SkyscraperPage Forum - NEW YORK | 145-155 E .42nd ST | (1,152) FT

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

- Proposals (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=361)

- - NEW YORK | 145-155 E .42nd ST | (1,152) FT | FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=261200)

NEW YORK | 145-155 E .42nd ST | (1,152) FT | FLOORS

A proposal I personally hope doesn't go forward....

https://nypost.com/2025/03/10/busine...er-building-2/

Aby Rosen has big plans for Trylons after boot from Chrysler Building

https://nypost.com/wp-content/upload...y=75&strip=all

By Steve Cuozzo
March 10, 2025

Quote:

Aby Rosen is done with the Chrysler Building, but not with its little sister — the triangular-topped Trylons next door at 145-155 E. 42nd Street. Rosen’s RFR owns the now-vacant property outright, unlike the leasehold he previously held at the office tower.

Rosen, who’s rebounding since Chrysler landowner Cooper Union booted him, has big plans for the low-rise, Philip Johnson-designed retail parcel wedged between the landmark tower and 666 Third Avenue at the corner.

“This is a wonderful opportunity,” Rosen said. “We always had the idea to redevelop it.”

Quote:

Rosen and an Austrian partner bought Chrysler and the next-door Trylons in 2019 for just $150 million. But the price wasn’t as lowball as it seemed, because the ground rent had risen from $7.5 million to $32.5 million a year, and was due to rise further to $41 million in 2028.

However, Rosen was able to buy the Trylons from Cooper Union outright without the costly nuisance of a ground lease.

He said the 13,000 square-foot lot can support 100,000 square feet of floor space as-of-right once the old structure is demolished, and could be built much larger and taller.

The latter would require air rights purchases and obtaining a greater density allowance under recent East Midtown rezoning, for which the project would undergo the city’s Uniform Land Use Review Procedure.

Quote:

The Trylons were commissioned by former Chrysler Building owner Tishman Speyer. Johnson’s design, unveiled in 2001, consists of three sharp-edged glass triangles between two boxy, banal retail structures. Although intended as an homage to Chrysler’s Art Deco lines, the Trylons were not regarded as among Johnson’s best work. Most of the space was home to Capital Grille steakhouse.

“Between you and me, it’s rather ugly,” Rosen said.

Quote:

Rosen intends to lease the parcel, not sell it. His options are open depending on market demand. The new building could be as relatively small as 100,000 square feet, for which he’d ask $10 million in annual rent on a triple-net-lease basis (tenant pays rent, utilities and operating/maintenance costs).

“It can be experiential retail, an auto dealership, or designed for a technology brand,” Rosen said. “We’re already talking to three large car companies that are drooling over it.”

But he’s open as well to a “build-to-suit” option for a much larger building depending on a tenant’s needs.

He said an office or hotel tower, or a project combining uses, could be as large as 600,000 square feet and rise “up to the level of the Chrysler gargoyles” at the tower’s 52nd floor.

Quote:

“Realistically, we’re looking at a a forty-story building,” he explained. Because the site is so small, a tall tower “becomes a needle above that, which we have no interest in.”

There’s no immediate rush. Rosen said it might take two years to select a tenant and to design the new building. RFR only began showing flyers to large retailers a week ago. Wider marketing will begin this week through its retail subsidiary MONA.

https://nypost.com/wp-content/upload...y=75&strip=all

https://nypost.com/wp-content/upload...y=75&strip=all

I read that quickly this morning. I think he gave a long time frame for it. Hopefully, he'll sell 477 Madison to Citadel to raise money for this.

I don't like the current building, so would be fine with this.

The added density and height would be nice, too. Looks like a 700 ft. tower.

Its not in danger of immediately coming down:

Quote:

Rosen said it might take two years to select a tenant and to design the new building.

A lot can happen in that time. I also like the building at 666 3rd Avenue, but if Tishman Speyer (I think they're in control of that) and Rosen could combine the lots, it would make something here worthwhile, and allow any tower portion to move away from the Chrysler Building, which sits on the western half of the block:

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...KRzirFv.m1.jpg

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...LLaTzYP.m2.jpg

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...kyWyRf.p1c.jpg

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...bSr2QZ.p1b.jpg

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...DbEsix.p4b.jpg

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...2YHvGs0.p4.jpg

The lot would be about 47,000 sf, a little larger than that of One Vanderbilt. It could be built up to 33 FAR with special permits.

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...mW.zoning2.jpg

https://therealdeal.com/new-york/202...r-development/

Aby Rosen readies Chrysler Building neighbor for redevelopment
Project could span 100k sf and target retail, office or hotel tenants

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...koPAF0w.r4.jpg

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...ybU8voh.r3.jpg

Quote:

Aby Rosen may have been kicked out of the Chrysler Building, but he wasn’t kicked off the block.

RFR Holding is planning a redevelopment of the Trylons property next to the Chrysler Building, the New York Post reported. RFR owns the vacant property at 145-155 East 42nd Street, a much different situation than the ground lease environment of its next-door neighbor.

Quote:

The Trylons lot is only 13,000 square feet, but Rosen claims a property can be built up to 100,000 square feet as-of-right, perhaps growing taller after demolition. Depending on how big Rosen wants to go, he could also snap up air rights and even apply for an allowance under the Midtown East rezoning, potentially putting the property through ULURP.

Rosen’s goal is to redevelop the property and then lease it. He said what comes of the building will likely depend on market demand, though he likely isn’t willing to go under 100,000 square feet, for which he’d charge $10 million annually on a triple-net lease.

Possibilities floated include experiential retail, a space for a technology brand or an auto dealership, which the RFR head claims has already drawn interest from car companies. Office and hotel spaces are also candidates.

Any office tower built on that site would have small office plates. Hopefully, this is just Rosen making waves, and Tishman Speyer buys the property to assemble a development site for a new tower that would offer larger floorplates, and room for the Chrysler to breath. A larger footprint would also trigger the plaza requirements of any new development. This is not something that will happen overnight, they've got time to figure it out.

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...u.IMG_8664.JPG

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...n.IMG_8665.JPG

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...s.IMG_8663.JPG

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...v.IMG_8666.JPG

Have to respect the spitefulness

Still, this could make the Chrylser building an also-ran into the future. This is one of those moves that puts some grease on your skin, hair on your chest, whatever phrasing you wish to say.

Whatever Rosen's reason for shaking it up, with real estate being what it is in the city, that lot would be developed sooner or later. But a tower squeezed in there shouldn't happen. I believe the best way to avoid that if for Tishman Speyer to merge it with there's, creating a 47,000 sf lot. That way, it could be redeveloped, with an open plaza between the two buildings.

https://a4.pbase.com/g13/06/102706/2....7473eef1.JPEG

This building is spiritually related to the Hyatt anyway.

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...081pFa2.p1.png

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...UYjDx4r.p2.png

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...r6hdxsV.p7.png

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...SHWBQvY.p8.png

https://a4.pbase.com/o12/06/102706/1...czD090u.p9.png

I can't even imagine the outrage if a Chrysler blocking tower actually gets seriously pitched.

Those short base concepts are actually pretty cool.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 10420721)

I can't even imagine the outrage if a Chrysler blocking tower actually gets seriously pitched.

Those short base concepts are actually pretty cool.

None of the scenarios presented represent the best use of the site. It needs to be consolidated with it’s neighbor to form a footprint for a proper development - with space between the Chrysler Building, perhaps a plaza.

Rosen still in on the area...

https://commercialobserver.com/2025/...-seagram-2025/

By Max Gross
October 28, 2025

Quote:

Commercial Observer: You guys have historically been in a lot of spaces in Midtown. Broadly, how do you view the Midtown market right now?

Aby Rosen: The Midtown market has always been good. It’s now even better. I think people realized if you’re in walking distance to the Upper East Side, the Upper West Side, transportation, Grand Central, Penn Station — that’s the place to be. I think One Vanderbilt did a great job highlighting that. I think resi is pushing down from Midtown toward Grand Central. There’s conversions going on 43rd Street — you know, the old Apple Bank is getting converted to resi; 520 Fifth went to resi, and some office. So that neighborhood’s on fire.

Quote:

I wanted to ask about the Chrysler Building. Tell us the story from your perspective?

It’s a story that was told already before, so I’m not going to rehash it.

.....What do you think they need to do to be successful?

I told them so many times, they know exactly what they need to do. They need to get in bed with somebody, create a partnership, a venture, a kind of alignment, and then let’s make money together. If only one says, “I want, I want, I want, I want,” and “I don’t care what you do, and if you can hang yourself, fine,” it’ll fail. But they want it all. They want control, they don’t want to participate in the downside, they only want the upside.

Believe it or not, I’m still in it to participate in that bidding again — because I still believe that I’m very much the right venture partner with Cooper to do this. I invested a couple hundred million bucks, I don’t mind putting in another $100 to $200 million to do that. So we are still monitoring what’s happening there, especially owning the development site next door. They’ll come back to us eventually if they can’t figure it out. Or if they don’t come back, it’s fine too — I wish them all the best.