One Madison Park future?

Does anyone know when the onsite rental office opens? Do you think I can get a free month, or am I better off sending Jim over?

Latest article from the observer:

http://www.observer.com/2010/real-estate/shadow-boom?page=1

In the Shadow of the Boom
By Dana Rubinstein
March 9, 2010 | 7:03 p.m

Once upon a time, two young men named Ira Shapiro and Marc Jacobs left Rockland County for the isle of Manhattan to build a tower all the way to the sky. Day by day, week by week, their tower at One Madison Park rose. New York’s glitterati took notice. Parties were held. Photographs flashed. Messrs. Shapiro and Jacobs knew how their story would end: They’d walk away richer than before. More important than before. They’d be New York powerful.

They almost succeeded. Together, they built one of the tallest, most architecturally ambitious Manhattan skyscrapers of the decade. But in the end, their fairy tale was more Brothers Grimm than Walt Disney, ending with a fractured relationship between the onetime friends, a pile of lawsuits and, now, a looming foreclosure.

In February, iStar, the bank that now holds the more than $200 million debt on the 60-story condo tower at 23rd Street and Madison Avenue, sued for foreclosure. The men’s firm, Slazer Enterprises, is the defendant in more than a dozen lawsuits. And Mr. Jacobs and his wife, Rochelle, are now accusing Mr. Shapiro of fraudulently misusing his and his wife’s signatures.

Earlier this year, Mr. and Ms. Jacobs asked the Rockland County district attorney’s office to investigate more than 18 instances in which they claim their signatures were fraudulently used on personally guaranteed promissory notes and other documents related to the construction of One Madison Park, according to their attorney, Lawrence McCarron. “The DA, from what I understand, is investigating,” Mr. McCarron told The Observer. The district attorney’s spokeswoman declined to comment.

“We’re also pursuing a civil lawsuit,” Mr. McCarron added. “Marc feels terrible about this. A lot of these investors are personal friends of his. He would have liked to see the project proceed, so maybe these people can come out with something.

“I think a lot of people are going to have to account for their actions.”

BY MANHATTAN REAL ESTATE standards, Messrs. Shapiro and Jacobs, both 44, came from nothing. Which is to say they were successful, but not grotesquely so. Mr. Shapiro hails from a local real estate family; Mr. Jacobs was a successful commodities trader.

Prior to the construction of one of the biggest Manhattan condo towers in recent memory, Messrs. Shapiro and Jacobs had never built a project on the island. Earlier in the decade, they had erected their only other real estate project, a modest, 23-unit condo development, Mirabelle-on-the-Hudson, in … North Bergen. An ad that ran in New York magazine in November 2004 boasted of the seven-story building’s “panoramic river and Manhattan skyline views”; and “Kohler cast iron soaking tubs.” The asking prices ranged from $500,000 to $1.75 million.

A lot for North Bergen. Peanuts by Manhattan standards. Following Mirabelle’s apparent success, their ambitions grew.

By 2005, they were scoping out the promised land. They called Eastern Consolidated broker Marcia Rose Yawitz. They wanted to see about a plot of land on 28th Street and Eighth Avenue. It was taken. Ms. Yowitz found them another one, a better one. Right on 23rd Street, between Broadway and Park avenues, on the unruly, un-landmarked south side of Madison Square Park. They snapped it up. In late 2005, in the middle of the transit strike, they entered into a contract to purchase 20 and 22 East 23rd Street from Peter Fine for $36.4 million. They closed on the purchase in spring 2006. In June of the following year, they bought 24 East 23rd Street, an adjacent plot, for, $16.8 million.

They decided they would call their project Saya. No, on second thought, they would call it One Madison Park.

At the time, construction loans were disastrously easy to come by. In May 2006, Column Financial, a subsidiary of Credit Suisse, whose New York headquarters happens to be located on Madison Square Park, issued separate mortgages to Slazer Enterprises for $25.3 million, $66.3 million and $8.4 million, according to city documents. Later in 2007, iStar, a private commercial real estate banker, purchased the debt on the building.

Meanwhile, Messrs. Shapiro and Jacobs hired architects Cetra/Ruddy, the firm responsible for 77 Hudson on the Jersey waterfront and the Orion on 42nd Street. The tower rose. Problems rose with it.
BY APRIL 2007, very few units (if any) had been sold,” according to a Jan. 28 lawsuit filed by advertising virtuoso David Lipman against Mr. Shapiro and friends.

“In truth, and among other reasons, defendants were unable to market the Property because of their lack of a successful track record in the marketplace and their lack of standing in the New York City luxury condominium industry.”

So, Messrs. Shapiro and Jacobs “approached David Lipman and asked him to enhance Property’s brand and image (and in turn to increase its value) by turning the Property into a luxury brand, akin to Mercedes, Rolex and other well-known luxury items.”

In return for two 15-floor units in the building and $800,000, Mr. Lipman would use both his agency’s infrastructure and his personal network to help market the tower. By his own account, Mr. Lipman delivered.

He reached out to his contacts at Creative Artists Agency, which agreed to design a special screening room in the building. He reached out to Charlie Trotter, who agreed to open a restaurant in the building. He introduced the developers to Rem Koolhaas, who agreed to design the lobby, the spa, the fitness room, the screening room, the restaurant, the wine cellar and a 22-story annex to the original building. Celebrities like Naomi Watts, Liev Schreiber and Susan Sarandon were said to have purchased units in the building.

As all of these seemingly positive developments were going down, the two men were already casting about for short-term loans to keep the project going amid what had become the frothiest New York real estate market in a generation. They found willing and deep-pocketed lenders. On March 14, 2007, David Chu, the founder of Nautica and the owner of a gorgeous townhouse at 25 East 22nd Street, by the development site, agreed to lend Slazer $1.4 million, according to Mr. Chu’s attorney, Christopher Chang. Five months later, Mr. Chu lent Mr. Shapiro another $870,000. A year later, in September 2008, Lehman Brothers collapsed.

Mr. Chu is now one in a long line of litigants suing Slazer Enterprises.

JANUARY 14, 2009, four months into the Great Recession. A black-clad Ira Shapiro poses for a photograph during the opening of the sales office for Rem Koolhaas’s 23 East 22nd Street, behind One Madison Park. He is of average height, balding, with a ruddy face. He’s standing next to a shiny silver model of the 22-story Koolhaas tower. It’s a beautiful, cantilevered building, one that seems to lean over and peer out from behind the tall, slender One Madison Park. The latter is already under construction. (In September 2008, architecture critic James Gardner, then at The New York Sun, wrote, “Mr. Koolhaas’s contribution will be Lou Costello or Jerry Lewis to the Bud Abbott/Dean Martin of its neighbor. Peeking out from behind the back of the taller building, it will deliver the impish and subversive laugh lines, while the taller building, the grown-up straight man in the equation, will preserve its unflappable rectilinear integrity. That should be interesting to see.”)

Mr. Shapiro’s photo-ready smile masked a world of financial distress. In June 2009, Curbed speculated that Mr. Koolhaas was no longer on the project. Buildings Department filings revealed that Cetra/Ruddy would now design the 22nd Street annex as well, and it would rise only to 11 stories. According to the pile of lawsuits that have since been filed against Slazer, around the same time Mr. Shapiro posed for the photo, he was scrambling for more short-term infusions of cash. Now, those who delivered short-term loans are suing for repayment. The most prominent lenders are Mr. Chu and Mr. Shapiro’s own former real estate broker, Wendy Maitland of Brown Harris Stevens, who declined to comment for this article.

But loan repayments are hardly the only accusations contained in the lawsuits. Plaintiffs allege numerous acts of double-dealing, from promising certain condo specifications but delivering others, to agreeing to sell a unit to one party and then selling it to another.

Now, the fate of the building’s buyers and investors rests with the courts. About a dozen of the building’s 90 condos are occupied. And insiders estimate that the more than $70 million in escrow from contracted buyers should cover the completion of both One Madison Park and the tower behind it, which has yet to begin construction.

The fates of the dozens of buyers in contract with the building remain unresolved. The state attorney general’s office could grant buyers a right of rescission, which would allow them to demand their deposits back. But given the prestige of the building, its powerful allure and its ideal location, buyers might well choose to stick out the turmoil.

AS FAR AS Messrs. Shapiro and Jacobs are concerned, some say it’s likely they will lose control of the building entirely.

“Eventually, Shapiro will be forced into bankruptcy, one way or another,” Mr. Chang, the attorney for Mr. Chu, said. “It’s pretty clear they’ve run out of money. That all has to be sorted out in the bankruptcy court.”

Neither Mr. Shapiro nor Mr. Jacobs would comment for this story. Nor would debt holder iStar. But Burton Dorfman, Mr. Shapiro’s attorney, said of the likelihood that Slazer would lose the property, “I don’t think it’s a possibility.”

In the end, it doesn’t matter to anyone outside of the mess who owns the development. Or who owns the otherworldly condos inside, second homes for those with too much money to spend.

What does matter is that a 60-story tower has been built on the south side of Madison Square Park, and will, in perpetuity, reside there, and surely outlive those involved in its creation, including the young men from Rockland County, and those millions of New Yorkers who move beneath its shadow.
At least it’s not ugly. Indeed, on a recent springlike evening, the skyscraper could be seen rising spectrally through the branches of the London plane trees that live on the north side of Madison Square Park. The reflection of the backlit 700-foot Clock Tower on Madison Avenue—another distressed condo conversion—shimmered on One Madison Park’s reflective facade.

The tower was, in its overpowering, hubristic way, kind of pretty.

drubinstein@observer.com

Any ideas on likely outcomes?

I keep thinking the key to this thing is the second tower. Right now Ira is committed to building some ugly 11 story tower because that's what's in the offering plan. He can't afford to do it 'cuz the ugly duckling won't sell, and he hasn't been able to make changes to it because it would allow everyone to get out of their contracts.

Similarly, for a new buyer, they either have to build the runty loser, or be prepared to bail on existing contracts so they could do something new.

Is there some world where they divide this into two projects/parcel? The existing tower (which Ira could probably figure out a way to finish), chopping off the second parcel for a future development? That might be crazy, but it would seem to allow completion of the current project while creating an asset with some possible future value.

Feel free to tell me this is crazy . . . I know nothing about how this stuff works. But if you do, please offer an equally entertaining alternative!

alternative: don't buy now. this is a mess.

attorneys tell me this could take 5 months to 5 years to clear up. love the building but that is very risky.

My guess is that people currently in contracts will have the opportunity to get out either by the terms of their contracts (e.g., inability of seller to close) or by AG mandate, irrespective of any decision on the south tower. As for the question of the second tower, who knows? That will depend on who ends up controlling the project and on what terms. It's a safe bet, given all of the mistakes made so far and lawsuits filed, that iStar and the other lenders will be very loathe to reach an agreement that leaves Slazer in charge of finishing the building and selling the remaining units. For residents at the current building, best outcome would be that only the lobby gets constructed on 22nd street and there is no building put up there. In spite of the incredible legal/financial mess here, I'd expect some clarity far sooner than 5 months from now. As this saga drags on and the negative press continues, everyone involved -- lenders, developers, investors -- are losing lots of money both in terms of financing costs and potential revenues from closings. Everyone has powerful incentives to come to the table.

This is the Latest NEWS UPDATE on the building!

http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/one-madison-park-condo-told-to-offer-buyers-refunds-by-andrew-cuomo

It is done.

I'll miss all of you. Really!

whoah.

what a mess.

I find this telling:

19 active sales listings: $3,795 per ft² (avg)
130 previous sales listings: $2,852 per ft² (avg)
13 recorded sales: $1,794 per ft² (avg)

thats a pretty big gap.

I think the thing to do is sit tight for a few months and see how it unfolds. maybe put the 2nd bldg on hold, or sell off the site if possible. The key is there must be an entrance from 22nd st. 23rd street entrance is a bummer. Possibly build a long corridor entrance on 22nd with high ceilings, well done, could work for me.
i am still interested in the building, and love the project, but will sit on the sideline for a while to see how it unfolds.

Agree Steelman.

Let's hypothesize for a moment on what might happen. New lender buys out old lender for hefty discount. New lender restores sanity, financial backing and certainty to the project. New lender closes some units (at nice discounts) to show all is good and moving fwd, with the view to then really bump up the prices once prospective buyers' nerves are calmed.

My long-term view has not changed. The buyers will do very well. A new lender (assuming they get a nice haircut on the notes) will do well. The old lender will be thrilled to get out and, in light of that, do pretty well. Only party that gets wiped out is the sponsor, which sounds about right since they got in the this in the first place with the most to gain, the most risk, and the most to lose. Capitalism at its best.

It could go your way, Or Istar may feel they have a win situation and finish it themselves. The builder/broker are on board and the bldg is almost complete. Either way the sponser/mezz lender are out. I think an investor would do better in your scenario, but it might go the way i said.

The real question right now is whether the parties will be able to reach an agreement that allows the project and sales to move forward in the near term without a lengthy court foreclosure proceding (or at least during such a proceding). Objectively, it's in everyone's interest that the remaining funding be guaranteed so that buyers no longer view this as a distressed property and are willing to pay closer to "market' prices and move in.

However, there are so many parties involved at this point, with so many different financial interests and there is such a lack of trust of the current developer group that it's entirely conceivable that everyone acting in their self-interest will continue to destroy value for all. IStar, as senior lender, just wants its money back and probably would be perfectly content to sell off the building at prices which allow it to get par even if nothing is left for the sub debt, mezz and equity. At the other extreme, the original partners arguably have no value here other than optionality and hold-up value. It wouldn't be shocking if they use what leverage they have to secure some value for themselves or at a minimum a release from personal liability/guarantees.

Right now, things are in limbo. iStar hasn't won the right to step into the shoes of the sponsor and the sponsor isn't in a position to do anything on the project itself. If this churns throught the courts, the next step will be to have a receiver appointed...something the sponsor's attorney claims has been blocked in court thus far...

I agree about Slazer.

Their only way to get value is to be obstructionists.

They will do everything possible to gum this up until they get what they want.

Hopefully that will make this their last development.

It's out!

The 17th Amendment -- the magic one that allows everyone to rescind -- has been issued. It's dated March 12, and allows for rescission within 15 days.

We had not received it in the mail, but had to wrest it from their grubby little hands.

It also has the foreclosure claim document attached. Wow.

So what do you think? Rescind or renegoiate? If there is going to be a clear path to finish, with all the ammenities i still love the Bldg.

Hard to argue against rescinding unless you believe that by submitting a new bid when the dust settles you will do worse than your current contract price. If sales resume only when funding for the project (and timeframe to completion) is 100% nailed down, perhaps there will be a feeding frenzy, but that's a big IF, and it's still 2010, not 2007 in any event. Even a financially sound 50+ storey building will take a while to sell and remember that only 12 units have closed so far.

any affects on the manhattan condo market?

Clear path? To what? This is going to be lawsuit heaven for awhile. Seen iStar's bonds lately? They aren't the model of fiscal health themselves.

Bigger concern: what happened during construction with unpaid/late paid crews and a developer looking to save money. If corners were cut, you find out in drips and drabs over years. A missing shower pan here causes a leak, faulty electric over there, sheet rock and not green board in this bathroom, etc

I've seen it before. More than a few 80s buildings took a few years to discover all the kinks and work them out. It isn't even the money, it's the constant hassle. OK, it's also the money.

This project has been a disaster since Wendy and crew spun up the developers with promises of Hollywood stars and huge numbers. How many other new developments in Manhattan have offered the right to assign contracts as if this is Miami Beach? Pie in the sky projects with novice and greedy developers never works out well.

Think about it this way: If these two developers did half of what they accuse each other of, what the heck did they do to the construction process?

Does any buyer really have an option not to rescind?

All of the contracts in place are at 2007 prices. Even if you want to stay, you'd have to renegotiate.

And if you DON'T exercise the right to rescind, your old (high priced) contract stands.

At a minimum you'd have to get some sort of document from someone (Slazer?) that gave you the right to walk away if you didn't come to a new agreement.

And I would advise you that this is not the developer you'd want to get that kind of document from. They'll dely beyond the 15 day period (screwing you), or simply deny they signed it or that it ever existed.

Even if you want to invest, your best option has to be to rescind but say you're still interested.

anyone hear anything on how many contracts are being rescinded? Anything else new as to how the project is going to proceed?

Rescission offer has about another week to run unless extended, and I doubt there will be any kind of public announcement about how many contracts are rescinded. Probably the next "public" step will be to see what units come back on the market for sale.

The question is "Whose selling them?" The bank or the sponsor. There seems to be no one to talk to.

No one is selling them now. AG won't permit it. Likely a receiver will be appointed in connection with someone (iStar presumably) affirming/assuming obligations. At that point, presumably, sales can start again, either with current listing agent or someone new.

Where's the money,? Assumng everyone has seen Real Deal lead yesterday.
The saga continues... Wonder when Slazer goes to the slammer?

the madness continues. now i am convinced this building will be tied up in the courts for quite some time.

Anyone know how many recissions? Do we think that Istar will stick it out, finish the project and sell it out at a discount?

Steelman, the rescission period is just now coming to an end. Check court filings (or press reports) over the next couple of weeks to see if there's public disclosure on this.

Re: predicting what will happen next, I doubt even the attorneys who are directly involved can do more than come up with possible scenarios. This situation really is unprecedented: all the parties involved, allegations of fraud and breach of contract, etc. Not to mention the fact that there are already people living in the building...pretty unusual for a receivership situation. The project construction is nearly complete, and one would think that iStar has a strong financial incentive to invest additional dollars (in a way that such investment is protected) in order to assure the project is completed. According to press reports, iStar has been trying to get a receiver appointed to acheive that without allowing Slazer to remain in control.

Where this goes and how quickly it will take for the dust to settle is anyone's guess. Next court hearing is April 13. Maybe that will bring some clarity.

Maybe not.

thank you What a shame that this bldg turned into such a disaster.

Checks are in!

I know I'm tempting fate by announcing this before they actually clear . . . but thought any fellow "rescinders" should know that they are starting to be sent out.

Checks are in!

I know I'm tempting fate by announcing this before they actually clear . . . but thought any fellow "rescinders" should know that they are starting to be sent out.

Does anyone know how many rescinders there are? How can we find that out? I would assume most have rescinded.
Thoughts?

the ones i have heard about from broker friends have rescinded

i would think nearly everyone would rescind

from that perspective this is a gift from the gods

The question is, when things start to sell there, what do you think the full floors should sell for per square foot? Any thoughts?

that is truly the "millions of dollars" question
2000 a square foot half a high floor ....maybe i am in

Depends on the status when sales start up again. Will operational funding be fully guaranteed? By iStar's credit or with a performance bond? What about construction? How firm are completion dates? What about the 22nd Street entrance, let alone the South Tower. Will all this mess impact common charges going forward? Are there still material open litigation items when sales start? Will banks lend (with 20% sold, not likely...)?

In the current market, it's easy to justify $2,000 to $2,500, maybe even a bit more for a high floor, for an OMP with no "issues" and with willing lenders. But if that's not the situation when sales resume, it's unlikely that sales will touch those prices.

i think they should have tried to sell all full floor units ...i havnt been around here that long maybe they did

but t only 50 or so units full floor ....private key elevator right into your apartment

so cool.......so elite......

i mean if you want to get 3000 a square foot who wants to mingle with one bedroom types

Anyone know how the last court date on 4/13 turned out? what's next?

Steel,

According to an article in the paper a temporary receiver was appointed with very limited powers to collect money, pay bills and evaluate what is needed to finish construction of the bldg. The Sponsor was left in charge and permitted to market the property and resume sales. Seems like a victory, at least in part, for the Sponsor.

sales should be opened in ten days i am told. i am buying.

Ronbo, five weeks ago you were saying that this building was a "mess" that could take 5 months to five years to "clean up". What is it about this recent news that has changed your mind? Doesn't seem any less messy today than it was five weeks ago...

sponsor is in place which probably means finances have stabilized. if lawsuits are dismissed etc process becomes neater. in any case, sponsor must finish building--his actions overseen by the AG and a judge. this will become an iconic building. there is some risk but to the risk taker comes great reward. that's my thinking

some of the nicest views I've ever seen. If you don't get the "IN the view" idea, you should really check a bulding like this out.

Seeing the skyline from far away doesn't compare to seeing the skyline from within....

"sales should be opened in ten days i am told. i am buying."

regardless of price?

All that's happened so far is that the judge appointed a receiver with limited powers to collect and disburse funds...and said that sales could resume (subject to AG approval) which everyone involved would like to see happen so the building loan can be repaid. Sponsor is "in place" only because foreclosure proceeding hasn't yet really gotten underway. What the parties will continue to fight about is whether the sponsor can have a role in how the project is completed/funded. iStar isn't currently obligated to fund anything and it's highly unlikely that sponsor has any funds to do anything.

It may be a great building, but things aren't much closer to resolution than they were when the foreclosure proceding was launched in Feb. Anyone considering going into contract now had better do their diligence.

rawdeal reports that the bank has proposed to the judge in this case that if the receiver is given authority (and shapiro et al lose that authority), the bank will complete the building--the lobby, and even build an eleven story addition that had been proposed. that is welcome news.

Ronbo, I'm afraid that report was inaccurate with respect to the second building (South tower). IStar's attorney did say in a letter to the judge, however, they'd fund completion of the North tower if the receiver's powers were broadened to oversee construction and the Sponsor was removed from the picture.

realdeal reports that the judge in the case has removed ira shapiro and istar is now in charge of 1mp's future. good news?

Ignore what realdeal, page six or any other gossip mag says is happening here. A ruling is likely coming soon, clarity will follow at some point and if you are in any way a serious buyer for this bldg a new amendment will be filed with the AG shedding light on all of this. Patience.

the ruling has come down and matters are still muddled. shemesh is still not answering broker queries and the mess continues...

Mktmaker is right. No "ruling has come down" as yet. The parties have drafted an order for the judge to sign and are still arguing over various particulars. The judge hasn't signed the order so the precise status is unclear. Morever the draft order -- and the discussion in Court last Friday -- clearly states that sales won't begin again until the new amendment is filed and approved by the AG. I doubt that brokers will be taking calls until the amendment is effective and the developer is authorized to sign contracts again.

16 months we've been picking over this carcus.
iStar is finished. Not even a power ball win could save these over ambitious boys from Rockland.
Build the other tower? Maybe someday but that could only be a fools errand. Where does it all end up?
Does the bank end up selling it off to recover what they can? could prices remain where they are? Will this building end up the bargin of the century? Will it be the largest and most fantastic dust collector the skyline has? Care to enlighten me as to what you all propose the future to be? I will remind you all that there was a time that both the Empire State Building and the WTC were precieved as complete boondogles.

any news re: when sales will recommence?

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/05/24/lawsuits_come_with_the_discounts_at_one_madison_park.php

omg. this will drown in a sea of litigation for who know how long. moving on!

whats the latest here? any updates...timeline?

http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/creditors-aim-to-force-one-madison-park-into-bankruptcy

Here you go.

Sadly enough, it seems like 1MP will never live up to the initial hype of being the downtown's 15CPW.

given the developments, sounds like the timing of resolution is getting even more extended ...

There is now a wikipedia entry for OMP. It seems to leave out many of the more interesting parts of it's history! Perhaps someone here could fill in some of the blanks!

Even though the NY procedings appear stalled pending bankruptcy court resolution, the claims/filings keep coming. Latest is Gotham Greenwich Construction which filed a $1.7mm mechanics' lien against the building owners (Slazer et al) in November 2006. Gotham got a judgment, then reached a settlement agreement, the owners defaulted on the agreement, so Gotham got another judgment; the parties then reached an amended settlement agreement, again the owners defaulted on THAT agreement, so Gotham had to get yet another judgment, reached a SECOND amended settlement agreement earlier this year which, guess what?, the owners defaulted on again.

To everyone who's had a brush with this building and gotten away unscathed... MAZEL TOV!

to those who are still following this...anything new on the legal front? what are the next key dates to watch?

Dont know what's happening on the inside(both on paper and on tile) but from my viewing vantage point, looks like all that's left on the outer facade are the top 5 floors.
Exterior work has not let up the entire time.

The only work that continues is bare minimum on the curtain wall plus miscellaneous maintenance construction. The NY Supreme Court foreclosure hearing has come to a standstill due to Delaware Bankruptcy Court's automatic stay. The BK court will have a hearing on a motion to take the case back out of bankruptcy and lift the stay, in mid-August. Doubt we'll hear anything before then.

Any updated news on this project?

any updates anyone ?

Still with the BK court. Initial motions to dismiss were heard a couple of weeks ago. So far judge hasn't considered/responded to arguments. Not sure about timing/next steps. I wouldn't expect the sales office to re-open any time soon... You can find info online (for a fee): Delaware BK court case number 10-11867-KG.

Hearing on motion to dismiss involuntary bankruptcy filing pushed back again to November 4 unless a consensual agreement is reached before then. Saga continues. Meanwhile, rumors that iStar may be considering BK filing itself... Wonder how the six residents are coping?

I feel for those 6 residents. I have a Miami condo in a new building that is 97% sold but most residents are part time (second homes). We have a real vermin problem. We have had to implement a plan for the super to go into every apt to flush toilets and run baths twice a month just so the standing water doesn't allow for the bug breeding. Who knows what vermin have taken up residence in One Mad in all those vacant apts.

Federal coujrt records can be accessed thru PACER. It is free for limited quarterly use. You can
look at docket records, i.e., record of allo court proceedings, and examine all motion papers and
court decisions.

First rental listing!

http://www.halstead.com/detail.aspx?id=1899238

Quoting RE Spin-meister Amy Herman's listing:

MADISON PARK TRIPLE MINT 2 BEDROOM
Be the first to live in Flatiron's most magnificent offering to date. Triple mint two bedroom, two bath, approximately 1328 SF with all glass windows overlooking Madison Square Park. This apartment has W,N,S exposures, a brand new state of the art chef's kitchen, mint bathrooms, a large master bedroom, central heat and AC, washer/dryer, gorgeous wood flooring throughout and abundant closets. All you need to bring is your toothbrush. Pets on a case by case basis.

Halstead better watch it. Pool, health club, roof garden DO NOT exist. And how come no floor plan or pics of the views?

And assuming this 1328 sq ft apartment went around $3m, how's that rent vs buy calcualtion work out. :O

"all glass windows" - wow, what a luxury! What's next, "all wood floors"? "all porcelain toilets"? Maybe some "all metal doorknobs"?

Go ahead and dis one of the great residential buildings of the go-go optomic 2000's. Day late, dollar short but a sparkle to the skyline! Some day it will be a miraculous residence. I might even be a bit of a bargin.

Haha... Well I was dissing the broker rather than the building itself. I'm actually pretty interested in this building and curious to see where it really trades once the sales office reopens. I think this broker meant "floor to ceiling windows", which is in fact a great feature and a major selling point of the building IMO (assuming you are on a high enough floor to have a view).

$7500 does seem a bit steep, though, to live in an almost-empty building with no amenities, and a temporary lobby/entrance (on 23rd St between two fast-food sandwich restaurants). Does this mean one of the 6 current residents is bailing out?

People looking for a floor plan: there is only one 1,328 sq ft layout, which is the A line on certain floors (9, 12, 14, etc). So it must be this floor plan: http://img.streeteasy.com/nyc/image/70/3059270.png

Negatives: master bedroom has no walk-in closet, master bath has no windows while guest bath does, kitchen is just a bunch of appliances and sink against a wall in the living room.

Positives: master bedroom and living room should have beautiful views of the park (north) from any floor, split bedroom layout.

Did you say $7500 and NO AMENITIES?

No amenities in the sense of no gym, pool, restaurant, roof deck - all things that were promised but so far not built. You get the basic amenities of a doorman and elevator. Not sure about the storage spaces.

Indeed you get a doorman acturally two to be exact. At the present moment the building has more staff than residents. Rumors are surfacing that because of the istar bankruptcy a staff reduction may take effect. So renters beware you might not even get a doorman -maybe a virtual doorman.

the doorman is court appointed... he is not going anywhere.. a lot of you probably also do not know there is a super- not live in, but full time during the day.

Wow, a 24-hour (court-appointed) doorman, AND a full-time super, for 6 residents? That IS luxury living! :)

article in curbed, pics of apt

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/10/27/inside_one_madison_parks_first_rental_apartment.php#one-madison-park-rental-3

After seeing those photos, I gotta say I'm not as interested in this building anymore. The wall o'kitchen is just terrible, and the living/dining area is too cramped. I guess that is the price you pay to live in a skinny tower... Too bad. (I'm sure the full floors are more spacious, but those are gonna be out of my price range.)

Any news about the sales or rentals????is still alive this building.???

There should have been a hearing as part of the bankruptcy proceedings in the past week - anyone know what happened?

Lohengrin, as far as sales and rentals go... The sales office has been closed for a long time with no signs of it opening again anytime soon. But feel free to check out the rental (http://www.halstead.com/detail.aspx?id=1899238) and report back on your findings!

This is the first news about this building in a long time... Maybe we will finally see something happen... Although the commenters in the article are skeptical.

http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/one-madison-park-to-get-40m-infusion-possibly-from-continuum-company-and-ian-bruce-eichner

One Madison Park to get $40M infusion?
Continuum will foot the bill for a loan restructuring and finish up the project, if bankruptcy court gives the go-ahead November 19, 2010 02:51PM By Amy Tennery

Developer Continuum Company is set to inject $40 million into the troubled One Madison Park residential development and finish up the project, after reaching a deal with developer Ira Shapiro and creditors.

The deal, which is contingent upon bankruptcy court approval, would fund the costs of a proposed restructuring on a loan from lender iStar. The lender gained control of the building from Shapiro's Slazer Enterprises in April, after asserting that the builder had failed to pay it $12 million in interest between October 2009 and February 2010 and owed upwards of $200 million. IStar first filed to foreclose on the property in February.

The building, at 23 East 22nd Street between Park Avenue South and Broadway, is currently the target of pending involuntary chapter 7 bankruptcy petitions in bankruptcy court.

The agreement, announced today, would install Continuum Company Chairman and CEO Ian Bruce Eichner as developer of the project, under the limited partnership "New One Madison Park Member I," upon the completion of the proposed restructuring. Continuum did not respond to a request for more information. Eichner is reportedly a buyer at the building.

In a written statement, Shapiro said he supported the tentative agreement.

"I couldn't be more pleased that the product of our tireless efforts to restructure One Madison Park's balance sheet is the contemplated $40 million infusion that will provide a direct benefit to stakeholders," Shapiro said.

Shapiro could not be reached for further comment.

The 69-unit, 50-story building currently has 19 units in contract, according to Streeteasy.com.

As The Real Deal reported in January, Shapiro, along with co-developer Marc Jacobs, was sued by more than half a dozen individuals, who claimed that the developers borrowed money from them using units in One Madison as collateral. In March, Attorney General Andrew Cuomo ordered Jacobs and Shapiro to offer refunds to any buyers who hadn't closed on their apartments, The Real Deal reported.

IStar declined to comment and Continuum Company did not respond to a request for comment.

Any updates on the Continuum proposal or the building itself?

http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/final-rescue-plan-by-ziel-feldman-s-hfz-group-at-one-madison-park-expected-within-weeks

Any news newer than this?

After walking past the madison park the other weekend, I can honestly say there is nothing shake shack could be selling, or giving away, or even paying me to wait on that line for.

ther'a always the line for abercrombie and fitch, if shake shack aint for you

actually you just reminded me of an even more confusing line ...in Soho....Dash.
I mean what are these people hoping? to see Kim Kardashian? Really? or are they misreading Hash? or are they just smoking Hash.

See those tourists lining up by the Plaza to get into the Apple store?
Good topic: Stores with lines to get in.... Anyone else?

shake shack, which I will admit is good, is SO not worth waiting on line for because 1.It's just a burger 2. Anyone who sees you waiting knows your a line waiting loser. 3. Damage to self esteem for waiting on the line....for a burger!!!

Tourists I'm willing to excuse because they don't know better.

i respect those who wait in lines--i don't have the self esteem to handle it

lol, what a failure

The apartments at One Madison will be back on the market very soon...

This building is SO going to fall over.

What is the latest here? Anyone?