NEW YORK | 45 East 45th St (Roosevelt Hotel) | FT | FLOORS

[ChiND]

This is interesting.

I guess that JPMC is looking to add a lot more square feet. To the extent that they were blocked, Milstein's Madison Avenue site would be a nice alternative.

“Pakistan thwarts JPMorgan’s efforts to buy historic New York hotel.”

https://www.ft.com/content/31b2cf59-9ea4-4d59-8fae-48e0321d60dd

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by ChiND

This is interesting.

I guess that JPMC is looking to add a lot more square feet. To the extent that they were blocked, Milstein's Madison Avenue site would be a nice alternative.

“Pakistan thwarts JPMorgan’s efforts to buy historic New York hotel.”

https://www.ft.com/content/31b2cf59-9ea4-4d59-8fae-48e0321d60dd

I always said this would have been a better alternative to the 250 Park site, with the potential for larger floorplates. But Pakistan is looking for a mixed-use development. We'll see how that turns out.

From the article:


Pakistan thwarts JPMorgan’s efforts to buy historic New York hotel
Biggest US bank seeks to add Roosevelt Hotel to its rapidly growing Midtown campus





Joshua Franklin and Zehra Munir in New York, Humza Jilani in Islamabad
3/5/26

JPMorgan Chase’s aspirations to expand its Manhattan real estate empire have hit a roadblock at the Roosevelt Hotel, which the government of Pakistan wants to knock down and replace with a high-rise development.

The bank led by Jamie Dimon has for more than a year had designs on buying the Roosevelt, which neighbours JPMorgan’s new 60-storey Park Avenue skyscraper and two other buildings it also owns, according to people familiar with the matter.

“JPM was aggressively chasing the Roosevelt hotel,” one of the people said.

However, talks fizzled because of the Pakistani government’s preference to redevelop the site and retain an ownership stake as well as the loss of its real estate adviser.

On a private tour of the skyscraper at 270 Park Avenue for wealthy clients in late 2024, Gary Cohn, a former top executive at Goldman Sachs and senior official in the first Trump administration, asked JPMorgan’s head of global real estate David Arena whether the bank would want to buy the Roosevelt.

Arena said JPMorgan would love to buy the hotel but the sale process was complicated, said people familiar with the matter.

Pakistan, however, has closed the door to a sale.

Muhammad Ali, chair of the commission, said many “global organisations and banks are interested” in the Roosevelt but the plan was to pursue a joint venture to build a high-rise where the current building stands.

“We are not engaged in discussions with any entity about sale of Roosevelt property and discussions on the joint venture will begin in March after appointment of our new financial adviser,” Ali told the FT.

Islamabad envisions a multibillion-dollar redevelopment that brings in an investor to inject cash into the joint venture, which would also raise new debt.

[HappyCapSlapper]

[QUOTE=NYguy;10563748]I always said this would have been a better alternative to the 250 Park site, with the potential for larger floorplates. But Pakistan is looking for a mixed-use development. We'll see how that turns out.

Agreed - Though 250 Park is believed to have been a defensive purchase from JPM rather than a site for future redevelopment. Conversations around what they've planned at 250 primarily surrounds an as-is renovation/hoteling location for JPM staff, though they haven't picked a forward path yet. The 250 site also sits above the tracks and complicates foundation for a potential ground up scheme - both economically and logistically.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by HappyCapSlapper

Though 250 Park is believed to have been a defensive purchase from JPM rather than a site for future redevelopment. Conversations around what they've planned at 250 primarily surrounds an as-is renovation/hoteling location for JPM staff, though they haven't picked a forward path yet. The 250 site also sits above the tracks and complicates foundation for a potential ground up scheme - both economically and logistically.

250 Park Avenue is a joint development between JPMC and Hines. All of the towers in that area - on both sides of Park Avenue - sit above tracks, including 270 Park Avenue, as well as the Roosevelt.

[HappyCapSlapper]

Originally Posted by NYguy

250 Park Avenue is a joint development between JPMC and Hines. All of the towers in that area - on both sides of Park Avenue - sit above tracks, including 270 Park Avenue, as well as the Roosevelt.

True but there are varying degrees of how encumbered the lots are based on their positioning on Park. E.g. - a site on Park & 54th is way better off than Park & 47th (250P)

[IMG]https://www.american-rails.com/images/456023049286820092394868266.jpg

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by HappyCapSlapper

True but there are varying degrees of how encumbered the lots are based on their positioning on Park. E.g. - a site on Park & 54th is way better off than Park & 47th (250P)

[IMG]https://www.american-rails.com/images/456023049286820092394868266.jpg

That may be true, but the railyards itself is no barrier, as obviously shown by the skyscrapers that rise above it. 250 Park didn't just magically sprout in the air.

[HappyCapSlapper]

Agreed - All I'm saying is the combination of the (i) economic cost of foundation work in consideration of the density of tracks beneath the site and (ii) the complexity and coordination in working alongside MTA/NYC which is sure to cause extended timeline over the course of a development have both been deterrents in the eyes of RE developers evaluating a ground up at 250 (back when Newmark marketed it for sale in 2024).

Economically it's a huge challenge - of course the math changes (or gets thrown out the window) when you're JPM / an owner-user and you're not trying to build to market return metrics

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by HappyCapSlapper

Agreed - All I'm saying is the combination of the (i) economic cost of foundation work in consideration of the density of tracks beneath the site and (ii) the complexity and coordination in working alongside MTA/NYC which is sure to cause extended timeline over the course of a development have both been deterrents in the eyes of RE developers evaluating a ground up at 250 (back when Newmark marketed it for sale in 2024).

It's New York. Basically every major new tower going up in Midtown has challenges, whether that be from subway lines or any of the various soup of infrastructure the city has buried underground, to underground rivers, to the variations in rock. And with the rezoning of Midtown East, specifically, these challenges are well known. A "challenge" however, doesn't equal a "deterrent". It's why JPMC took on the extraordinary challenge of first, demolishing a 700 ft skyscraper, and then rebuilding a new 1,400 ft skyscraper over the railyards. They could have left the site entirely. It's also why the previous owners had architects draw up new plans for a tower at 250 Park, and why community groups were pushing for both 250 Park and the Roosevelt Hotel to be landmarked - because both sites are desirable redevelopment locations, especially post Midtown East rezoning.

An approximation of towers that have all or at least partial foundatons over the railyards of Grand Central...

[NYguy]

A better look...

[HappyCapSlapper]

No such thing as a clean development - Especially in Manhattan. Just giving you the color from the investor community's perspective. The tracks were a material economic concern preventing financial feasibility for a new tower on the 250 site.

[ChiND]

To the extent that JPMC seeks extra space in the area, I wonder if they'd buy an office condo at 175 Park.

[The New York Lion]

Regardless of the details, something enormous is going to rise here and at 250 Park.

And at many more sites in this vicinity.

[ChiND]

If, in fact, the Pakistanis are set on mixed-use, this could be the tallest tower in the area.

It’s really good news that JPMC seeks another enormous tower.

This is the Age of …

[Busy Bee]

Rabies

[mrnyc]

Ram sees

[NYguy]

The fact that JPMC couldn't get this site adds more to the fuel of a new building with Hines at 250 Park Avenue. As far as a move to 175 Park, I remember SL Green pitched JPMC on One Vanderbilt, which didn't go anywhere.



https://www.ndtv.com/lifestyle/why-pakis...t-hotel-in-new-york-to-jpmorgan-11176697

Why Pakistan Will Not Sell The Roosevelt Hotel In New York To JPMorgan
Pakistan's determination to extract maximum value from the Roosevelt Hotel is closely linked to the country's broader economic challenges

Pakistan has blocked a proposed deal with banking giant JPMorgan Chase for the purchase of the historic Roosevelt Hotel in New York City, ending more than a year of discussions over the prime Manhattan property.

The American bank had been pursuing the site as part of its expansion plans near its new headquarters tower on Park Avenue. However, Islamabad ultimately rejected the proposal, opting instead to redevelop the property through a joint venture that would allow Pakistan to retain ownership while unlocking its long-term value.

According to reports cited by Moneycontrol, the government believes the Midtown Manhattan property could attract more than $1 billion in private investment if redeveloped into a modern high-rise complex. Officials are also expecting an upfront payment of about $100 million as part of the proposed redevelopment plan.

The Roosevelt Hotel occupies one of the most valuable pieces of real estate in Manhattan. Located just a short walk from Grand Central Terminal, the property sits in the heart of Midtown, an area that has increasingly become a hub for luxury developments and major corporate headquarters.

Despite the building's condition, the land remains exceptionally valuable. Pakistani officials estimate the property could be worth more than $1 billion, making it one of the country's most significant overseas assets.

.....monetising overseas assets has emerged as an important strategy. The Roosevelt Hotel stands out because of both its location and redevelopment potential.

Officials have described the project as part of a broader privatisation strategy. As quoted by Moneycontrol, Pakistan's finance division said, "The objective remains to secure maximum value for this property in alignment with the government's privatisation strategy while strengthening Pakistan-United States economic ties."

For JPMorgan Chase, the property was strategically important because of its proximity to the bank's expanding Manhattan campus.

The bank recently completed its new headquarters tower at 270 Park Avenue, and the Roosevelt site sits directly next to the cluster of buildings that form its growing corporate footprint.

The bank had reportedly been exploring a 99-year ground lease for the site, which would have allowed it to incorporate the land into a major corporate campus. In fact, the bank had already provided a $105 million loan against the property in 2018.

According to people familiar with the negotiations quoted by Moneycontrol, "JPM was aggressively chasing the Roosevelt hotel."

However, Pakistan's government rejected the idea of an outright sale. Officials argued that redevelopment through a joint venture would allow the country to capture far greater value over time.

Muhammad Ali, chair of Pakistan's privatisation commission, said, "We are not engaged in discussions with any entity about sale of Roosevelt property and discussions on the joint venture will begin in March after appointment of our new financial adviser."

Another government adviser, Khurram Schehzad, also confirmed that Pakistan has "no plans to sell it outright," emphasising that the decision aligns with cabinet policy.

The future of the Roosevelt Hotel has also taken on a diplomatic dimension.

Pakistan recently announced a cooperation framework with the US General Services Administration aimed at supporting the hotel's upkeep, refurbishment and redevelopment.

The agreement was negotiated by US special envoy Steve Witkoff and officials from both governments. Islamabad described the arrangement as a "strategic economic initiative" intended to help navigate the regulatory complexities involved in redeveloping a major Manhattan property.

Still, the agreement does not include firm funding commitments or clear timelines, raising questions about how quickly redevelopment might actually move forward.

For Pakistan, the Roosevelt Hotel represents more than just an ageing building in New York.

Selling the property outright could provide immediate financial relief. However, officials fear that such a move might undervalue one of the most valuable real estate holdings the country owns abroad.

Redevelopment, on the other hand, offers the possibility of far greater long-term returns. But it also requires large-scale investment, technical expertise and time.

With negotiations for a joint venture expected to begin in March 2026, the future of the Roosevelt Hotel remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the Manhattan property has become a symbol of Pakistan's attempt to turn a historic overseas asset into a financial lifeline during a period of economic strain.

[NYguy]

https://www.thestatesman.com/world/why-p...-scrutiny-in-us-congress-1503567082.html

Why Pakistan’s ‘trophy asset’ Roosevelt Hotel in New York is under scrutiny in US Congress
A congressional hearing in Washington saw sharp questions over a memorandum involving Pakistan’s Roosevelt Hotel in New York, with lawmakers seeking clarity on Washington’s role in discussions around the foreign-owned property.


Statesman News Service
March 7, 2026

A US congressional hearing this week saw pointed questions from lawmakers over why a federal agency is involved in redevelopment discussions concerning the Roosevelt Hotel in New York, a landmark property owned by Pakistan’s national carrier.

The issue surfaced during a session of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, where officials were reviewing federal real estate policies. According to news agency IANS, the discussion quickly turned to a memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the US General Services Administration (GSA) and Pakistan’s Defence Ministry regarding the Manhattan property.

Congressman Rick Larsen raised the matter while questioning GSA Administrator Edward Forst, saying the Roosevelt Hotel is owned by Pakistan International Airlines and is not a US government asset.

Larsen asked why an agency that manages federal buildings in the United States would be involved in redevelopment talks linked to a property owned by a foreign government.

“You recently signed an MoU with the Defence Ministry of Pakistan to renovate the Roosevelt Hotel in New York,” Larsen said, according to IANS. “The Roosevelt Hotel, as far as I know, is owned by the Pakistani International Airlines. It is not a property owned by the federal government.”

He further pressed the official on what legal basis allowed the agreement and questioned whether the agency’s mandate had been stretched beyond managing US government properties.

“This doesn’t make any sense,” Larsen told the hearing.

Forst acknowledged signing the MoU but insisted the arrangement does not place any binding obligations on the United States.

“Correct, I did,” he said when asked about the agreement.

He told the panel that Pakistan had first reached out to US officials seeking possible cooperation regarding the property. According to Forst, the approach was made to US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff.

“The government of Pakistan approached Special Envoy Steve Witkoff with the opportunity to collaborate on that property,” he said.

Forst described the agreement as an early-stage discussion rather than a firm commitment.

“This is really a first stage conversation, begin to work together to see if there’s an opportunity that also benefits the US government from a location standpoint,” he said.

Despite the explanation, Larsen remained unconvinced and argued that the GSA already has extensive responsibilities related to federal real estate management.

He suggested that the agency should focus on handling government-owned properties rather than exploring projects tied to foreign assets.

Forst responded that the agreement had undergone legal scrutiny and said the administration would share both the memorandum and the legal opinion supporting it with the committee.

Asked what obligations the MoU placed on Washington, Forst said the agreement simply commits both sides to continue discussions.

“It obligates us to do nothing, quite frankly,” he said, adding that the parties would work together in good faith to explore options for the site.

He also indicated that any redevelopment plan might not necessarily return the building to its earlier role as a hotel.

“I would not, personally, get held up with the fact that it had been a hotel,” Forst said. “It could be anything upon redevelopment.”

[Busy Bee]

100% guaranteed this is Trump's doing.

[NYguy]

Forst described the agreement as an early-stage discussion rather than a firm commitment.

“This is really a first stage conversation, begin to work together to see if there’s an opportunity that also benefits the US government from a location standpoint,” he said.

...“It obligates us to do nothing, quite frankly,” he said, adding that the parties would work together in good faith to explore options for the site.

He also indicated that any redevelopment plan might not necessarily return the building to its earlier role as a hotel.

“I would not, personally, get held up with the fact that it had been a hotel,” Forst said. “It could be anything upon redevelopment.”

It could be anyting. Even a spaceship. Ridiculous. There seems to be too many people already involved in figuring out what gets built here, even before an advisor and a developer is brought on board. It adds to what already was an air of uncertainty. The only thing we know is that it will be a new tower. But it shouldn't be so difficult to figure out.

[NYguy]

Meanwhile, this clown thinks he knows everything behind the scenes.



https://nypost.com/2026/03/08/business/more-head-scratching-news-about-roosevelt-hotel/

More head-scratching news about JPMorgan’s ‘thwarted’ attempt to buy the Roosevelt Hotel


By Steve Cuozzo
March 8, 2026

The Financial Times reported last week that the Pakistan government “thwarted” an attempt by JPMorgan Chase to buy the Roosevelt Hotel. There was only one question:

What attempt?

According to the FT, Pakistan International Airlines, the Roosevelt’s nominal owner, chose to “pursue a redevelopment plan that would transform the site into a high-rise project while allowing Islamabad to keep a stake in the property.”

Moreover, last month’s puzzling agreement between Pakistan and the US General Services Administration to cooperate on the Roosevelt wasn’t only about “maintaining and renovating” it, as the FT said, but about redeveloping it.

The Roosevelt site between Madison and Vanderbilt avenues in the East 40s is valuable and its development issues are complex, but it is not the Louisiana Purchase. If PIA and JPMorgan Chase – or anyone else — wanted to make a deal, they had only to sit down and sign the papers.