Page 26 of 79 FirstFirst ... 162223242526272829303676 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 1185

Thread: Times Square Plaza - 11 Times Square - 42nd St @ 8th Ave - by FX Fowle Architects

  1. #376

    Default

    There is an existing subway station (not in use) located on the north side of 41st street that will affect the site as it will be part of the 7 train expansion. However, it is well below the foundation of the property and an easement is only used for actual construction within the existing subway. As part of the deal with the ESDC, the Milstein (or whomever builds) will be required to build a subway station stop at the corner. Not sure if the person builds "as of right" if the station will be required.

    Also note that the Milstein's own the site in fee simple. Therefore, the State cannot "take back" the land or fine them for not building or sue or whatever. They could possibly use the New London Case for eminent domain, however, I am sure that the Milstein team of lawyers would fight them until death.

    As to building spec, I still dont think it is wise yet to build 1mm sf spec given where construction costs are, especially steel and concrete. Grant it rents are rising, but construction costs have increased 40% in the last two years. Rents/demand for space still needs to catch up.

  2. #377
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    2,636

    Default

    with seven being very shaky now, they should push forward with the lots now as 7 may be pushed back more becuase of the mayor

  3. #378

    Default

    I guess you're not going to post a rendering after all, TylerFC?

  4. #379
    The Dude Abides
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC - Financial District
    Posts
    4,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerFC
    As to building spec, I still dont think it is wise yet to build 1mm sf spec given where construction costs are, especially steel and concrete. Grant it rents are rising, but construction costs have increased 40% in the last two years. Rents/demand for space still needs to catch up.
    If you truly believe that, I think you need to take another look at the market right now. This is one of a few large sites that can still accommodate a new office tower in Midtown (excluding Hudson Yards). Vacancies continue to drop, and rents continue to rise. Every opportunity to expand the pool of office space should be taken advantage of, because it will take some time before Hudson Yards starts to fill the gap. Until then, it will only become more difficult for firms to find space, and they will have to look elsewhere (meaning Jersey City and other smaller business districts). The construction costs concern is irrelevant, as there is no end in sight to the rising costs, thus it is best to get a project going as soon as possible these days to avoid cost overruns.

  5. #380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pianoman11686
    If you truly believe that, I think you need to take another look at the market right now. This is one of a few large sites that can still accommodate a new office tower in Midtown (excluding Hudson Yards). Vacancies continue to drop, and rents continue to rise. Every opportunity to expand the pool of office space should be taken advantage of, because it will take some time before Hudson Yards starts to fill the gap. Until then, it will only become more difficult for firms to find space, and they will have to look elsewhere (meaning Jersey City and other smaller business districts). The construction costs concern is irrelevant, as there is no end in sight to the rising costs, thus it is best to get a project going as soon as possible these days to avoid cost overruns.
    Obviously, you are not a developer. Constructions costs are irrelevant? That is an amazing statement. If the building can be built for $600/NSF (including land), they would require an average Net $55/NSF ($90/NSF Gross) to make the project feasible subject to a 9.0% ROC. Now this includes the low floors and the crappy space. Right now, they wouldnt get that. Also, to build another 1.0mm NSF on spec when there is over 1.5mm of additional supply coming to market at around $90/NSF or so. They would be forced to rent for less since BofA and NYTimes are of higher quality and reknown. So any rational developer that didnt want to piece meal lease a 1.0mmsf, they would wait until they get a lead tenant. This would also help for branding the building, which could command higher rents. Say if JPM wanted to move or something of that nature. You also have to figure that the building is an irregular "L" shape that hurts the office floor plate.

    As for the Sketches...I dont know how to post them...but antinimby can....

  6. #381
    The Dude Abides
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC - Financial District
    Posts
    4,418

    Default

    First off, I never claimed to be a developer. You seem to be into listing the numbers that make projects work, and I'm not going to doubt you. However, I will reiterate why I made that statement about construction costs: if you're a developer, and rising costs seems like an issue, I could not see the logic in waiting longer to get a project under construction. We see this with almost every new major construction project in the city. The Javits Center alone has increased in cost by $500 million dollars because of the delays in getting it approved.

    So, (and correct me if I'm wrong with this assumption) if a developer can lock in a price for all his construction materials now, and get things underway before costs go up some more, I think it would be more logical not to wait for rents to go up even more, because by the time the building is finished (within a few years), rents will conceivably have increased again, and available inventory will have decreased.

    Quick question: as for making profits on the lower floors, wasn't the entire base of this building supposed to be a retail complex? I don't see this being a real concern with the demand for retail in Times Square. (If the retail plans have changed, please confirm.)

    Another quick question: please confirm that there will be 1.5 million square feet of additional space coming on line at the time that this building is supposed to be completed. I don't have a specific source, but from what I remember reading, both Bank of America and the NY Times Tower are very quickly running out of space, and only have a few hundred thousand square feet left.

    As for branding: again, why wait for the delay, when a firm in need of a lot of office space (big blocks of which are very hard to come by these days) can come along and brand the building before it opens? We saw this happen with CIT at 505 Fifth, and with Conde Nast at 4 Times Square (and this occurred arguably during a time when the office market was not as healthy as it is today).

    Last thing: I think antinimby said he wouldn't look at this thread until there were sketches posted. You might want to send him a PM. Or, if you tell me what format they're in, I might be able to help you out. Thanks.

  7. #382
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    TylerFC: You can PM me -- I'd be glad to post the images

  8. #383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pianoman11686
    First off, I never claimed to be a developer. You seem to be into listing the numbers that make projects work, and I'm not going to doubt you. However, I will reiterate why I made that statement about construction costs: if you're a developer, and rising costs seems like an issue, I could not see the logic in waiting longer to get a project under construction. We see this with almost every new major construction project in the city. The Javits Center alone has increased in cost by $500 million dollars because of the delays in getting it approved.

    So, (and correct me if I'm wrong with this assumption) if a developer can lock in a price for all his construction materials now, and get things underway before costs go up some more, I think it would be more logical not to wait for rents to go up even more, because by the time the building is finished (within a few years), rents will conceivably have increased again, and available inventory will have decreased.

    Quick question: as for making profits on the lower floors, wasn't the entire base of this building supposed to be a retail complex? I don't see this being a real concern with the demand for retail in Times Square. (If the retail plans have changed, please confirm.)

    Another quick question: please confirm that there will be 1.5 million square feet of additional space coming on line at the time that this building is supposed to be completed. I don't have a specific source, but from what I remember reading, both Bank of America and the NY Times Tower are very quickly running out of space, and only have a few hundred thousand square feet left.

    As for branding: again, why wait for the delay, when a firm in need of a lot of office space (big blocks of which are very hard to come by these days) can come along and brand the building before it opens? We saw this happen with CIT at 505 Fifth, and with Conde Nast at 4 Times Square (and this occurred arguably during a time when the office market was not as healthy as it is today).

    Last thing: I think antinimby said he wouldn't look at this thread until there were sketches posted. You might want to send him a PM. Or, if you tell me what format they're in, I might be able to help you out. Thanks.
    1) A developer can't lock in prices until he has Construction Documents..as the CM wont know what he is building until that point. Also, you can lock in costs for a GMP for any project...but to lock in costs and to move forward on a project that you dont think makes economic sense as of right now or in the near future? That is dumb.


    2) If you get a GMP for a set of Construction Docs and then a 400,000 user comes along that wants reconfigured space....you either can lease to that tenant or you are screwed on the GMP.

    3) The entire ground floor is retail and is a homerun regardless. It also can make up a lot of ground on the office. However, it is only 22,000sf (grade only) of a 1.0mm sf building. floors 3-8 are office and due to the signage requirement at 42nd st...they are crappy floors with very limited light...which limits the end user and restricts the marke value of the floors. Those floors are basically 150,000nsf+ of dead weight.

    4) As for BofA and NYTimes, call a broker. I believe you will be surprised at the inventory left. I also didnt include 7WT, which is basically giving floors away (that building did well on spec...)

    5) Due to the prominence of the location, you would be leaving money on the table if you dont build to an anchor tenant's needs.

    6) Antinimby should have them...he told me he would post them.

  9. #384

    Default

    How about the fact that interest rates continue to climb? Financing for construction and site purchase will cost more the longer you wait. It may be worth getting the docs and permits rolling, and secure some financing before the fed keeps creeping higher.

  10. #385
    Forum Veteran krulltime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Manhattan - UWS
    Posts
    4,208

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerFC
    6) Antinimby should have them...he told me he would post them.
    He doesn't come here anymore... I think... send it to lofter1. Please!

  11. #386
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    I'm pretty much in the stone-age regarding programs on my pc -- so if it's a pdf I can open it.

    Beyond that who knows???? Let's give it a shot!

  12. #387

    Default

    Yes what did happen to antinimby? Or londonlawyer? I miss their input.

  13. #388
    The Dude Abides
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    NYC - Financial District
    Posts
    4,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerFC
    1) A developer can't lock in prices until he has Construction Documents..as the CM wont know what he is building until that point. Also, you can lock in costs for a GMP for any project...but to lock in costs and to move forward on a project that you dont think makes economic sense as of right now or in the near future? That is dumb.
    You're assuming the developer thinks it doesn't make economic sense. Can't say I agree with you.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerFC
    2) If you get a GMP for a set of Construction Docs and then a 400,000 user comes along that wants reconfigured space....you either can lease to that tenant or you are screwed on the GMP.
    That makes sense, but only if the user has really specific needs. How many new leases have been signed so far this year for more than 200,000 square feet? 10? These were all in existing buildings, some of which probably seem outdated when compared to new buildings like the Times tower.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerFC
    3) The entire ground floor is retail and is a homerun regardless. It also can make up a lot of ground on the office. However, it is only 22,000sf (grade only) of a 1.0mm sf building. floors 3-8 are office and due to the signage requirement at 42nd st...they are crappy floors with very limited light...which limits the end user and restricts the marke value of the floors. Those floors are basically 150,000nsf+ of dead weight.
    Thanks for the heads up on that. I'm disappointed that the retail portion will be so minimal, and that it will result in sacrifices for the lower floor offices. Do you know if this site was given any subsidies or economic incentives to offset the lost revenue because of the signage requirement?

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerFC
    4) As for BofA and NYTimes, call a broker. I believe you will be surprised at the inventory left. I also didnt include 7WT, which is basically giving floors away (that building did well on spec...)
    Easier said than done. I don't know anyone in the business, and I don't think I could just look up CBRE's phone number and give them a call, asking about how much space is left. However, I can give you published statistics, which may explain some discrepancy, but not as much as you claim.

    This article, printed on July 26th, says B of A is about 90% leased, which leaves at most, ~250,000 square feet left.

    And this article, printed on the 13th, says that Forest City's portion of the Times tower is 50% leased. That leaves around 350,000 square feet left.

    Combined, the two total 600,000 square feet - an unacceptably large discrepancy compared to "over 1.5 million". There are no other new office projects under construction in Midtown. And as for 7WT, I don't know how you can say that Silverstein's giving the space away, as he just recently rejected Vantone's bid for 200,000 square feet. If he was really that desperate for leases, he wouldn't have done so. And besides, comparing Lower Manhattan (especially a building across the street from the open construction pit) to a centrally located site in Midtown is like apples and oranges.

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerFC
    5) Due to the prominence of the location, you would be leaving money on the table if you dont build to an anchor tenant's needs.
    Again, how do you explain the overwhelming success of 505 Fifth and 4 Times Square? They were both built to spec and have already been leased (both with anchor tenants).

    Quote Originally Posted by TylerFC
    6) Antinimby should have them...he told me he would post them.
    We haven't heard from him in a while. Is there any way you can send them either to me, or to lofter? Maybe one of the moderators? Or at least can you tell us what kind of file it is so we can help you upload it? You've been talking about this rendering for quite a long time now, and frankly, I think some of us are getting antsy. Thanks again.

  14. #389
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    antsy in my pantsy ...


  15. #390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sfenn1117
    Yes what did happen to antinimby? Or londonlawyer? I miss their input.
    Turned into lurkers?

    antinimby last visited August 2, and londonlawyer August 3.

Similar Threads

  1. New Year in Times Square
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: November 16th, 2013, 05:29 AM
  2. Toys R Us Times Square
    By noharmony in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2008, 10:37 PM
  3. W New York - Times Square Hotel
    By hyperfine in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: January 18th, 2005, 08:55 PM
  4. Times Square 2002 Celebrations Part I
    By Edward in forum Photos and Videos of New York
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 31st, 2001, 11:39 PM
  5. Pictures of luxurious W Hotel - Times Square
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 29th, 2001, 12:36 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software