A large Midtown air-rights transaction that allows JPMorgan Chase to develop a taller and bigger tower on the site of its current 270 Park Ave. headquarters has inadvertently stirred up questions about an investment in these air rights made by a group that includes one of the bank’s largest customers.

The group purchased the investment at a fire-sale price, records show, but sources advised those records are wrong.

Quote:

JPM is buying the air rights from a partnership that includes tech guru Michael Dell’s private investment firm, MSD Capital, and local real estate developers the Elghanayan family’s TF Cornerstone, and Andrew Penson’s Argent Ventures.

The JPM purchase is about half of a 1.35-million-square- foot swath of air rights owned by the three groups.

Quote:

Around 2015, sources said Penson exercised a buy-sell agreement, but needed new sophisticated investors who could understand the complexities of owning the land under Grand Central, its tracks and its air rights. In early 2016, a merchant banker brought in the nimble MSD which teamed up with locals TFC.

In July 2016, MSD and TFC bought out Fortress and Lehman — paying, according to records they filed with the city, $63 million, or $48.46 per square foot.....Along with Penson’s 10 percent share, the pricing came to $140 million, about $104 per foot. “The City register did not pick up the entire transaction,” a source said.

At the $104-per-square- foot price, the group will pocket — after a 5 percent fee paid to Grand Central Terminal — roughly $90 million, or about twice its investment in 18 months.

Quote:

Michael Dell spent much of 2014, 2015 and parts of 2016 working with JPM to finance and complete computer-maker Dell Inc.’s purchase of EMC for $67 billion — with Dell telling employees to “go big or go home, baby.”

Quote:

Without the incorrect TFC/MSD late transaction filing, Manhattan air rights in 2017 would have averaged $315 per square foot, commercial real estate data services firm Tenantwise found.

“For offices, air rights are now in the low-$300-per-square-foot range,” said M. Myers Mermel, CEO of Tenantwise.

jackster99

Mar 14, 2018 5:41 PM

I've been trying to imagine a design that they might go with here/would look best.

I think something like London's Shard would look amazing.

That's something the New York skyline is missing IMO, a sharp edged knife of glass that cuts the sky at 1200+ feet

patriotizzy

Mar 14, 2018 6:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackster99 (Post 8119700)

I disagree on what would look best.

I want something akin to Brooklyn's supertall that is near construction. Something with a gothic crown, and a shape that tapers off with many setbacks as it peaks.

Not a fan of buildings of which their whole design element is focused on one angle, or one certain aspect that makes it artistic.

NYguy

Mar 19, 2018 1:51 PM

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...n-a-year-later

For Sale: A $2 Billion Tower From the ’60s

By David M Levitt
March 19, 2018

Quote:

HNA Group Co. will be hard-pressed to get anything close to the $2.2 billion it paid for a Manhattan office tower during its real estate binge. Last year, the Chinese conglomerate bought 245 Park Ave., a late 1960s-era building that’s home to JPMorgan Chase & Co., paying one of the highest prices ever for a New York office property.

Quote:

“You’d have to put a ton of money into it,” said Kraut, who estimated the 1.7 million-square-foot (158,000-square-meter) property will require about $850 million in upgrades, like a new lobby and sprinkler system, and another almost $230 million more to renovate spaces for tenants over time. That’s “a lot of risk even for Park Avenue.”

Quote:

HNA’s 45-story Park Avenue tower, near Grand Central Terminal in Midtown, is home to a collection of high-profile companies such as French bank Societe Generale SA, Major League Baseball and alternative investment firm Angelo Gordon & Co. Its largest tenant, JPMorgan, occupies more than 40 percent of the building, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

A new owner will have to contend with vacancies of about 13 percent, according to data firm CoStar Group Inc., and tenants leaving for renovated buildings. JPMorgan’s lease expires in 2022. Last month, the bank announced plans to erect a new skyscraper at the site of its current headquarters at 270 Park Ave. The firm could leave 245 Park Ave. and consolidate in the new building, which it plans to complete by 2024. Major League Baseball is leaving behind about 220,000-square feet of space and moving to 1271 Avenue of the Americas, which underwent a $600 million renovation.

Quote:

“Tenants come and go all the time on Park Avenue,” said Scott Rechler, chief executive officer of RXR Realty LLC, landlord to nearby 237 Park Ave. and the Helmsley Building at 230 Park Ave., a New York City landmark.

HNA’s Park Avenue tower should benefit from ongoing growth and an influx of people to the area. By 2022, SL Green Realty Corp.’s multibillion-dollar project at 1 Vanderbilt will be complete and the effort to bring Long Island Rail Road trains into Grand Central should be done, Rechler said.

JMKeynes

Mar 19, 2018 1:58 PM

245 is the worst building on Park. I'd like to see it get torn down.

NYguy

Mar 19, 2018 9:50 PM

Is it bad when an architecture magazine can't point out the correct tower? This is at least the second time I've seen the building misidentified.

http://www.architectmagazine.com/des...h-a-bad-idea_o

Saving the Big Bland Box Might Not Be Such a Bad Idea

https://cdnassets.hw.net/dims4/GG/7e...ior-aerial.jpg

Meanwhile, planning is underway for the new tower...

https://jobs.chase.com/ShowJob/Id/11...tive-Director/

All times are GMT. The time now is 2:21 AM.

Prev 1 2 345 6 7 8 14 54 89 Next

Viewing Page 4 of 89

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page