NEW YORK | 405-417 Park Avenue | FT | FLOORS

[NYguy]

https://nypost.com/2018/10/09/park-ave-blockfront-suddenly-back-in-play/

Park Ave. blockfront suddenly back in play





By Lois Weiss
October 9, 2018

The Park Avenue blockfront between 54th and 55th streets is suddenly in play as the multiplier effect from the JPMorgan Chase tower redevelopment sinks in.

The co-op apartment house at 417 Park Ave. on the southwest corner of East 55th has hired Darcy Stacom and Bill Shanahan at CBRE to sell the building, sources said, and they could include the rest of the blockfront.

Joseph Moinian tried to buy it in the 2000s. More recently, Kushner Cos. offered $250 million before walking away.

The 1916-era 13-story, 28-unit co-op building could be twice as large under new Midtown East zoning — nearly 200,000 square feet.

The vacant retail store is represented by Robert Burton at Cushman & Wakefield, who is not privy to the board’s sales discussions but noted the area will change for the better when L&L Holdings’ new 425 Park Ave. across the street is completed.

Next door, the Stefano Ricci retail store at 407 Park could add 36,000 square feet to an adjacent project. It was purchased by an Italian company for $8.7 million in 2010. The selling points included the potential redevelopment of all or part of the blockfront.

The store’s lease is also up in April 2019 — just in time for developers.

“The entire block was always the play,” said Adelaide Polsnielli of Compass who represented the seller while with Marcus & Millichap.

To its south, the 19-story 1960s white office building at 405 Park Ave. was also the target of redevelopment.

In 2007, Steve Witkoff, Larry Gluck and a group of developers signed a contract, but the market fell and they lost a $41 million deposit after years of litigation. In 2016, it was sold to Deutsche Bank’s REEF and MRP Realty for $247.7 million.

According to Crain’s, they are now buying air rights from the adjacent men’s club, The Brook, to add four floors on top.

A redevelopment of the entire blockfront, however, could create a tall modern tower of roughly 500,000 square feet.

CBRE, the co-op board, REEF and MRP did not return requests for comment.

[NYguy]

https://therealdeal.com/2018/10/10/board-of-417-park-avenue-makes-another-push-for-sale/

Board of 417 Park Avenue makes another push for sale





October 10, 2018

The owners of 417 Park Avenue are making another push to sell the co-op apartment building after bringing on new brokers.

Under the new Midtown East zoning, the early 1900s building could be doubled in size to 200,000 square feet.

Several other neighboring buildings — including 405 and 407 Park — and the air rights to 11 East 54th Street could also be up for grabs for a savvy investor capable of stitching together a block-long assemblage.

[NYguy]

https://nypost.com/2018/10/15/midtown-east-rezoning-sparks-flurry-of-building-sales-revamps/

Midtown East rezoning sparks flurry of building sales, revamps





By Lois Weiss
October 15, 2018

At 425 Park, with Citadel as an anchor tenant, L&L Holdings moved ahead with a complete renovation prior to the new rezoning. The building will begin tenant fit-outs in March 2019, says David Berkey of L&L. New leases in the base have an asking rent of $185 per foot and go upwards from there.

“When 425 Park is done, it will change the whole tenor of the area,” says Robert Burton of Cushman & Wakefield, who reps the retail space for sale or lease at 417 Park.

Meanwhile, co-op residents of that 16-story building were offered millions to move by Kushner Cos. The board has now hired CBRE to field offers to sell and redevelop the building.

The Italian owners of the small adjacent Stefano Ricci retail building at 407 Park Ave. are also being courted to sell. Already, the owners of 405 Park — MRP Realty and Deutsche Wealth & Asset Management — are buying air rights to add a mere four floors.

“Many buildings on Park Avenue are doing it,” says John Maher of CBRE. “There is a lot of uninspiring real estate and an opportunity to create great architecture and modern buildings for the 21st-century tenant without disrupting the character of Park Avenue.”

In the interim, some owners are adding termination agreements, which may prompt tenants to go elsewhere or ask for reduced rents.

“There are a few buildings with termination rights, but it is super costly. And, evidenced by 425 Park, you have to take down the building and earn no income for three to five years until you can construct something great,” says Evan Margolin of Savills Studley.

[NYguy]

I really do hope they can assemble the entire block-front. Another, modern office tower along Park Avenue would help make Park Avenue great again.



OCTOBER 16, 2018

[NYer34]

The tragedy of this site is that 417 Park is a beautiful, classic Park Ave. building. No sane city in the world would allow it to be razed. Yet its inhabitants (and some of the fanboy posters on this site) seem ready to do so.

On the same block is 405 Park, one of the crappiest buildings in Midtown. It's not individually offensive, but it represents a genre - crappy modernist post-war schlock - that we have way too much of and that any third-tier, podunk city would be happy to raze and replace. And it's underdeveloped, for better (minimizes the amount of crap) or worse (block doesn't maximize its utility).

Any sane city in the world would preserve 417 while redeveloping 405. We appear to be getting the opposite. Slow clap for your short-sighted crappiness once again, New York!

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by NYer34

The tragedy of this site is that 417 Park is a beautiful, classic Park Ave. building. No sane city in the world would allow it to be razed. Yet its inhabitants (and some of the fanboy posters on this site) seem ready to do so.

On the same block is 405 Park, one of the crappiest buildings in Midtown. It's not individually offensive, but it represents a genre - crappy modernist post-war schlock - that we have way too much of and that any third-tier, podunk city would be happy to raze and replace. And it's underdeveloped, for better (minimizes the amount of crap) or worse (block doesn't maximize its utility).

Any sane city in the world would preserve 417 while redeveloping 405. We appear to be getting the opposite. Slow clap for your short-sighted crappiness once again, New York!

And any sane person would read this and say these "fanboys" of preserving anything old just because, clearly don't get it. But thankfully they aren't in any position to do any harm.

I can't think of a single reason why, in all of New York City, this particular building needs to stand for all eternity, a must see for future generations. That's where I draw the line, and that, my friend, is real sanity.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by NYer34

The tragedy of this site is that 417 Park is a beautiful, classic Park Ave. building. No sane city in the world would allow it to be razed. Yet its inhabitants (and some of the fanboy posters on this site) seem ready to do so.

On the same block is 405 Park, one of the crappiest buildings in Midtown. It's not individually offensive, but it represents a genre - crappy modernist post-war schlock - that we have way too much of and that any third-tier, podunk city would be happy to raze and replace. And it's underdeveloped, for better (minimizes the amount of crap) or worse (block doesn't maximize its utility).

Any sane city in the world would preserve 417 while redeveloping 405. We appear to be getting the opposite. Slow clap for your short-sighted crappiness once again, New York!

I will say that this building is indeed quite attractive, and there are many, many buildings that deserve the wrecking ball long before this one. 240 Central Park South (fuck 240 Central Park South: ), and MSG come immediately to mind. If there is shame to be found, it's that a lot of garbage that plagues NYC still stands, while almost objectively pretty buildings, like 417 Park Ave, may be demolished.

But if you put your mind to it, you could make a case to save most of the buildings in the city. You could make the case that the old Waldorf Astora should have been saved, but then we wouldn't have the Empire State Building, perhaps the most famous building in the world, and one which is almost universally praised for it's aesthetic and cultural beauty and importance. There are almost too many examples to list, but that is the most immediate and obvious of them (and probably the best).

NYC, in order to remain NYC, desperately needs new office stock. Even with Hudson Yards coming on line, and even with the WTC starting to fill up, and even with the Midtown rezoning, NYC's building stock is very old. In order to maintain its status as the business capitol of the world, it has to keep up with cities that have been modernizing (even London's Class-A housing stock is on average, newer, and it's not as if London is a upcoming city). There are some buildings which almost anyone would agree are far too important to tear town - GCT, the old Penn Station, the ESB, Chrysler building, Woolworth building, etc, etc - all genuine landmarks. What is this? A mid rise with a pretty facade? Those can be found all over the city.

You should really put your attention towards the countless shit buildings landmarked because of questionable historical significance, or because their design represents a pinnacle of a certain type of architecture (In that sense, 240 CPS would represent the pinnacle of the "dog shit" style), or because some mentally unstable NIMBY's don't want a skyscraper going up...in New York City. You could also focus your attention on all the rotting, excrementicious, lowrise structures all over the city, and call for zoning changes which would make them attractive for redevelopment.

[Crawford]

240 CPS is landmarked, built by a famous 20th century architect, and considered one of the best examples of early modernism, so good luck with that. Anyone with urban planning or architectural background would laugh if you advocated for its demolition over 417 Park.

417 Park isn't landmarked and won't be missed, as there's one practically on every block. If there's one thing Manhattan doesn't lack, it's anonymous prewar residential midrises.

This whole conversation reveals the following- architectural appeal is totally subjective, so arguing aesthetic merit is a waste of everyone's time.

[Busy Bee]

There's a third way here that will be just as divisive and that's incorporation into a new development using a facadectomy. It's not hard to imagine this handsome edifice sitting at the base of a soaring glass res or office tower. So as Michael Scott would say, win-win-win.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Crawford

417 Park isn't landmarked and won't be missed, as there's one practically on every block. If there's one thing Manhattan doesn't lack, it's anonymous prewar residential midrises.

This whole conversation reveals the following- architectural appeal is totally subjective, so arguing aesthetic merit is a waste of everyone's time.

Yeah, I'm trying to figure out the significance of that building, why some feel it needs to stand for all time. I'm not gettin it.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by Crawford

240 CPS is landmarked, built by a famous 20th century architect, and considered one of the best examples of early modernism,

I took a dump today. It's considered one of the best examples of Sriracha poo's ever made.

Can you get the preservation board on the line, please?

[Busy Bee]

If you want a high profile turd of a building to focus your ire and calls for destruction on, please focus it on the horror known as Madison Green which is like a piece of shit sitting right next to the Faberge egg that is the Flatiron.

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

If you want a high profile turd of a building to focus your ire and calls for destruction on, please focus it on the horror known as Madison Green which is like a piece of shit sitting right next to the Faberge egg that is the Flatiron.

lol...Madison Green is another architectural abortion.

[JSsocal]

417 Park is as nice as those kinds of buildings come - this one's got great classic details, a facade in solid limestone (Go on google earth and scroll up park avenue - this is a rarity), and a copper cornice. It's as NEW YORK - in all caps - as they come. NY's at its best when small anomalies survive in otherwise completely changed neighborhoods.

Also a new building here would not have large floor plates (Same lot size as 425 park) - so please none of this 'NY NEEDS THIS NEW TOWER" sentiment here. The eyesore next door had already previously made plans to expand vertically, clearly this building was not an obstacle.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by JSsocal

417 Park is as nice as those kinds of buildings come - this one's got great classic details, a facade in solid limestone (Go on google earth and scroll up park avenue - this is a rarity), and a copper cornice. It's as NEW YORK - in all caps - as they come. NY's at its best when small anomalies survive in otherwise completely changed neighborhoods.

Also a new building here would not have large floor plates (Same lot size as 425 park) - so please none of this 'NY NEEDS THIS NEW TOWER" sentiment here. The eyesore next door had already previously made plans to expand vertically, clearly this building was not an obstacle.

Two points-

1. This building isn't remotely anomalous. It's essentially the most common typology in Manhattan (prewar midrise residential with stone base). There are countless similar buildings on Park Ave. alone.

2. This entire block is in play for a major tower. The adjacent site will likely be combined with this site for a full-block tower, under the new Midtown East zoning.

[JSsocal]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Two points-

1. This building isn't remotely anomalous. It's essentially the most common typology in Manhattan (prewar midrise residential with stone base). There are countless similar buildings on Park Ave. alone.

2. This entire block is in play for a major tower. The adjacent site will likely be combined with this site for a full-block tower, under the new Midtown East zoning.

Thanks my previous response addressed to both of your points -

1. this building is of a higher quality then most of those on northern Park avenue, a full limestone building with other adornments that I mentioned previously. More importantly, there aren't any like it in the immediate area.

2. This is only a block front tower, the hypothetical site is actually smaller then the aforementioned 425 park, and the site does not extend towards Lexington- nor is that remotely in play. There is a landmarked church and 2 smaller landmark structures that prevent this from taking the entire block. This would become a smaller boutique office building, not a 1 Vanderbilt.

[JMKeynes]

As per The Real Deal, the old building next door will be razed. It would have been nice if the two lots could be combined, but it appears to entail different developers. I always wanted a 1,000'+ Stern on this site with condos and boutique office space.

https://therealdeal.com/2019/06/04/gds-i...o-op-for-200m-in-office-conversion-play/

[NYguy]

https://www.crainsnewyork.com/real-estate/deal-works-new-park-avenue-tower

Deal in works for new Park Avenue tower





June 3, 2019
DANIEL GEIGER

Another new office building that would take advantage of the rezoning of Midtown East is in the planning stages on Park Avenue.

GDS Development, a builder with several commercial projects underway in the city, is negotiating to purchase an over 100-year old residential co-op building at 417 Park Ave. on the corner of East 55th Street for around $200 million, several sources with knowledge of the deal said.

If completed, the firm could erect a nearly 220,000 square foot boutique office building on the site under the rezoning plan, or an even larger structure if it is able to purchase neighboring properties to enlarge its footprint.

The brokerage and real estate services firm CBRE has been marketing 417 Park Ave. on behalf of the co-op's residents for several months. The proceeds from the sale would be split between the 28-unit building's shareholders, averaging over $7 million per apartment at a time when high-priced sales have dramatically slowed.

The deal would be one of several office projects spurred by the Midtown East rezoning.

JP Morgan Chase announced last year that it would utilize the plan to tear down its headquarters at 270 Park Ave. and rebuild a much larger, state of the art office tower in its place. Developer Harry Macklowe has announced plans to raise a 1,551 foot tall spire across the street from St. Patrick's Cathedral, in part using air rights he would procure through the rezoning to give him the necessary bulk to raise such a tall building.

SL Green is in the process of building One Vanderbilt, a 1,400 foot tall office building that took advantage of a rezoning of Vanderbilt Avenue, which was passed as a precursor to the wider East Midtown plan.

The owners of 405 Park Ave., which is separated from 417 Park Ave. by a small townhouse, are using the rezoning to add four new floors on top of the existing 17-story office building.

The market for newly built office space in what is considered one of the most prestigious corridors in Midtown has been brisk. Across the street from 417 Park Ave., a new tower that is under construction at 425 Park Ave., recently struck a deal to have its anchor tenant, the hedge fund Citadel, expand by more than 50% to over 300,000 square feet. The financial firm Sentinel Capital Partners meanwhile just signed a high priced deal at One Vanderbilt.

[JMKeynes]

Has the renovation on 417 Park started yet? This will be an epic loss if these properties are not combined.

[Busy Bee]

A skilled firm and a creative developer could incorporate the façade of 417 into the base of new tower. Some purists hate the concept, but wouldn't you rather see a handsome pre-war limestone façade survive and reimagined instead of being dumped in a gravel pit?