NEW YORK | The Spiral (509 W. 34th) | 1,041 FT | 66 FLOORS

[chris08876]

Tishman Speyer’s Hudson Yards tower to cost $3.2B: filing

Tishman Speyer has put a $3.2 billion price tag on its 2.6 million-square-foot office tower in Hudson Yards, which will rise 61 stories when completed in late 2019.

The company, which earlier this year snapped up a pair of development sites at 34th Street and 10th Avenue, estimates the total cost of developing its office tower at $3.2 billion, according to an application filed with the New York City Industrial Development Agency.

The IDA is offering Tishman a 25-year exemption of property taxes worth about $170 million. The building, which the developer is looking to construct to LEED Gold standards, will include 57,000 square feet of retail space.
Earlier this year Tishman paid $438 million for the far West Side properties, one of which had been marketed by Massey Knakal as the “Hudson Spire” development site with the potential to build the country’s tallest building, surpassing the 104-story One World Trade Center.

Tishman’s building, however, is planned for only 61 stories. The company intends to begin construction in the third quarter of 2015 and finish four years later.

=====================================
July 07, 2014
http://therealdeal.com/blog/2014/07/...t-3-2b-filing/

[Perklol]

I think we're getting something lame here. Also did they opt out to use the other 200,000 square feet they have available?

Shame with the 61 story office building.

[Michael12374]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Tishman Speyer’s Hudson Yards tower to cost $3.2B: filing




=====================================
July 07, 2014
http://therealdeal.com/blog/2014/07/...t-3-2b-filing/

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!

[Sky88]

Is this was supposed to be a "truly iconic" tower?
It is really a waste of money (3.2 billion) for a stupid 61 floors tower.
New York has lost another opportunity to build a true high tower. Too bad ...

[wilfredo267]

Originally Posted by Sky88

Is this was supposed to be a "truly iconic" tower?
It is really a waste of money (3.2 billion) for a stupid 61 floors tower.
New York has lost another opportunity to build a true high tower. Too bad ...

lt's Tishman so l am not surprised considering the proposal they had for the Hudson yards. l hope l'm wrong and this turns out to be something special.

[Michael12374]

Originally Posted by Sky88

Is this was supposed to be a "truly iconic" tower?
It is really a waste of money (3.2 billion) for a stupid 61 floors tower.
New York has lost another opportunity to build a true high tower. Too bad ...

61 floors still could possibly be over 1000 ft. And just because its not tall doesnt for sure mean it wont be iconic. thats about the only good thing I can pull from that.

[hunser]

Hmm, with 61 floors the tower could reach the 1,312ft / 400m mark (spire and / or crown). Still, I'm a bit disappointed. How things are going, the Hudson Yards complex (along with Manhattan West) will be a plateau of supertalls with no real peak. The North Tower got a massive height cut and now this. Also, the Equinox Tower and Silverstein's residential tower are about the same height. New York has about 30 supertalls in the pipeline, but none with a truly great height. For a signature tower you need a good design and superb height.

[sparkling]

61 floors may be disappointing to skyscraper lovers but IMO developers face huge risks of building 61/81/101/121 floor towers. I am in the financial markets and what I see makes me believe that funding will get much harder to come by pretty soon and big companies won't be too eager to move their HQ to new and fancier office towers. I do not want to irritate people around here but I believe that many spec buildings (this one included) won't get finished but will end up like Chicago spire circa 2009. Just my 2 cents.

[chris08876]

It could be 61 floors with a tall base and large floor heights with a spire. IDK, but maybe this could reach 1700 feet. Say its 1400 ft estimate or close to it with when it comes to roof height, given the slender nature, and a spire, it might be over 500m. Time will tell though.

[Zapatan]

It'll probably be about 900-1000+ feet

[NYguy]

Tishman Speyer has put a $3.2 billion price tag on its 2.6 million-square-foot office tower in Hudson Yards, which will rise 61 stories when completed in late 2019.

....Tishman’s building, however, is planned for only 61 stories. The company intends to begin construction in the third quarter of 2015 and finish four years later.

We don't know what the even means yet as far as the height goes. For that price I would expect something spectacular. One Vanderbilt with its 67 stories will rise above 1,300 ft. Depending on design, and what accounts for the floors, this tower could be in that range or higher.

I'm surprised that they will begin construction as early as next year, but it will take four years to build.

[De Minimis NY]

BofA Tower cost $1B ($1.18B in today's dollars, taking inflation into account) and NYTimes Building was $850M ($940M). There haven't been enough comparable commercial towers built in the past decade to have a great idea of what $3.2B in construction and materials will yield (WTC costs are inflated by security and Hudson Yards costs are inflated by platform/logistics), but rest assured that this is going to be a VERY nice tower.

[ILNY]

Few quotes from February's discussion.

Originally Posted by ILNY

...or the tower may not be build at all. The seller wants to sell this lot for max profit so it advertises it as a "potential" for super tall. But it will be up to the buyer to decide what to build. He can build 2 smaller towers instead of super tall one. It will probably be less expensive. Everything is possible until the new developer declares plans for this site.

Originally Posted by babybackribs2314

There is no real plan, so there haven't actually been any changes; it is all marketing mumbo-jumbo.

And.... it turned out to be a mumbo-jumbo as predicted by some.

Originally Posted by NYguy

No, the site is being marketed to people interested in building a skyscraper that will be the tallest in the City, or the hemisphere, making it one of the tallest in the world.

With 61 floors, I can hardly see this tower as the tallest in the City. (unless they put 500ft antenna on top). We will be lucky if it makes a super tall status at all. Lesson learned, do not listen to all this marketing pitch coming out from sellers. It only serves one purpose... to sell.


I would not put too much weight on $3.2 bln price either, it's an estimate and can change any time.

[Eidolon]

I have to say that I agree with this, $3.2 gigabucks spent on a building that requires no special engineering is a pretty rare thing. Also, even though floor numbers these days are not a very reliable indicator of a building's final height, I have long had doubts about this reaching the advertised height of 1800 feet. It doesn't have to though, because I'd be pleased to see a solid 1400 footer with a ~200 foot spire rise on this site.

I do wonder who the anchor tenant is going to be though, there are several big ones prowling for space currently and Tishman-Speyer's proposed schedule is pretty bullish.

[scalziand]

Just for another couple of data points:

11 Times Square (2010) cost $1.2 billion for 1.2 MSF.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/08/ny...ease.html?_r=0

200 West Street (2010) cost $2.1 billion for 2.1 MSF.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200_West_Street

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by ILNY

And.... it turned out to be a mumbo-jumbo as predicted by some.

With 61 floors, I can hardly see this tower as the tallest in the City

Lesson learned, do not listen to all this marketing pitch coming out from sellers. It only serves one purpose... to sell.

I would not put too much weight on $3.2 bln price either, it's an estimate and can change any time.

We already knew that the design of the Hudson Spire proposal wasn't what was going to get built. There was no "mumbo-jumbo". The site, as it was marketed, was for half of the development rights which Tishman now controls. They could build a tower taller than what was envisioned, if they so chose to. There was no lie, no gimmick, and no "trickery".

Originally Posted by scalziand

Just for another couple of data points:

11 Times Square (2010) cost $1.2 billion for 1.2 MSF.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/08/ny...ease.html?_r=0

200 West Street (2010) cost $2.1 billion for 2.1 MSF.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200_West_Street

I remember the 200 West Street buildout, a large tower that needed larger base floors than the WTC towers, and ended up using the Liberty bonds that were intended for the WTC (as did BofA).

I think you're all getting to "frustrated" over the 61 floor figure. If construction is expected to begin next year, there will be some type of rendering, even if preliminary in due time. Save yourselves the grief until you have something to grieve about. I'm excited for this tower, and excited at the prospect of construction beginning next year, a full 2 years ahead of Related's expected start time for 50 Hudson Yards, which will sit between this one and 30 Hudson Yards.

[ILNY]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I think you're all getting to "frustrated" over the 61 floor figure. If construction is expected to begin next year, there will be some type of rendering, even if preliminary in due time.

I am not frustrated, I am disappointed. I was quietly hoping for something big, a Hudson Yards signature tower or like you said the tallest one on the hemisphere, but what we are getting is 61 story tower that will disappear between other super tall towers of Hudson Yards. Moreover, HY North Tower just got height decreased by 100 ft. to 1227 ft. so there will be no tower that will really stand out at HY.

[NYguy]

There will be a hearing on Thursday of next week (17th) on the merits of the development with the NYCIDA. Don't expect too many details about the design which is still in development.

[Perklol]

Originally Posted by Eidolon

I do wonder who the anchor tenant is going to be though, there are several big ones prowling for space currently and Tishman-Speyer's proposed schedule is pretty bullish.

Originally Posted by sparkling

I do not want to irritate people around here but I believe that many spec buildings (this one included) won't get finished but will end up like Chicago spire circa 2009. Just my 2 cents.

Agreed. They will need a big tenant to get financing and with so much competition from nearby office towers, this building may not start construction until 2017+ at least.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Eveningsong

Agreed. They will need a big tenant to get financing and with so much competition from nearby office towers, this building may not start construction until 2017+ at least.

I would say 2015 was sooner than I expected, but Tishman Speyer is no amateur. If they are talking 2015, then it seems likely they will get what they need to do so.

Two developers wooing Deutsche Bank, a big tenant
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...k-a-big-tenant

They're in the market for a tenant, there's a pool to pull from, even if its one of their own. The best Related would have to go against this one would be 50 HY (2017) or even later, the tower in the western half of the yards. Brookfield would have a better chance with Manhattan West.