Mr. Flood. (MTA/Flickr)

It's beginning to feel a bit like the letters section of the New York Review of Books around here.

Yesterday morning, The Observer published a post highlighting another outlet's revelation that developer and civic leader Bill Rudin was somewhat pleased that the Hugh Carey Brooklyn Battery Tunnel had flooded, thereby protecting some of his buildings downtown. (Some experts agree that the tunnels should actually be designed to do exactly that.)

Unexpectedly, Mr. Rudin's office sent a statement from him to The Observer in the afternoon, speaking generally about the need to plan for the future, but not directly addressing the issue of the tunnel or MTA Chief Joe Lhota, who had told Capital New York, "I wasn’t particularly pleased with the comment.” Now, unbidden, The Observer has received a statement from Mr. Lhota that praises Mr. Rudin.

Bill Rudin is one of New York City’s most ardent champions, and the Rudin Family has long been at the forefront advocating for the city’s future and for all New Yorkers.  Bill and I witnessed the horrific damage of Superstorm Sandy and we both concluded that we must have a comprehensive effort by the federal, state and local governments and the private sector to prevent such water surge damage to property in the future.  I have no doubt that Bill will be an exemplary leader of this effort.

The real lesson here seems to be: Be careful what you blog about.

Think about it. (Blogspot)

Earlier today, we ran a post about how Bill Rudin rather pragmatically welcomed the flooding of the Brooklyn Batter Tunnel, for it provided a modicum of protection to some of his buildings downtown that might otherwise have been flooded. This afternoon, we found a statement in our inbox from Mr. Rudin that seemed to indicate—as we had in the original piece—that floodable tunnels and other innovative flood control measures might not actually be the worst idea. The Observer asked a Rudin spokesperson for more context on the statement, but this is all we've got.

For almost a century, my family has been invested in the future of all parts of New York City. As we look post-Hurricane Sandy to New York’s long-term recovery, we have to consider a variety of options to effectively protect and defend our critical infrastructure as well as our residents, businesses and visitors. The public and the private sectors are actively involved and collaborating to come up with solutions to ensure that the city’s infrastructure and buildings are resilient in today’s unpredictable climate.

A good flood? (Getty)

Superstorm Sandy wreaked havoc across the city, including Lower Manhattan, where flooding into tunnels shut down both subway and vehicular traffic for weeks. In a story looking at flooding in the Hugh Carey Brooklyn-Battery tunnel, Dana Rubinstein reveals that none other than developer, macher and civic bigwig Bill Rudin actually welcomed the flooding because it protected some of his harborside buildings.

"I had one very prominent real estate builder who owns buildings in lower Manhattan—actually all over the city—thank me for allowing the Brooklyn-Battery tunnel to be used as a drainage ditch," M.T.A. chairman Joe Lhota told me recently. "I wasn’t particularly pleased with the comment.”

(Lhota confirmed during our conversation that he was referring to Bill Rudin.)

The M.T.A. has recently begun to float different ideas for protecting the system's tunnels in the future from flooding during such storms, which are expected to increase in frequency as the climate warms. Industrial balloons and flood gates are among the ideas under discussion.

But as Rudin's comments indicate, protecting the tunnels might create problems elsewhere. "The fact of the matter is, if I plug it up, we plug it up, the M.T.A. plugs it up—if God forbid this happens again, the surge is the same or even higher, the water will go elsewhere," said Lhota.

And elsewhere could include the lower floors of nearby buildings, like those owned by Rudin Management at One Battery Park Plaza and One Whitehall Street. Rudin, the scion of a storied New York real estate family and chairman of the influential Association for a Better New York, declined comment.

But even more intriguing than the revelation that a self-styled civic leader welcomed ill on the city's infrastructure is the conclusion of the article, which argues that perhaps we should all embrace such Schadenfreude.

After all, if the tunnels could be designed to serve as moats, with their mechanical systems carefully protected, and easily pumped dry, they could actually serve as yet another form of so-called soft infrastructure serving to protect the city from future disasters. Insulating some cables and installing some pumps would probably be a lot cheaper than building those giant sea gates. The same goes for what we put in the basements of our buildings. Though then there's a debate about all that unused, and often valuable space going empty. Putting the mechanicals upstairs takes up living space, and who wants a boiler in the living room?

Still, rather than trying to stop the water, is there a way we can successfully live with it inside our buildings? That may become the design challenge of 21st-century New York.

Update: Mr. Rudin shares a statement on the future of the city's flood protections.

Update 12/6:Mr. Lhota issued a statement praising Mr. Rudin.

Midtown, 2025? (Photo composite: Ed Johnson/NYO; Photos: Getty)

It was but one line in Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s State of the City address in January, but it could prove to be one of the biggest of his dozen years in office.

“In the area around Grand Central, we’ll work with the City Council on a package of regulatory changes and incentives that will attract new investment, new companies and new jobs,” the mayor said from the stage inside Morris High School in the Bronx.

Hizzoner spent more time talking about Cornell’s Roosevelt Island tech campus, keeping the Hunt’s Point Produce Market from moving across the Hudson to Jersey and efforts to further expand the blue-collar workforce on the waterfront. Even the redevelopment of nearby East Fordham Road and Webster Avenue got equal billing with these vague pronouncements about “the area around Grand Central.”

Despite the scant mention, it turns out that for an administration that has never shied away from big plans, this may be one of the biggest projects yet.

In what is likely to be the latest, greatest and last of the grand Bloomberg rezonings, City Hall has turned its focus to Midtown East. Under the direction of City Planning Commissioner Amanda Burden, the administration has undertaken 115 rezonings in almost every corner of the city, remaking nearly a quarter of its landmass.

Now, it is time to remake the middle of Manhattan, to redevelop one of the most developed swathes of land in the world.

Midtown, 2000. (Getty)

It was not the first time Robert Steel, the deputy mayor for economic development, had considered the plight of Midtown East, but he recalled it as the moment everything came into focus. Around this time last year, the former Goldman exec and Wachovia chief was standing on the roof of the Hearst Tower two blocks south of Columbus Circle, gazing out at the city surrounding him.

The Hearst building itself is an apt metaphor for the plans the city is currently contemplating. Originally built by William Randolph Hearst in 1928, the Art Deco dandy rose to six stories, with plans for a tower to rise above. Those were waylaid, for nearly eight decades, courtesy the Great Depression. But it would take another great boom to see the project through, and in 2006, the new Hearst Tower opened, with its faceted obsidian exterior, a gem of modern office life.

It was created by the high-tech practitioner and Pritzker Prize-winner Sir Norman Foster and received a LEED Gold rating for sustainability, the first office tower in the city to do so. The base of the tower remains, a nod to history, but it was gutted to make way for a soaring lobby, complete with a waterfall that recycles rainwater, helping to cool the space and cut down on A/C costs.

This is precisely the sort of building that Mr. Steel wants to see more of in Midtown, still the heart of the city’s commercial core.

“Think about what Midtown was historically, the Pantheon for corporate America,” he said during a recent phone interview. “It was lots of jobs, but also a symbol for all the Fortune 500 companies.”

But it was not so much the Hearst Tower as the ones surrounding it that got Mr. Steel concerned. A few blocks south, Mort Zuckerman was getting underway on 250 West 55th Street. In the distance stood the new Times headquarters, and across the street the still mostly-empty 11 Times Square. To the north was the Time Warner Center, and most telling of all, 3 Columbus Circle--another 1920s beauty built for General Motors, shoddily reclad in glass during the last boom by Joe Moinian, an effort to modernize the building.

Were Mr. Steel standing on the other side of Midtown, say atop the Bloomberg Building, he could point to almost no new development whatsoever besides the tower his boss and Vornado’s Steve Ross had built in 2004. And even then, the top half of that building, like the Time Warner Center, is filled with apartments for the likes of Jay-Z (Time Warner) and his wife Beyonce (Bloomberg). What new development there might be is much closer to 3 Columbus, buildings that have been “refreshed,” than anything built new, from the ground up.

The city wishes this were not the case, but given the vagaries of Manhattan development, from the challenges of clearing out tenants to the cost of construction, the status quo is often the easiest choice for a landlord to make. Developers argue that they need incentives, namely air rights, to do anything more. The number of new buildings could be counted on one hand.

“While new windows and HVAC systems can be installed, the fundamentals of ceiling heights and column configurations are fixed,” Mr. Zucckerman, chairman of Boston Properties and owner of a number of buildings in the area, including the iconic Citicorp Tower, said in an email. “To incentivize owners to empty leased office buildings and replace them simply requires that a much higher density be allowed.”

When the city began to look at solutions, the administration was struck by just how severe the situation in Midtown east had gotten. “We did an audit, and we found that 80 percent of buildings were more than 50 years old,” Mr. Steel said of Midtown East, roughly 39th Street to 57th Street, east of Fifth Avenue. “Basically it feels like the 1940s in a lot of places. We just think this should be a showcase place for the city, especially around Grand Central.”

But the city is focusing on much more than just Grand Central, based on a preliminary presentation it gave to community boards earlier this month, with the potential upzoning of the entire area. Still, there is a special focus on the blocks around the train station, as well as along Park Avenue, seen as especially valuable as well as especially outdated.

The entire rezoning might not cover the largest footprint of any the administration has undertaken, but it could well have the largest impact. Stretching to Second Avenue in the 40s and Third Avenue in the 50s, the current study area measures 85 square blocks, roughly 250 acres of the most densely developed property on earth. It is equivalent to about 10 Hudson Yards.

Yet compared to a place like Hong Kong or Singapore, the densities are piddling. “On a macro level, we have to remain competitive on a global basis in terms of creating modern office space,” real estate scion and Association of Better New York chairman Bill Rudin told The Observer. “Back in the ’80s, they shifted the zoning from the East Side to the West Side, and it kept going out to Hudson Yards. But Park Avenue is still very desirous.”

Steven Spinola, executive director of the Real Estate Board of New York, put it in even more stark terms. “Right now, our buildings top out around 50 stories,” he said. “Why shouldn’t they top out around 80 stories? They do in a lot of other great cities.” According to one much-discussed proposal, they could, with air rights jumping as much as 50 percent in certain areas.

An initial proposal is to be released on July 11, and the city hopes to begin the arduous public review process by the first quarter of next year—just before the notorious countdown clock at City Hall blinks off.

It all starts with Grand Central. (Getty)

There are those who fear that the city is putting the cart before the conductor. One of the big arguments for rezoning Midtown East is the arrival of East Side Access, which will usher the Long Island Railroad into Grand Central by the end of the decade (assuming no further delays). The Second Avenue subway might someday reach the area as well. But at the same time, the city has made massive infrastructure investments in areas like Hudson Yards and the World Trade Center site, where the Related Companies and Silverstein Properties struggle to find tenants. These expenditures, for expanding the 7 train and rebuilding ground zero, were partly based on the argument that Midtown had seen its day.

The case for reviving it is good, but not at the cost of these other areas, the thinking goes.

“The public is spending billions of dollars at Hudson Yards and ground zero, and for good reason,” Raju Mann, a former city planner and member of Community Board 5, said a recent meeting of the board. “We haven’t even seen what these projects have produced yet, so how can we be sure what’s appropriate for Midtown East?”

And yet developers outside of Midtown East areas are not worried, pointing out that the city’s proposal could take years, if not decades, to come to fruition.

“My first reaction was to be concerned about it, but the more I thought about it, it’s a really long-term proposition,” Jay Cross, president of Related Hudson Yards, told The Observer. He said the proposal could even be self-defeating. “It will also make these buildings more valuable, just perceptually, which will drive up the building cost,” he said. “That means they cost more to trade and assemble the sites, and by the time you’ve done all that, you may not be able to afford to replace the buildings.

Larry Silverstein shared this sentiment at the topping out of 4 World Trade Center on Monday, his shiny new office building that remains half empty. “My hunch is, we’re going to do fine,” he said, pointing to the drift of New Yorkers to both live and work in Downtown and Brooklyn.

There are other demographic shifts afoot, as well, though, that could undermine the success of the city’s plan. If one area has flourished during the past few years it is not Midtown East or Hudson Yards but Midtown South. As financial firms, with their love of shiny buildings and vast trading floors, have retrenched, the city’s tech sector has flourished, and it largely prefers old buildings to new. Even those firms moving to Midtown, like Facebook and Twitter, are setting up shop on Madison Avenue, filling spaces that are more Mad Men than Blade Runner. “We don’t know what the office of the future will look like yet,” Mr. Mann said.

Mr. Rudin pointed out that the two do not have to be mutually exclusive. “We need office space of all types for all types of tenants,” he said. “The important thing is that we plan for the future.”

The past is an issue, as well, as some preservationists worry about taking a full accounting of Midtown’s historic fabric before we begin bulldozing it. “I’ll be the first to admit that just because a building is X years old doesn’t mean it’s worth saving and reusing,” said Peg Breen, president of the Landmarks Conservancy. “But we can’t just plow it all under and build Midtown anew. Why bulldoze the place without seeing what’s there first.”

Vishaan Chakrabarti, director of Columbia University's real estate development program and former head of the Department of City Planning's Manhattan office, warned against knee-jerk preservation in the heart of Midtown. "This is the engine for the entire city," he said. "We cannot freeze it in amber. If we do, we'll end up like Paris, a museum and nothing else." Pro-development types love invoking Paris. It is the bête noire of businessmen the world over, apparently.

Still, the city argues that it is not obsessing over Midtown but instead finally giving it the attention it was used to in the past after a fair amount of neglect. “Really, this is a response to the five borough economic plan, which has focused outside of Midtown more than any administration ever has, I think,” Mr. Steel said.

This could be the case in more ways than one, as some traditional Midtown heavyweights, like SL Green, have felt neglected amidst the city’s westward expansion. Earlier this month, The Journal revealed that the city’s largest commercial landlord had teamed up with Hines, another player who has mostly developed along Third and Lex, to replace a clutch of turn-of-the-century buildings immediately west of Grand Central, on 42^nd Street between Madison and Vanderbuilt avenues. The city freely admits that it is working with local stakeholders to craft its plan but denies that they are the ones sketching it out.

"We will listen to what our partners in the private sector have to say, as well as the community, but this is definitely the mayor and his team's plan," Mr. Steel said. One City Hall source even called it "Bob Steel's baby," the marquee project of the deputy mayor since he joined the administration two years ago.

425 Park, in its prime. (Eral Soto)

One need look no further than 425 Park Avenue for proof of the problems with Midtown’s current zoning. One of those bland mid-century grandees, all flat glass planes, it was completed in 1958 and spans an entire block on Park. David Levinson, a partner at L&L Holdings, would tear down the 32-story behemoth if he could and replace it with something better. He is in the rare position of owning a building that will be empty of tenants coming 2015—normally a bad thing, were L&L not set on ridding itself of the low ceilings and column-choked spaces that fill the space.

“It’s an entire block-front on Park Avenue, and that opportunity hasn’t existed in my lifetime,” Mr. Levinson said with relish.

But he is confronted with the challenge of the zoning having changed three years after his tower was built, and were he to replace it, he would be left with a much smaller building. It is a problem faced by landlords all across Midtown East.

His clever real estate attorneys have determined that he could demolish all but the bottom quarter of the building and build up from there, getting as close to a new building as one could hope for. He has convened a private competition between 10 of the world’s top architects to solve this vexing problem.

Naturally, his fingers are also crossed that the city might solve this problem for him. “The zoning does not make this easy, but that’s the way it is, and we’re going to comply with that,” Mr Levinson said, “unless something changes.”

It might, and it might not. According to city planning sources, the proposal could get downsized to include only the immediate blocks surrounding Grand Central. There are almost 2 million square feet in development rights that once belonged to the Penn Central Railroad, currently owned by a little-known firm called Argent Ventures.

The city would add to that pot by a few million square feet, selling off the extra air rights, which would go to fund improvements to the surrounding streets and the spaces within Grand Central, particularly the local, and long-neglected, subway stations. This would benefit but a few developers owning surrounding properties. City Hall denied it has shrunk its scheme, but also admitted that it has yet to finalize the boundaries.

The administration is stuck between what it wants to build and what it has time to build. With thousands of constituents in Midtown, many with money to make and lose, it would be difficult to realize a sweeping plan within the next 18 months—public review alone takes seven. “I’m not even sure if there is unanimity at City Hall on what to do,” as one top land-use attorney put it. “I hope they can move quickly and not settle for the lowest common denominator.”

Even those critical or wary of the plan want to see it succeed, they just want to see it done right. The Municipal Art Society has long been a champion of Grand Central Terminal, helping to save it decades ago with Jacklyn Kennedy Onassis, and they have taken a keen interest in this project as well. Vin Cipolla, the group's president, hopes the mayor will take time in coming up with a plan, while realizing that if the administration puts it off, the next one might not take it up, either.

"Any plan for this area needs to be carefully balanced and worthy of Grand Central, the Chrysler Building and the Seagrams building," Mr. Cipolla said. "It’s a part of the city where the bar has to be very high."

And so do the buildings.

"Infinite Forest" by design team at Studio A+i

With all the negative attention surrounding Rudin Managment's plan to turn the old St. Vincent's hospital into condos, there has been one piece about which people have been genuinely excited—even if it is not officially part of the plan: a new AIDS Memorial Park proposed for a triangle of land at the corner of 7th Avenue and 12th Street.

Today, the AIDS Memorial Park Design Competition jury announced the contest winner and selected a local design team from 475 submissions from around the world. The Brooklyn-based crew,  studio a+i, proposed a design called "infinite forest." Stands of trees are set against polished surfaces reflecting the "forest" on-and-on as well as those inside. It creates a space of quiet contemplation that hides the busy city beyond.

One park, many places.

"The winning design creates a space for reflection, awareness and recognition, while acknowledging the history of the disease," jury chair and 9/11 Memorial designer Michael Arad said in a statement.

Studio a+i is made up of Mateo Paiva, Lily Lim, John Thurtle, Insook Kim, and Esteban Erlich, and their design was rendered by Guillaume Paturel. According to their website, the designers have created both retail and residential spaces around the city. Previous projects include a Tribeca loft, french clothing brand Zadig and Voltaire's Mercer Street store and the Ronnybrook Milk Bar at Chelsea Market.

"The winning concept inspires us, and is the starting point for an iterative process to design a green oasis with an AIDS memorial for the community and New York City," memorial co-founders Christopher Tepper and Paul Kelterborn said. Three runners up and 12 honorable mentions were also awarded to competing designs.

The only remaining question is whether Bill Rudin will build it. He seems obliged. After all, the AIDS memorial project has helped shore-up some support for his development project.

Update: Mr. Rudin is eager to work with AIDS activists on incorporating elements of their proposal into his. Considering a new design would require an entirely new public-review process, this specific memorial seems to stand less of a chance of actually getting built, as it would take at least another year to be approved. Below is Rudin Management's statement:

Our neighborhood park design – which was approved by the Landmarks Preservation Commission, Community Board 2, the Borough President’s Office and the City Planning Commission – allows for a commemoration of both those effected by the AIDS epidemic and of St. Vincent’s Hospital for its 160 years of service to the community and its steadfast commitment to care for those suffering from HIV/AIDS. We stand ready to continue our work with all stakeholders to determine how best to realize these memorial elements as part of the approved park design in a timely manner.

eknutsen@observer.com

Sacred ground. (Architizer)

It's official—well, almost—the West Village will be getting an AIDS memorial. After opening the design competition in November, the AIDS Memorial Park received 475 entries from architects, designers and gardeners the world over. The winner will be announced next Monday, and will receive a $5,000 prize.

The timing is appropriate, given that yesterday Bill Rudin's development at St. Vincent's received unanimous approval by the City Planning Commission. Several of the commissioners made mention of the AIDS memorial, including Chair Amande Burden, and stressed their desire to see a memorial included.

Commissioner Maira Del Toro, who resides in Greenwich Village, explained the role AIDS has played in the community's history. "When AIDS affected our community in such disproportionate numbers, St. Vincent's was the refuge for those suffering. They never turned away a single AIDS patient," she said.

Ms. Burden all but commanded Mr. Rudin to include the memorial in his plans. "Given the past efforts of the applicant on this proposal, I am confident they will continue to work with the community in the future, including those interested in creating the AIDS memorial," she said.

Considering these land-use applications are mostly hashed out behind closed doors, it would not be unreasonable to imagine that an agreement had even been struck already. Do not be surprised if a big announcement is made to this effect in the next month or two, after the memorial has selected a winner and while the proposal is still being fought over at the City Council. It will look like a nice olive branch, one that will not cost the Rudins anything—unlike, say, adding affordable housing—since they have already promised to build some sort of park on the plot of land across the street from the hospital.

Indeed, Mr. Rudin even seems open to the idea. After yesterday vote, The Observer asked him where he stood on the memorial proposal. "We've always been very consistent in the design that we’ve put forth in working with the community, that we have placeholders for commemorative elements refelcting HIV and also the rich history of St. Vincent's," Mr. Rudin said.  "We’re working with the community board to come up with the appropriate designs."

eknutsen@observer.com

All smiles. (PMcM)

Earlier this afternoon, a die-hard group of developers, activists and real estate enthusiasts gathered at the New York Department of City Planning for a much anticipated meeting. In a brief meeting, the controversial Rudin development project at the former site of St. Vincent's Hospital passed with unanimous support from all City Planning commissioners.

Commission Chair Amanda Burden explained that she was pleased with how the developers had worked with the community. "The Rudin West Village proposal represents an important step in incorporating the former St. Vincent's campus into the fabric of the West Village," Ms. Burden said.

Commissioner Angela Battaglia similarly voiced her support of the project, but encouraged Rudin to continue searching for a way to include an affordable housing program into the massive real estate endeavor.

After the meeting, Mr. Rudin spoke to a bevy of reporters, most of whom were curious about the affordable housing angle Commissioner Battaglia had mentioned. "I'm not exactly sure, there were a couple of different comments, and I think we need to see what their report was," Mr. Rudin said. "Maybe after we’ve read it we can comment on it."

Mr. Rudin explained that the development project will create "a revitalized neighborhood with jobs being created and stores being refilled." In addition to condos and a park, the new space will include *an urgent care clinic with exactly two hospital beds.

As Mr. Rudin was speaking to the press, several opponents of the project gathered behind him, with signs reading "Shame! Shame!" and "City Planners to The West Side: Drop Dead."

The vociferous activists argued that without a fully-operational hospital, complete with in-patient care and Level 4 trauma facilities, the West Side of Manhattan would be put in dire straits. "There's a very large disparity of hospital beds and this isn’t being addressed by the plan," said Dr. Gerrie Nussdorf. "There’s a change in health care where these freestanding clinics are somehow taken as being equal to hospitals." The urgent care center, she said, is "kind of a band-aid: it can help certain things if they’re not so serious, but for serious things people need to be transported to a hospital."

Another opponent, Timothy Lunceford, told The Observer that despite the planning commission's statements, the Rudins have not worked with the community. "I'm telling you the commission did not tell the truth today," he said. "Bill Rudin has not told the truth any time he's presented to the board about working with the community."

Mr. Rudin told the assembled reporters that *financing is completely in order for the project, and it will be completed sometime in 2015.

eknutsen@observer.com

Overbite this.

Sometimes landmark battles have happy endings.

Many a preservationist lamented the demise of the Village's O'Toole Building, the old National Maritime Union headquarters more commonly known as the Overbite Building for its unusual facade. After a three-year fight at the landmarks and city planning commissions, St. Vincent's won begrudging approval to tear down the modernist structure and replace it with a new 21-story hospital tower.

When St. Vincent's went bankrupt (the story was not a happy ending for everyone), its development partner, Rudin Management, turned to North Shore/LIJ to keep its multimillion dollar condo plan on the former hospital campus alive. Instead of building a new hospital—which never would have passed landmarks—North Shore/LIJ came up with a plan to repurpose the O'Toole Building, which won unanimous approval from the commission today.

“It’s a felicitous conclusion,” Commission Chair Robert Tierney said at today's hearig. “The proposal will allow the building to be restored intact and function as a health care facility and not detract from the character of the district. I enthusiastically support this application.”

The plan calls for restoring the facade to its original appearance, after new tiles were added during later renovations. The plans also address one of the biggest complaints against the building, its uninviting Seventh Avenue side. This will be opened up to create a new entrance, and while it is not quite the vibrancy of a sidewalk cafe that Jane Jacobs relished, it is seen as an improvement from the hedges and glass brick that currently dominate the expanse.

Bill Rudin applauded the decision in a statement. "Today's vote is further recognition that the North Shore-LIJ Comprehensive Care Center is not only the best plan to bring health care back to the West Side, but the right one for the neighborhood," he said. "Along with our LPC-approved residential development, new open space and a public school, this plan preserves the heart and character of the West Village community."

“I want to really thank the applicants for saving this building,” Commissioner Margery Perlmutter said.

mchaban [at] observer.com | @MC_NYC

Haven't seen this face in a while.

Nothing takes us back to that halcyon year of 1996 as does seeing the likes of Michael Ondaatje and Drew Carey in the same paragraph. In a delightful blast from the not-so-distant past, the stars' respective talent agencies have renewed at the Rudin family's 41 Madison Avenue.

The Gersh Agency, who, in addition to a svelter Mr. Carey, also reps Jamie Foxx, has renewed its 13,000-square-foot lease for the entire 33rd floor for another 10 years. Augustus B. Field IV of Cushman & Wakefield represented the tenant, which also has offices a bit closer to the action in Beverly Hills. Tom Keating represented the landlord in-house.

Adding a dash of the high brow, literary agency the Trident Media Group has also renewed a 13,000-square-foot lease on the 36th floor for another six years. Keith Cody and Cregg Rothkin of CB Richard Ellis represented the tenant; Robert Steinman repped the landlord in-house.

“Tenant retention has always been a major component of the Rudin Management philosophy," said a typically understated Bill Rudin in a statement, "so we’re delighted that both of these creative agencies will continue to call 41 Madison and Madison Square Park their home for many more years to come.”

Speaking of show biz, the Emery Roth-designed tower is also home to 23 stories of showrooms for tableware manufacturers.

In a January 2010 Observer article, he had sounded one of the earliest calls for not holding the 9/11 terror trials in the federal courthouse in Lower Manhattan. Attorney General Eric Holder announced Monday afternoon that the trials will, indeed, be held at the Guantanamo Bay prison (to the dismay of many among President Obama's lefty base). 

The Observer nabbed Big Real Estate's super at the 101 Club on Park Avenue and queried: Was REBNY the first to sound the call? "I do believe we were," said Mr. Spinola with a wide grin.

As early as December 2009, Mr. Spinola (pictured) met with Bill Rudin, the landlord and Association for a Better New York chair, in his office. Initially, Mr. Spinola spoke with then-White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and presidential adviser and policy wonk David Axelrod. The board at first kept a low public profile on the issue to resist offending the administration.

But Mr. Spinola was getting an earful from REBNY members, as The Observer noted a month after the meeting with Mr. Rudin, more than he had gotten on any single issue since he took over the board in the mid-1980s: "They're saying to me, 'You've got to stop this, you can't let it happen.'" To hold the trial downtown, they said, would disrupt traffic and create security concerns that could drive out tourists and office tenants, plummeting the downtown economy to post-9/11 lows.

The real estate board, one of the most powerful lobby groups in the state, has had an impact on other issues like property taxes, but none with quite such national resonance. In other words, the board took on the president of the United States and won. 

During his Monday evening recap with The Observer, Mr. Spinola also gave credit to Community Board 1 for helping. Victory, Mr. Spinola said, was not surprising (rumors of the administration's reversal surfaced this past January). "We assumed it would not be in New York," he said. "We're very happy." 

lkusisto@observer.com