NEW YORK | 343 Madison Avenue | 844 FT | 49 FLOORS

[NYguy]

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2014/10/...-headquarters/

Bidding reopened for MTA’s Midtown headquarters
Winner is expected to build a skyscraper at the site





October 03, 2014

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has reopened the bid for the long-term lease on the agency’s headquarters at 341-347 Madison Avenue. The MTA is vacating the location between 44th and 45th streets. Whoever wins the bid is expected to build a skyscraper there, according to the New York Post. Interested bidders have until October 14 to submit their proposals.

http://nypost.com/2014/10/02/mta-reo...quarters-site/

MTA reopens bidding for Midtown headquarters site


By Lois Weiss
October 2, 2014

As the city’s plans gel for Vanderbilt Ave. rezoning, the MTA has quietly reopened the bidding for the long-term lease on its headquarters block at 341-347 Madison Ave.

The site between E. 44th and 45th streets is being vacated and the winning bidder is expected to tear it down and put up a new skyscraper.

Developers have until Oct. 14 to amend their bids or submit new proposals, according to the Sept. 17 notice. The MTA sent out its original request for proposals in June 2013 and later extended its deadline to October 2013 while reopening it to new bidders. But once de Blasio was elected the major Midtown East rezoning was scrapped and since then, the MTA deal has been in a holding pattern.

Cushman & Wakefield is overseeing the bidding on behalf of the MTA. Reps for both declined to comment.

The agency is asking that new bids for the building be based on a floor area ratio (FAR) of between 24 and 30, or as much as 753,150 square feet. Right now zoning laws would allow 376,575 square feet.

There are also requirements to “support public circulation” in the area either on or off site, and the developer would have to meet “findings” with regard to the ground floor level, the massing and energy performance of the new building.

Additionally, landmark properties are expected to be able to transfer more air rights to the new structure, and any hotel within the new Vanderbilt Corridor would also need a special permit.

Steven Spinola, president of the Real Estate Board of New York, said the Vanderbilt zoning proposal should be certified by City Planning by the end of October. “Up until recently there was uncertainty as to what the city was doing. Hopefully, this will encourage people to take another look at this site.”

Another look at the location, a block north of the 1 Vanderbilt project (site 1279)

[Submariner]

What do you think the maximum square footage would translate to in terms of height?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Submariner

What do you think the maximum square footage would translate to in terms of height?

Don't know.

The agency is asking that new bids for the building be based on a floor area ratio (FAR) of between 24 and 30, or as much as 753,150 square feet. Right now zoning laws would allow 376,575 square feet.

Additionally, landmark properties are expected to be able to transfer more air rights to the new structure

For comparison, 425 Park is about 670,000 ft, but they're building without any additional air rights.

And the MTA site is only half of the block. Any developer would likely try to consolidate the block, as was done with 1 Vanderbilt.

[Crawford]

750,000 square feet + tiny site = likely supertall

This will probably be residential/hotel, as the site is too small for office. In any case, I don't see a likely scenario where a supertall isn't built, given the generous zoning and site constraints.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Crawford

750,000 square feet + tiny site = likely supertall

This will probably be residential/hotel, as the site is too small for office.

It's the same size as the 1 Vanderbilt block. But barring that, it's still a suitable footprint for office similar to 425 Park. Then there's the issue of obtaining more air rights, which seems likely.
I think it's more likely to be office. The current rezoning for this stretch is going through the approvals process, but there would have to be another for any hotel. That area is rich with assets,
and we saw the Waldorf, one of the classic hotels go for $2B today. I would put my money on a trophy office tower, which has been what that area is known for.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by NYguy

It's the same size as the 1 Vanderbilt block. But barring that, it's still a suitable footprint for office similar to 425 Park.

You're right, if they assemble the whole block, then yes, it will likely be office.

But the current site is tiny and much smaller than that of 425 Park. 425 Park is a giant site, deep and spanning the entire block. 347 Madison is a tiny site, shallow and covering maybe 30-35% of the blockfront.

I would guess that 425 Park has a footprint 3-4 times the size of 347 Madison.

[Perklol]

really going to miss all those pre-war beauties in that block...

Hopefully something spectacular gets built there but that seems like a stretch. I mean take a look at the monstrosity next door.

[NYguy]

^ The good news is that there are like a thousand more blocks of pre-wars in Manhattan for you to marvel at.

Originally Posted by Crawford

You're right, if they assemble the whole block, then yes, it will likely be office.

But the current site is tiny and much smaller than that of 425 Park. 425 Park is a giant site, deep and spanning the entire block. 347 Madison is a tiny site, shallow and covering maybe 30-35% of the blockfront.

I would guess that 425 Park has a footprint 3-4 times the size of 347 Madison.

Not that much, but look at the floor plats of 425 Park Avenue. There is a market for that, not all of the new towers will have massive floor plates. But the purpose of the rezoning, particularly this are clustered around Grand Central is for office development, so the city is encouraging the greater FARs for that. Full service hotel use would also be allowed, on a special permit basis.

The FAR for residential would be 10, or roughly a third of development space. We see this playing out in the Hudson Yards where Silverstein is seeking approval to building more residential than is allowed, due to the unique nature of his site. I don't see that as an issue here.


Using One Vanderbilt for example, we see how much could go to each (separately). Whatever amount of residential that could be built (up to the 10 FAR) would be subtracted from the commercial space: (comparing today's zoning with proposed zoning)






A look at the current buildings on the MTA site...










Landmark transfers would also be involved in determining size...





And the public/transit improvement bonus...

[NYguy]

Just some notes on potential transfers in the area...


http://nypost.com/2014/10/14/palanti...t-garage-site/


By Lois Weiss
October 14, 2014

The eventual sale of 230 Park Ave. by Monday Properties through CBRE could make it a participant in the Vanderbilt Corridor rezoning and revitalization, even though the landmark building itself can’t be touched.

Monday Properties repurchased the distinctive building in December 2007 after owning it earlier under the Max Capital moniker.

One bonus for a buyer would be its transferable air rights (TDR) as the corridor is being rezoned to bump the permissible floor area from 21.6 to a 30 FAR.

This means there are a handful of players that could team up to buy the building for its extra air rights.

According to a back-of-the-envelope computation by “Sky King” Robert Shapiro of City Center Real Estate, who specializes in air rights transfers, 230 Park has 81,538 square feet of air that could be transferred through a sale, for instance, to the winner of the MTA headquarters redevelopment of 347 Madison.

Bids for the 99-year lease of that site were due by e-mail to Cushman & Wakefield on Oct. 14 at 5 p.m.

The brokerage declined comment.

But RXR Realty and Walton Street Capital, which own 237 Park Ave., could effectuate a zoning lot merger and obtain as many as 219,846 square feet for additional development.

At one point, 230 Park’s current seller, Monday Properties, controlled both 230 and 237 Park and was going to merge them to construct a new tower on land by 237 Park.

But Monday, then in its Max Capital configuration, still needed to buy additional air rights, which never happened.

Andrew Penson’s Argent Ventures owns 1,285,011 feet of air rights according to public documents while the MTA also retained 100,000 square feet.

Penson has been vocal about getting cut out of the air rights sales process by the city, which has tried to limit the price.

He did not return calls for comment.

[NYguy]

http://nypost.com/2015/01/15/they-ai...drive-pricing/


By Lois Weiss
January 15, 2015

The sale of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority headquarters at 347 Madison Ave. through Cushman & Wakefield is down to finalists who will use it as a development site that will also benefit from the district’s zoning.

[Eidolon]

City Official Questions MTA Property Deal
February 24, 2016
By Dow Jones Business News

A deal to redevelop the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's former headquarters was put on hold after a top New York City official questioned whether a private developer should be able to avoid paying potentially hundreds of millions in city taxes.

At issue is a deal under which Boston Properties would build a new midtown Manhattan skyscraper on the site of the authority's Madison Avenue office buildings near Grand Central Terminal.

Ms. Trottenberg questioned "whether you're unfairly letting them get out of paying their property taxes. A private entity should pay."

The city would otherwise expect to reap hundreds of millions of dollars in property tax revenue over the course of the proposed 99-year lease, depending on how large the skyscraper winds up being built, she said.

The objections by Ms. Trottenberg called into question, at least for now, a chunk of funding for major construction and repair projects.

The MTA said it expected the deal in part to contribute $110 million toward its 2015-2019 capital plan. Funding for the $26 billion plan remains uncertain.

Ms. Trottenberg said the city's questions weren't related to a long-standing dispute between Mayor Bill de Blasio, her boss, and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who in effect controls the state-run MTA.

"This is just something we need a little time clarifying," she said.

[NYguy]

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/...icle-1.2543216

Mayor de Blasio's MTA board rep stalls $430M real estate deal for capital program


BY DAN RIVOLI
February 25, 2016

Mayor de Blasio's rep on the MTA board is holding up a real estate deal that would give the transit agency $430 million for its capital program.

Polly Trottenberg, de Blasio's transportation commissioner, asked for a last-minute delay ahead of a vote to let developer Boston Properties take over the old MTA headquarters on Madison Ave. in Midtown.

A sticking point for Trottenberg and the city was the fact that Boston Properties would be exempt from paying property taxes to the city, which could put a dent in its coffers. Instead of property taxes, Boston Properties would make those payments to the MTA.

“There is a real question we need to work through … about whether the MTA can just transfer its tax exempt status to a private company for a 99-year period, whether that can work," Trottenberg said.

MTA chair Tom Prendergast defended the deal as a way to pump more money into the $29 billion capital plan waiting for approval in Albany.

“The revenues that we would get from it would go toward public good in terms of investment in the transit system,” Prendergast said.

While MTA board members agreed to hold off on approving the transaction for at least a month, several were concerned about missing out on revenue from the deal due to a delay in approval.

“Time is money,” board member Norman Brown said. “Next month, it’s going to be harder to vote on it. It’s not a free month.”

Boston Properties Chief Financial Officer Michael LaBelle declined to comment.

[NYguy]

http://ny.curbed.com/2016/5/10/11650...ngs-identified

LPC Earmarks 12 Midtown East Buildings As Part of Neighborhood Revitalization
Includes the Graybar Building, the Pershing Square Building, and the Yale Club of New York among others



The Yale Club of New York pictured here is one of the buildings being considered for landmarking



BY TANAY WARERKAR
MAY 10, 2016

The city's Landmarks Preservation Commission has identified 12 buildings in Midtown East, including the Graybar Building and the Pershing Square Building, to be potentially landmarked in the future. It's part of the agency's move to provide greater protection to historic buildings in the neighborhood.

In 2014, Mayor Bill de Blasio created the East Midtown Steering Committee to tackle a series of goals for the neighborhood including density, sustainability, and historic preservation. That's where the LPC comes into the mix.

The agency studied the area known as Greater East Midtown, which spans East 39th to East 57th Streets, from Fifth Avenue to Second Avenue. And through that study the LPC identified three eras of development — buildings constructed prior to the existence of the Grand Central Terminal (pre-GCT), those built during its construction or soon after, and finally, those that were built after 1933 (post--GCT).

Buildings were then selected from each era and calendared to be considered at a future date. Most of the ones chosen including the Graybar Building and the Pershing Square Building were from the Grand Central Terminal era, when construction was spurred by improvements in transit.

"Greater East Midtown has always been the commercial center of New York, and its authenticity and dynamism largely derive from the textured coexistence of historic buildings and new construction," Meenakshi Srinivasan, the chair of the LPC, said in a press release. "Our challenge was to conceptualize a preservation strategy to protect a collection of significant buildings that, together, establish a historical narrative that will continue to be legible amidst future change."

East Midtown already has 38 individual landmarks and one historic district, and landmarking the 12 selected buildings could potentially bring that up to 50. Some of the other buildings under consideration include the Hampton Shops Building, the Yale Club of New York, and the Shelton and Beverly Hotels.

[De Minimis NY]

I hope they’re very liberal in doling out landmark status to the buildings in the GTC era (especially the Pershing Square Building, Yale Club and Roosevelt Hotel). That’s too important an era to see scrubbed from the city’s history.

Plus, under the Bloomberg plan those buildings would have the ability to transfer their unused development rights to adjacent buildings (and, I think, across the street), so hopefully aggressive landmarking would just result in taller buildings on smaller plots.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by De Minimis NY

I hope they’re very liberal in doling out landmark status to the buildings in the GTC era (especially the Pershing Square Building, Yale Club and Roosevelt Hotel). That’s too important an era to see scrubbed from the city’s history.

The Roosevelt Hotel is undistinguished, already earmarked for a massive development, and has no chance. The others are possibilities, though.

And LPC better be conservative in dolling on landmarking. You're embalming a building in amber. It better be damn distinguished, and not just some NIMBY excuse to block development.

[De Minimis NY]

^^ The Roosevelt Hotel is a solid representation of its era with really great street presence. I'd be willing sacrifice it for something of the quality of 111 57th street or Torre Verre, but it would be hard to argue that it's not preferable to 90% of new development out there.

None of that should really matter much if the newly created development rights are freely transferable, though.

We're going to get a fixed amount of new FAR either way. Would it not be better to concentrate those new zoning rights on ugly sites (and end up with relatively taller towers) than spread it out across a greater number of sites, with a plateau of relatively shorter towers, and lose gems like the Roosevelt in the process?

I felt the same way when I saw the destruction of the Bancroft Building for that new HFZ condo. It's bittersweet, as it's great to see new designs going up, but you can't help but wish they could have put the new tower on one of the many ugly sites in the neighborhood.

Well, with liberal landmarking and transferable development rights you can create the conditions to do just that.

[NYguy]

http://nypost.com/2017/01/10/mta-rel...redevelopment/

MTA relocating to larger building amid Midtown redevelopment

By Lois Weiss
January 10, 2017

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is expanding to 152,000 square feet at the Center Building at 33-00 Northern Blvd. in Long Island City.

Along with adding 17,000 square feet on part of the 6th floor, the state agency renewed until 2026 its lease on part of the seventh floor and entire eighth floor.

Josh Kuriloff and Jodi Roberts of Cushman & Wakefield represented the MTA, which is rejiggering its occupancies as it prepares to turn over its Madison Avenue buildings in Midtown to Brookfield Property for redevelopment.

In a direct deal, the city’s Human Resources Administration was also renewed, for 150,000 square feet.

Glen Weiss and Josh Glick repped Center Building owner Vornado for both leases. Sources said asking rents in the building are roughly $40 a square foot.

Cushman & Wakefield and Vornado reps declined comment.

[Crawford]

OK, given that Brookfield is developing this site, I assume a very large, tall, glassy office tower is planned. That's their bread and butter.

This is a large full-block site, and part of the new Grand Central upzoning, so I would guess we're getting something pretty enormous. We'll see.

[JSsocal]

Its not a full block site, the newly landmarked Yale club occupies a quadrant.

Edit: I think YC's neighbor 52 Vanderbilt is also excluded as well, so the new development will only front madison

[De Minimis NY]

The landmarking of the Yale Club and its neighbor were a great outcome, as we'll end up with taller towers while preserving historical architecture at the street level. Given the economic incentives, it's possible that all of these air rights will be concentrated on the MTA site, resulting in an incredibly tall tower.

The Vanderbilt Corridor rezoning increased FAR in the area to 24 as-of-right. Landmarked buildings can take advantage of this by selling unused air rights to other buildings in the corridor (once the Midtown East rezoning passes, the resale zone will be increased to include all of Midtown East as well).

However, rather than sell the air rights to a site on a different block, the best way to maximize value would be for the Yale Club and its neighbor to merge zoning lots with the MTA property instead. That approach would allow Brookfield to absorb the as-of-right FAR from its landmarked neighbors (24 for the block) and also make additional contributions to the transportation fund on its neighbors’ behalf, which would allow it to increase the FAR for the entire block to 30.

The end result would be a tower with nearly the same square footage as One Vanderbilt, but on a site with half the footprint—in other words, a VERY tall tower.

Normally that would be uneconomical, as the floor plates will be somewhat awkward for office use and so there may not be enough demand to justify the additional costs of constructing that tall. In this case, however, this is the only site that can take full advantage of those air rights, so maybe that tips the scales towards building bigger here… at least I hope it does.