HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2012, 11:48 PM
RobertWalpole RobertWalpole is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,911
Smile NEW YORK | 343 Madison Avenue | 844 FT | 49 FLOORS

Therealdeal.com reported on 28 Feb. 2012 that the MTA is submitting RFPs to developers for its Madison Avenue headquarters. It's sad because it's a nice, per-war tower. That being said, a lot of air rights exist here, and something over 300m could rise here.

Last edited by RobertWalpole; Feb 29, 2012 at 12:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 12:24 AM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,728
By it's you mean the MTA! & this is exciting news.

I wish more companies would do what Hearst did with its HQ; the facade is really all that matters on these buildings as most of the interiors are dingy etc.

People worried about the visual impact of 432 Park (cross fingers it gets to 1,700 as you mentioned was possible) are delusional... all of Midtown is going to be sprouting 1,000' towers by the end of the decade. NYC is going to have the first skyline in the world that is truly Coruscant-esque.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 12:40 AM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,770
There are a number of major development sites along Madison near Grand Central that could yield 1000 ft.+ towers.

I think this part of town will look very different 10 years from now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 12:45 AM
RobertWalpole RobertWalpole is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,911
That's true. There are A LOT of unused air rights from GCT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 12:46 AM
babybackribs2314 babybackribs2314 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: UWS, Manhattan
Posts: 1,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
There are a number of major development sites along Madison near Grand Central that could yield 1000 ft.+ towers.

I think this part of town will look very different 10 years from now.
Potentially dramatically, especially as the city considers upzoning the entire neighborhood (already one of the densest--if not the densest office cluster--in the world).

The main takeaway from all this is that opposition to height in NYC is silly, and also that the ESB's days as a focal point for Midtown are quite numbered. With the developments to the West (Hudson Yards T2, Brookfield's T2, 15 Penn--all as tall/taller than the ESB), the developments to the North (432 Park and likely 225 W57th) and the emerging proposals along the East Side, it is going to be a giant among equals rather than a solitary behemoth.

If only we could get the Met Life North Tower finally completed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 12:53 AM
aquablue aquablue is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,741
The news today in the WSJ suggests the office market is going to flooded with space soon and the financial services industry is getting smaller. Don't expect many new office towers to go up any time soon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 12:58 AM
RobertWalpole RobertWalpole is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,911
These towers aren't being built on spec., and the financial services industry always expands and contracts. I guarantee that banks alone (excluding Credit Suisse) will be seeking millions of square feet in a few years. As the financial and commercial capital of the world, NY has a unique demand for space. In this regard, it's been well-documented that companies currently seek between 5 and 6m sf of space. No other city in the US or Europe can make a similar claim.

Since you're not from NY, it's understandable that you don't understand it's unparalleled position.

Last edited by RobertWalpole; Feb 29, 2012 at 1:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 1:17 AM
yankeesfan1000 yankeesfan1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 10014
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablue View Post
The news today in the WSJ suggests the office market is going to flooded with space soon and the financial services industry is getting smaller. Don't expect many new office towers to go up any time soon.
No. 51 Astor is being looked at by tech companies. 1 WTC up to this point is largely occupied by a publishing and a law firm. Hudson Yards South's anchor tenant makes purses, among other stuff I've been told. 250 W 55th is almost entirely leased, and it's all law firms. Plus you have L'Oreal looking at enough space to anchor, and get 3 WTC built, 500K for a make up company! (I know they won't move there but just an indication of how much space that is), Viacom and News Corp both none financial firms looking for huge amounts of space, 1M SF each.

Financial service companies have traditionally driven new office construction in the past, but as has been posted in the Hudson Yards thread, all sorts of companies, from all different types of industries are looking for new space because almost 90% of commercial square feet in Manhattan predates 1970, source. That is an incredible statistic.

I met with a woman who works at Studley this morning, and she has worked on the Time Warner account, a media company that is reevaluating it's more than 4 MILLION SF NY portfolio, that's almost one entire of the original twin towers, and they're also managing Jones Day which is another law firm looking for 400K worth of square feet, and she hinted at some other names and locations they're looking at specifically but nothing that wouldn't surprise someone on this site. Plus Milbank is getting booted from the JP building downtown and needs 250K sf.

Plus, your assertion that financial firms won't move isn't well founded either. Credit Suisse is actively looking at new space with CBRE, and Citi is looking around too. There is a lot of natural pent up demand for new space, the vacancy rate is falling, and rents are rising. These companies are smart, they know that at places like Hudson Yards, MW, and the WTC they can get huge blocks of office space (which it's important to understand is very rare in Manhattan) at discounted prices because of tax credits, among other things so they actually save money in the future by signing leases now and get into one of those new buildings instead of waiting until their lease expires in 2015 or 2018 when the economy will probably be better, and rents will be higher.

That was a bit of a rant, I had a long day so I apologize, and don't take it personally but what you said is just false.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 2:38 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablue View Post
The news today in the WSJ suggests the office market is going to flooded with space soon and the financial services industry is getting smaller.
I didn't read the article, but if what you're posting is true, the article is stupid.

There are roughly 500 million square feet of Manhattan office space, and Manhattan has, by far, the lowest vacancy rate in the U.S.

The only way that one could "flood" Manhattan with office space is to build minimum 100 million square feet of space or something.

And I guarantee that nothing close to 100 million square feet is u/c. Probably little more than 10-15 million square feet.

Financial services, BTW, are doing just fine. Big banks have issues, but they're still highly profitable, and that's just one portion of the securities industry. Smaller outfits are doing very well by filling in the gap left by the retrenching bigger firms.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 2:14 AM
jd3189 jd3189 is online now
An Optimistic Realist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Loma Linda, CA / West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 5,596
Quote:
Originally Posted by babybackribs2314 View Post
Potentially dramatically, especially as the city considers upzoning the entire neighborhood (already one of the densest--if not the densest office cluster--in the world).

The main takeaway from all this is that opposition to height in NYC is silly, and also that the ESB's days as a focal point for Midtown are quite numbered. With the developments to the West (Hudson Yards T2, Brookfield's T2, 15 Penn--all as tall/taller than the ESB), the developments to the North (432 Park and likely 225 W57th) and the emerging proposals along the East Side, it is going to be a giant among equals rather than a solitary behemoth.

If only we could get the Met Life North Tower finally completed.
Agreed. It would be the new ESB for 21st century Midtown. Can't wait for supertalls to be the new standard in New York. We might have one of the world's tallest skylines one day, as well as the largest.
__________________
Working towards making American cities walkable again!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 2:17 AM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertWalpole View Post
It's sad because it's a nice, per-war tower. That being said, a lot of air rights exist here, and something over 300m could rise here.
I expect this trend to continue in order to keep Midtown up to speed in the modern office market. As great as the West-Side expansion is, it does not compensate for modern office space in the heart of Midtown. As previously pointed out there are many unused air-rights in the Grand Central area that can be leveraged in order to fill the demand.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 3:09 AM
reencharles's Avatar
reencharles reencharles is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 274
I hope it's an amazing building, because the building that is there now is very good.
Whether it will be replaced, it must be for something much better.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 10:27 PM
scalziand's Avatar
scalziand scalziand is offline
Mortaaaaaaaaar!
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Naugatuck, CT/Worcester,MA
Posts: 3,506
It's a prime, albeit small site less than a block from Grand Central.



I wouldn't be surprised if the Yale Club gets wrapped up in this somehow too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Feb 29, 2012, 11:22 PM
THE BIG APPLE's Avatar
THE BIG APPLE THE BIG APPLE is offline
Khurram Parvaz
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 2,424
Well looks like the view from the Top of the Rock looking SE (and East in general) will change in a few miniscule years.

The Yale Club can't get demolished, cause it's landmarked. BUT they could use air rights if not already used.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:05 AM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,770
Yeah, I would imagine the Yale Club will sell their air rights.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:08 AM
RobertWalpole RobertWalpole is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,911
There are millions of sf of air rights available from GCT. However, this foot print is so small that even a 1m sf tower would exceed 300m. With small site, up is the only way to go!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:13 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,900
Keep in mind that the City is studying an "upzoning" of the area...
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=197082
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:20 AM
THE BIG APPLE's Avatar
THE BIG APPLE THE BIG APPLE is offline
Khurram Parvaz
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 2,424
Now only of some of those 'millions' of sq ft from GCT went to the site we know today as 383 Madison Ave, back in 1989. With a site this small 1msf can be at least 700-800 ft, since it is office, and the usual 1msf office buildings are 500 ft tall. This building would benefit with some residential components.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 1:24 AM
Arawooho's Avatar
Arawooho Arawooho is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE View Post
Now only of some of those 'millions' of sq ft from GCT went to the site we know today as 383 Madison Ave, back in 1989. With a site this small 1msf can be at least 700-800 ft, since it is office, and the usual 1msf office buildings are 500 ft tall. This building would benefit with some residential components.
That seems reasonable enough.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2012, 2:37 AM
RobertWalpole RobertWalpole is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE BIG APPLE View Post
Now only of some of those 'millions' of sq ft from GCT went to the site we know today as 383 Madison Ave, back in 1989. With a site this small 1msf can be at least 700-800 ft, since it is office, and the usual 1msf office buildings are 500 ft tall. This building would benefit with some residential components.
1m sf would be taller than that. This is a very small site.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Proposals
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:12 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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