DOCSLIB.ORG

Valuation Advisory Client: Morgan Stanley Bank N.A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Valuation Advisory Client: Morgan Stanley Bank N.A Jones Lang LaSalle Valuation Advisory Client: Morgan Stanley Bank N.A. Property: Citypoint, 1 Ropemaker Street, London EC2 October 2018 Property: Citypoint, 1 Ropemaker Street, London EC2 October 2018 Contents 1. Location ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Location .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Communications ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Situation .................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 2. Description ............................................................................................................................... 14 2.1. Site ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 2.2. Property................................................................................................................................................................................... 15 2.3. Construction .......................................................................................................................................................................... 16 2.4. Accommodation.................................................................................................................................................................... 20 2.5. State of Repair ....................................................................................................................................................................... 23 2.6. Environmental Considerations .......................................................................................................................................... 25 2.7. Sustainability Considerations ............................................................................................................................................ 26 3. Legal ........................................................................................................................................ 28 3.1. Title Review ............................................................................................................................................................................ 28 3.2. Tenancies ................................................................................................................................................................................ 32 3.3. Covenant Status .................................................................................................................................................................... 36 3.4. Income Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................................... 39 3.5. Planning .................................................................................................................................................................................. 41 3.6. Rating Assessment ................................................................................................................................................................ 43 3.7. Stamp Duty Land Tax ........................................................................................................................................................... 43 4. Market Commentary ................................................................................................................. 44 4.1. UK Economy ........................................................................................................................................................................... 44 4.2. Property Market Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 45 4.3. Local Market Review – City of London Offices Q3 2018 ................................................................................................. 46 4.4. City of London Retail Provision .......................................................................................................................................... 50 5. Valuation Commentary ............................................................................................................. 53 5.1. Rental Evidence and Considerations ................................................................................................................................ 53 5.2. Estimated Rental Value ........................................................................................................................................................ 68 5.3. Market Rent ............................................................................................................................................................................ 72 5.4. Investment Comparables and Investment Considerations ......................................................................................... 72 5.5. Valuation Approach .............................................................................................................................................................. 85 5.6. Historic Market Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................... 87 5.7. Loan Security Commentary ................................................................................................................................................ 90 5.8. Highest and Best Use ........................................................................................................................................................... 92 5.9. Suitability for Loan Security Purposes .............................................................................................................................. 92 6. Valuation .................................................................................................................................. 93 6.1. Market Value ........................................................................................................................................................................... 93 6.2. Market Value on the Special Assumption of Vacant Possession ................................................................................. 93 6.3. Reinstatement Valuation ..................................................................................................................................................... 93 6.4. Confidentiality and Publication ......................................................................................................................................... 93 © 2018 Jones Lang LaSalle IP, Inc. All rights reserved. Property: Citypoint, 1 Ropemaker Street, London EC2 October 2018 Appendices Appendix 1 ......................................................................................................................................... Letter of Instruction Appendix 2 ........................................................................................................................ General Terms and Conditions Appendix 2 ............................................................................................................................................ General Principles Appendix 2 ............................................................................................................................... Definition of Market Value Appendix 2 .................................................................................................................................Definition of Market Rent Appendix 3 ................................................................................................................................. Location Plans and Maps Appendix 4 .................................................................................................................................................... Photographs Appendix 5 ............................................................................................................................................... Rateable Values Appendix 6 ............................................................................................................................................ Tenancy Schedule Appendix 7 .......................................................................................................................................... Valuation Print-Out © 2018 Jones Lang LaSalle IP, Inc. All rights reserved. Property: Citypoint, 1 Ropemaker Street, London EC2 October 2018 Citypoint, 1 Ropemaker Street, London EC2 Executive Summary Key Property Facts Inspection Basis: Internal inspection Macro Location: National Micro Location: Prime Sector: Office County: London - City Total Property Area: 708,954 sq ft Tenure: Freehold Number of Tenants: 32 tenants on 50 leases / licences Percentage Vacant: 4.1%
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Witness Statement of Stuart Sherbrooke Wortley Dated April 2021 Urbex Activity Since 21 September 2020
    Party: Claimant Witness: SS Wortley Statement: First Exhibits: “SSW1” - “SSW7” Date: 27.04.21 Claim Number: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION B E T W E E N (1) MULTIPLEX CONSTRUCTION EUROPE LIMITED (2) 30 GS NOMINEE 1 LIMITED (3) 30 GS NOMINEE 2 LIMITED Claimants and PERSONS UNKNOWN ENTERING IN OR REMAINING AT THE 30 GROSVENOR SQUARE CONSTRUCTION SITE WITHOUT THE CLAIMANTS’ PERMISSION Defendants ______________________________________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF STUART SHERBROOKE WORTLEY ________________________________________ I, STUART SHERBROOKE WORTLEY of One Wood Street, London, EC2V 7WS WILL SAY as follows:- 1. I am a partner of Eversheds Sutherland LLP, solicitors for the Claimants. 2. I make this witness statement in support of the Claimants’ application for an injunction to prevent the Defendants from trespassing on the 30 Grosvenor Square Construction Site (as defined in the Particulars of Claim). cam_1b\7357799\3 1 3. Where the facts referred to in this witness statement are within my own knowledge they are true; where the facts are not within my own knowledge, I believe them to be true and I have provided the source of my information. 4. I have read a copy of the witness statement of Martin Philip Wilshire. 5. In this witness statement, I provide the following evidence:- 5.1 in paragraphs 8-21, some recent videos and photographs of incidents of trespass uploaded to social media by urban explorers at construction sites in London; 5.2 in paragraphs 22-27, information concerning injunctions which my team has obtained
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT of NEW YORK ______) in Re: ) Chapter 11 ) TERRESTAR CORPORATION, Et Al.,1 ) Case No
    11-10612-shl Doc 532 Filed 07/06/12 Entered 07/06/12 13:24:42 Main Document Pg 1 of 55 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________________________________ ) In re: ) Chapter 11 ) TERRESTAR CORPORATION, et al.,1 ) Case No. 11-10612 (SHL) ) Debtors. ) Jointly Administered ________________________________________ ) AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss COUNTY OF NASSAU ) I, Ira Nikelsberg, being duly sworn, depose and state: 1. I am a Senior Project Manager with GCG, Inc., the claims and noticing agent for the debtors and debtors-in-possession (the “Debtors”) in the above-captioned proceeding. Our business address is 1985 Marcus Avenue, Suite 200, Lake Success, New York 11042-1013. 2. On July 3, 2012, at the direction of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP (“Akin Gump”), counsel for the Debtors, I caused a true and correct copy of the following document to be served by first class mail on the parties identified on Exhibit A annexed hereto (Matrix Parties): Notice of Hearing to Consider the First Supplement to the Second Amended Disclosure Statement Filed by the TSC Debtors (“Disclosure Statement Hearing Notice”). 3. On July 3, 2012, also at the direction of Akin Gump, I caused an appropriate number of true and correct copies of the Disclosure Statement Hearing Notice to be served by hand delivery on Broadridge, Special Processing, Job # N56688, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 1 The debtors in these chapter 11 cases, along with the last four digits of each debtor’s federal taxpayer- identification number, are: (a) TerreStar Corporation [6127] and TerreStar Holdings Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • 22 Bishopsgate London EC2N 4BQ Construction of A
    Committee: Date: Planning and Transportation 28 February 2017 Subject: Public 22 Bishopsgate London EC2N 4BQ Construction of a building arranged on three basement floors, ground and 58 upper floors plus mezzanines and plant comprising floorspace for use within Classes A and B1 of the Use Classes Order and a publicly accessible viewing gallery and facilities (sui generis); hard and soft landscaping works; the provision of ancillary servicing and other works incidental to the development. (201,449sq.m. GEA) Ward: Lime Street For Decision Registered No: 16/01150/FULEIA Registered on: 24 November 2016 Conservation Area: St Helen's Place Listed Building: No Summary The planning application relates to the site of the 62 storey tower (294.94m AOD) granted planning permission in June 2016 and which is presently being constructed. The current scheme is for a tower comprising 59 storeys at ground and above (272.32m AOD) with an amended design to the top. The tapering of the upper storeys previously approved has been omitted and replaced by a flat topped lower tower. In other respects the design of the elevations remains as before. The applicants advise that the lowering of the tower in the new proposal is in response to construction management constraints in relation to aviation safeguarding issues. The planning application also incorporates amendments to the base of the building, the public realm and to cycle space provision which were proposed in a S73 amendment application and which your Committee resolved to grant on 28 November 2016, subject to a legal agreement but not yet issued. The building would provide offices, retail at ground level, a viewing gallery with free public access at levels 55 and 56 and a public restaurant and bar at levels 57 and 58.
    [Show full text]
  • Bishopsgate UKPN Focus August 2017
    FOCUS ON BISHOPSGATE DEVELOPMENTS Roadworks Patrol – 15TH August 2017 Authors: Michael Barratt TfL Francis Bernstein Southwark Living Streets Attendees Michael Barratt (MB) TfL Jon Baughan (JB) TfL(Roadwork Inspections) Francis Bernstein (FB) Southwark Cyclists Andy Osborne (AO) Met Police (Cycle Safety) Russel Green (RG) RTEO Enforcement Simon Munk (SM) LCC Officers Kate Bartlett (KB) LCC Ryan McGee (RM) McGee Demo Contractor Roger Stocker (RS) Lewisham Cyclists Timothy Burr (TB) Skanska (HS2) Jeff Collins (JC) St Georges (Developer) Dave Warner (DW) UKPN Apologies: Stuart Ford City of London Police Introduction The partnership is made up of TfL, cycle and pedestrian and other stakeholder groups. The objectives of the exercise is to; on a regular basis, cycle and walk through TfL and major development schemes during build and ensure where possible that the traffic management and construction management implemented does not negatively impact on vulnerable road users. pa Traffic Management Proposal UKPN planned works to connect power cables to 100 Bishopsgate. To facilitate works, a southbound diversion is to be implemented. TfL have met with UKPN to discuss all options which included maintaining a thoroughfare for southbound cyclists adjacent to the works. Due to the proposed excavation area covering the entire southbound carriageway, it is proposed that cyclists are diverted with all other traffic. The cycle patrol has been set up to actively experience the diversion routes from the cyclists’ perspective and to highlight any concerns or potential mitigation measures to improve safety. TfL and UKPN are still investigating all avenues for mitigating the need for the diversion during the latter phases of the programme.
    [Show full text]
  • City Office Market Watch
    UK Commercial – May 2020 MARKET IN City Office MINUTES Savills Research Market Watch Inevitable drop in take-up for April, although still a significant amount is under offer in the City Despite being in ‘lockdown’ for the entirety of the month, We have started to see a slight uptick in tenant supply, take-up for April reached 165,653 sq ft across 6 deals, rising from a 25% share in March (1.79m sq ft) to a 27% bringing the total for the year to date to 1.5m sq ft, which is share at the end of April (1.95m sq ft), which is still below slightly down on this point last year by 4% and 16% down on the long-term average of 29%. While this is by no means the 10-year average for this part of the year. The 12-month enough tenant supply to begin to affect rents negatively, rolling take-up is now at 6.6m sq ft, which is 3% up on the it is proving our expectations to be correct, and the more 165,553 sq ft 10-year average. Please note that this piece is not intended tenant controlled space we see arrive to the market in the of take-up in April was as an analysis of COVID-19 on the office market, rather a next 6 months could result in a negative effect on rents. the lowest amount of factual analysis of the market metrics. monthly take-up since Some of the notable tenant supply that has come to the February 2009 The largest deal to complete last month saw Covington market since lockdown began in mid-March includes 65,000 & Burling LLP acquire levels 51 - 54 (85,768 sq ft) at sq ft at the Blue Fin, SE1 building from HSBC, 20,300 sq ft TwentyTwo Bishopsgate, EC2.
    [Show full text]
  • Make+Ppmk Brochure
    Date May 2016 A new partnership forged through a shared vision for the design and delivery of high quality architecture. A new Cyprus awaits. The recent growth in property investment supported by the planning incentives announced by the government of Cyprus has opened the door to large- scale building projects and mixed used developments. It’s a golden opportunity to bring growth and prosperity to the economy. Make understands the importance of bringing this kind of potential to life. With an international portfolio of award-winning work – which includes 5 Broadgate and London Wall Place in London, Wynyard Place in Sydney and Pinnacle One in Chengdu – we have the vision and expertise to make it happen. Together with Pachomiou+Kazamias Architects, based in Cyprus, we have established a team with the capability to design and deliver the next generation of pivotal, sustainable schemes that will transform and uplift the island. Make Pachomiou+Kazamias Architects 32 Cleveland Street 8 Panioniou, Palace Heights B501 London , W1T 4JY Strovolos, 2018 Nicosia United Kindom Cyprus T +44(0)20 7363 5151 T +357 22757673 www.makearchitects.com www.ppmkarchitects.com Contact: Stuart Fraser Contact: Panayiotis Pachomiou Contents Introduction 3 About Make 7 Experience Residential Towers 19 Residential 47 Hotels and resorts 69 Pachomiou+Kazamias Architects 89 Practice profile 90 Experience 92 About Make 6 7 About Make – With studios in London, Hong Kong and Sydney, Make is an award-winning international architectural practice with a reputation for challenging convention and pursuing design excellence. Since we opened our doors in 2004, we’ve worked on We’ve developed a rigorous framework for enquiry more than 1,000 projects worldwide covering a wide through which we explore the potential of every brief.
    [Show full text]
  • Boundary House Final.Pdf
    1 HEADER Copy 7-17 Jewry Street London EC3 HIGHLY REVERSIONARY MULTI-LET FREEHOLD CITY OF LONDON INVESTMENT 2 3 HEADER INVESTMENT SUMMARY Copy A WELL LET FREEHOLD WITH EXCITING REPOSITIONING OPPORTUNITIES IN A RAPIDLY CHANGING AREA OF CENTRAL LONDON WHERE THE TRADITIONAL CITY CORE MEETS THE DYNAMIC NEW MEDIA TECH WORLD OF ALDGATE • Freehold. • Located at the crossover between the increasingly vibrant Aldgate district popular with Technology Media Telecommunications (TMT) occupiers and the established City of London financial and insurance heartland. • Close to numerous mainline and underground stations, such as Aldgate, Fenchurch Street and Tower Hill. Also close to the new Crossrail station at Liverpool Street (opening in 2018). • The building comprises 45,062 sq ft of offices over ground and 7 upper floors as well as 7 basement car parking spaces. • Multi-let to include 12 office tenants, producing a total passing rent of £1,319,326 per annum, reflecting very low average rent of approximately £28.24 per sq ft per annum for the ground and upper floor office space. All occupational leases are outside of the L&T Act 1954 (Part II). • Well timed lease events to enable rents to be driven forward in the short to medium term with weighted average terms of 3.70 years to expiry and just over 3.11 years to breaks. • Considerable active management, repositioning, alternative use opportunities in the short to medium term as well as significant medium to long term redevelopment potential, subject to planning. • Offers are sought in the order of £30,850,000, subject to contract and exclusive of VAT.
    [Show full text]
  • PDU Case Report XXXX/YY Date
    planning report GLA/4417/01 16 April 2018 100, 106/107 Leadenhall Street in the City of London planning application no. 18/00152/FULEIA Strategic planning application stage 1 referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. The proposal Demolition of existing buildings and construction of a ground plus 56 storey building (263.4 metres AOD) for office use, retail use at the lower levels, a publicly accessible viewing gallery and restaurant/bar at levels 55/56. The applicant The applicant is Frontier Dragon Ltd and the architect is Skidmore, Ownings & Merrill LLP. Strategic issues summary Principle of development: The proposed development would respond to established demand for office space within the CAZ, and would support London’s continuing function as a World City. It is therefore strongly supported in accordance with London Plan and draft London Plan policies. The publicly accessible viewing gallery on levels 55 and 56 must be secured. (Paragraphs 16–20) Design: This is an appropriate location for a tall building, and the high architectural quality proposed is fitting for a development of this scale and prominence. Nevertheless further detail required regarding the elevational treatment of the lower floors and the public connections around the site. (Paragraphs 21-33) Strategic Views: The development would reinforce and enhance the characteristics of strategic views through an improved consolidation of the City’s eastern cluster and complies with London Plan Policy 7.12 and Policies HC3 and HC4 of the draft London Plan. (Paragraphs 34-35) Historic Environment: The development would not compromise the ability to appreciate the Outstanding Universal Value of World Heritage Sites and would not cause harm to the historic environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Office Markets & Public Policy
    REAL ESTATE ISSUES Office Markets REAL ESTATE ISSUES & Public Policy This is the first book that looks at how offices and office markets in cities have Also available in the series changed over the last 30 years. It analyses the long-term trends and processes Markets & Institutions in Real within office markets, and the interaction with the spatial economy and the Estate & Construction planning of cities. It draws on examples around the world, and looking forward Ball Policy Public & Markets Office at the future consequences of information communication technologies and the 9781405110990 sustainability agenda, it sets out the challenges that now face investors. The Right to Buy: Analysis & Evaluation of a Housing Policy The traditional business centres of cities are losing their dominance to the brash Jones & Murie new centres of the 1980s and 1990s, as the concept of the central business 9781405131971 district becomes more diffuse. Edge cities, business space and office parks have Housing Markets & Planning Policy entered the vocabulary as offices have also decentralised. The nature and pace of Jones & Watkins changes to office markets set within evolving spatial structures of cities has had 9781405175203 implications for tenants and led to a demand for shorter leases. The consequence is a rethink of the traditional perception of property investment as a secure long Challenges of the Housing Economy: An International Perspective term investment, and this is reflected in reduced investment holding periods by Jones, White & Dunse financial institutions. 9780470672334 Office Markets & Public Policy analyses these processes and policy issues from an Towers of Capital: Office Markets & international perspective and covers: International Financial Services Lizieri l A descriptive and theoretical base encompassing an historical context, 9781405156721 a review of the fundamentals of the demand for and supply of the office Office Markets market and offices as an investment.
    [Show full text]
  • PDU Case Report XXXX/YY Date
    planning report D&P/3175/02 17 April 2014 Leadenhall triangle (Site bounded by 19-21, 49 Leadenhall Street/22 Billiter Street, 108 & 109-114 Fenchurch Street, 6-8 & 9-13 Fenchurch Buildings, London, EC3) in the City of London planning application no. DHS/13/01004/FULEIA Strategic planning application stage II referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. The proposal Partial demolition and works of refurbishment and reinstatement to 19-21 Billiter Street; demolition of all other buildings on the site; redevelopment to provide a new building comprising two basement levels and ground level plus part 10, 14 and 34 storeys plus plant (total height 170m AOD), containing offices (B1) and flexible retail/financial and professional services/café and restaurant uses (A1/A2/A3) at ground floor level; change of use at ground and first floor of 19-21 Billiter Street to retail/cafe and restaurant/bar use (A1/A3/A4); the provision of hard and soft landscaping; alterations to Fenchurch Buildings and other incidental works (125,977 sq.m GIA) The applicant The applicant is Vanquish Properties (UK) Ltd, and the architect is Make. Strategic issues The principle of a primarily office-led development on this site in the City with a high quality and innovative design that respects adjoining heritage assets is strongly supported. Matters of climate change and transport raised at stage one have been addressed, and the scheme fully complies with the relevant policies of the London Plan. The Council’s decision In this instance the City Corporation has resolved to grant planning permission subject to conditions and a S106 agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Planning and Transportation
    Public Document Pack Planning and Transportation Committee Date: THURSDAY, 12 DECEMBER 2019 Time: 10.00 am Venue: LIVERY HALL - GUILDHALL Members: Deputy Alastair Moss (Chair ) Christopher Hill Sheriff Christopher Hayward Alderman Robert Hughes-Penney (Deputy Chairman) Deputy Jamie Ingham Clark Munsur Ali Shravan Joshi Rehana Ameer Oliver Lodge Randall Anderson Natasha Maria Cabrera Lloyd-Owen Adrian Bastow Andrew Mayer Peter Bennett Deputy Brian Mooney Mark Bostock Sylvia Moys Deputy Keith Bottomley Graham Packham Henry Colthurst Susan Pearson Peter Dunphy Judith Pleasance Alderman Emma Edhem Deputy Henry Pollard John Edwards James de Sausmarez Sophie Anne Fernandes Oliver Sells QC Marianne Fredericks William Upton QC Alderman Prem Goyal Alderman Sir David Wootton Tracey Graham Graeme Harrower Enquiries: Gemma Stokley tel. no.: 020 7332 3414 [email protected] Lunch will be served in Guildhall Club at 1PM NB: Part of this meeting could be the subject of audio visual recording John Barradell Town Clerk and Chief Executive AGENDA Part 1 - Public Agenda 1. APOLOGIES 2. MEMBERS' DECLARATIONS UNDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT IN RESPECT OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA 3. MINUTES (*10.00AM) To agree the public minutes and summary of the meeting held on 5 November 2019. For Decision (Pages 1 - 14) 4. MINUTES OF THE STREETS AND WALKWAYS SUB COMMITTEE (*10.05AM) To receive the public minutes of the Streets and Walkways Sub Committee meeting held on 15 October 2019. For Information (Pages 15 - 24) 5. OUTSTANDING ACTIONS (*10.10AM) Report of the Town Clerk. For Information (Pages 25 - 26) 6. CITY POINT 1 ROPEMAKER STREET, LONDON, EC2Y 9AW (*10.15AM) Report of the Chief Planning Officer and Development Director.
    [Show full text]
  • Height Vs. History Tall Buildings in the Heart of London Controversy Over Tall Buildings in Central London Is Not a Recent Phenomenon
    Height vs. history Tall buildings in the heart of London Controversy over tall buildings in central London is not a recent phenomenon. Peter Stewart explains how heated debates on the issue began as long ago as the late nineteenth century. The proposal for a 250m (820ft) tall residential France, Westminster, completed in 1888 (demolished tower to be built next to Paddington Station – in 1973). Crude and joyless in its design, it was the ‘Paddington Pole’ – is the latest in a line of considerably taller than any other London residential controversial tall-building projects to come forward in building at the time and prompted widespread central London over the last two decades. Designed complaints, including one from Queen Victoria, whose by Renzo Piano, the architect of the ‘Shard’ at London view of the Palace of Westminster from Buckingham Bridge (completed in 2012), and promoted by its Palace was obstructed by the block. Several developer Irvine Sellar, the project has provoked generations of royals later, Prince Charles has proved protests from lay commentators and architects alike. just as vociferous a defender of London’s skyline. Journalist Simon Jenkins, a serial opponent of tall The development of the passenger lift had buildings, complained that the scheme flies in the made tall buildings possible from around 1870 but, face of established planning policies which set out while maximum buildings heights in New York and where tall buildings should and should not be built in Chicago increased rapidly, reaching 240m (787ft) London; and architect Sir Terry Farrell has criticised the with the Woolworth Building in New York by 1913, scheme as piecemeal and opportunistic.
    [Show full text]