$3.5 billion.
We believe that this is primarily due to a lack of financing for purchasers.
However, we have been able to access capital for refinancing purposes which we believe primarily results from the asset quality of our portfolio and our ability to create and preserve asset value.
Leasing activity for Manhattan, a borough of New York City, totaled approximately 16.3 million square feet compared to approximately 19.1 million square feet in 2008.
Of the total 2009 leasing activity in Manhattan, the Midtown submarket accounted for approximately 11.3 million square feet, or 69.1%.
Midtown’s overall vacancy increased from 8.5% at December 31, 2008 to 12.0% at December 31, 2009, after reaching as high as 13.4% in October 2009.
Overall asking rents for direct space in Midtown decreased from $72.08 at year-end 2008 to $57.32 at year-end 2009, a decrease of 20.5%.
The decrease in rents has been driven by increased vacancy resulting from the financial crisis.
Management believes that rental rates will begin to moderate and concession packages will decline during 2010 as vacancy shrinks.
During 2009, minimal new office space was added to the Midtown office inventory.
In a supply-constrained market, there is only 2.0 million square feet under construction in Midtown as of year-end and which becomes available in the next two years, only 7.3% of which is pre-leased.
We saw significant fluctuations in short-term interest rates, although they still remain low compared to historical levels.
The 30-day LIBOR rate ended 2009 at 0.23%, a 21 basis point decrease from the end of 2008.
Ten-year US Treasuries ended 2009 at 3.83%, a 162 basis point increase from the end of 2008.
Our activities for 2009 included: ?
Acquired two sub-leasehold positions at 420 Lexington Avenue for approximately $15.9 million; ?
Sold two properties for an aggregate gross sales price of approximately $135.7 million generating losses to us of approximately $7.1 million; ?
Signed 217 office leases totaling 2.1 million square feet during 2009 while increasing the cash rents paid by new tenants on previously occupied space by 14.8% and decreasing cash rents by 2.4% over the most recent cash rent paid by the previous tenants for the same space for the Manhattan and Suburban properties, respectively; ?
Sold 19,550,000 shares of our common stock, generating net proceeds of approximately $387.1 million; ?
Repurchased approximately $564.6 million of our exchangeable and non-exchangeable notes and a portion of our 2007 unsecured revolving credit facility, realizing gains on early extinguishment of debt of approximately $86.0 million; ?
Originated or acquired approximately $184.3 million of new structured finance investments, net of redemptions and recorded approximately $146.5 million in loan loss reserves and charge offs; and ?
Closed on approximately $1.0 billion of mortgage financings.
As of December 31, 2009, we owned the following interests in commercial office properties in the New York Metro area, primarily in midtown Manhattan, a borough of New York City, or Manhattan.
Our investments in the New York Metro area also include investments in Brooklyn, Queens, Long Island, Westchester County, Connecticut and New Jersey, which are collectively known as the Suburban assets:
## Table 0 ##
(1) The weighted average occupancy represents the total leased square feet divided by total available rentable square feet.
We also own investments in eight retail properties encompassing approximately 374,812 square feet, three development properties encompassing approximately 399,800 square feet and two land interests.
In addition, we manage three office properties owned by third parties and affiliated companies encompassing approximately 1.0 million rentable square feet.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES Our discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based on our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, and contingencies as of the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods.
We evaluate our assumptions and estimates on an ongoing basis.
We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources.
Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.
Investment in Commercial Real Estate Properties On a periodic basis, we assess whether there are any indicators that the value of our real estate properties may be impaired or that its carrying value may not be recoverable.
A property’s value is considered impaired if management’s estimate of the aggregate future cash flows (undiscounted and without interest charges for consolidated properties
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements As of December?31, 2011 and 2010, we held the following debt investments with an aggregate weighted average current yield of approximately 7.5% (in thousands):
## Table 1 ##
(1) This is a fixed rate loan.
(2) The difference between the pay and accrual rates is included as an addition to the principal balance outstanding.
(3) This loan was sold in February 2011.
We realized $6.2?million of additional income upon the sale.
A portion of this income is included in loan loss and other reserves, net of recoveries.
(4) This loan is in default.
The lender has begun foreclosure proceedings.
Another participant holds a $12.2?million pari passu interest in this loan.
(5) Gramercy was the borrower under this loan.
We sold this loan, which consisted of mortgage and mezzanine financing, for $35.8?million, in May 2011.
We realized $1.2?million of additional income upon the sale, which is included in loan loss and other reserves, net of recoveries.
(6) Loan loss reserves are specifically allocated to investments.
Our reserves reflect management’s judgment of the probability and severity of losses based on Level?3 data.
We cannot be certain that our judgment will prove to be correct or that reserves will be adequate over time to protect against potential future losses.
(7) This loan is on non- accrual status.
(8) Interest is added to the principal balance for this accrual only loan.
(9) Gramercy held a pari passu interest in the mezzanine loan.
This loan was repaid in March 2011.
(10) We hold an 88% interest in the consolidated joint venture that acquired this loan.
This investment is denominated in British Pounds.
(11) This loan was repaid in January 2011.
We realized $1.3?million of additional income upon the sale.
This income is included in preferred equity and investment income.
(12) In March 2011, we contributed our debt investment with a carrying value of $286.6?million to a newly formed joint venture in which we hold a 50% interest.
We realized $38.7?million of additional income upon the contribution.
This income is included in preferred equity and investment income.
The joint venture paid us approximately $111.3?million and also assumed $30?million of related floating rate financing which matures in June 2016 and carried a weighted average interest rate for the quarter of 1.16%.
In May 2011, this joint venture took control of the underlying property as part of a recapitalization transaction.
See Note?6.
(13) In June 2011, we funded an additional $5.5?million and extended the maturity date of this loan to February 2013.
In September 2011, we entered into a loan participation in the amount of $28.5?million on a $31.5?million mortgage.
We have assigned our right as servicer to a third party.
Due to our continued involvement with the loan, the portion that was participated out has been recorded in other assets and other liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.
(14) In May 2011, we acquired a substantial ownership interest in the 205,000-square- foot office condominium along with control of the asset.
We provided a senior mezzanine loan as part of the sale of the condominium unit in 2007.
The transaction included a consensual modification of that loan.
See Note?3.
(15) In connection with the extension of this loan, a portion of the mezzanine loan was converted to preferred equity.
See note 6 to the next table.
(16) In connection with a recapitalization of the investment, our mezzanine loan was converted to preferred equity.
See note 7 to the next table.
(17) In November 2011, we entered into a loan participation agreement in the amount of $7.4?million on a $15.0?million mortgage.
Due to our continued involvement with the loan, the portion that was participated out has been recorded in other assets and other liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet.
(18) The mezzanine loan is on non- accrual status.
(19) As of December?31, 2011, we were committed to fund and additional $15.0?million in connection with this loan.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Plan were granted to certain employees, including our executives and vesting will occur annually upon the completion of a service period or our meeting established financial performance criteria.
Annual vesting occurs at rates ranging from 15% to 35% once performance criteria are reached.
A summary of our restricted stock as of December?31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 and charges during the years then ended are presented below:
## Table 2 ##
The fair value of restricted stock that vested during the years ended December?31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 was $4.3?million, $16.6?million and $28.0?million, respectively.
As of December?31, 2011, there was $14.7?million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested restricted stock, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of two years.
For the years ended December?31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, approximately $3.4?million, $2.2?million and $1.7?million, respectively, was capitalized to assets associated with compensation expense related to our long- term compensation plans, restricted stock and stock options.
We granted LTIP units which had a fair value of $8.5?million as part of the 2011 performance stock bonus award.
The grant date fair value of the LTIP unit awards was calculated in accordance with ASC 718.
A third party consultant determined the fair value of the LTIP units to have a discount from our unrestricted common stock price.
The discount was calculated by considering the inherent uncertainty that the LTIP units will reach parity with other common partnership units and the illiquidity due to transfer restrictions.2003 Long- Term Outperformance Compensation Program Our board of directors adopted a long- term, seven- year compensation program for certain members of senior management.
The?program provided for restricted stock awards to be made to plan participants if the holders of our common equity achieved a total return in excess of 40% over a 48-month period commencing April?1, 2003.
In April 2007, the compensation committee determined that under the terms of the 2003 Outperformance Plan, as of March?31, 2007, the performance hurdles had been met and the maximum performance pool of $22,825,000, taking into account forfeitures, was established.
In connection with this event, approximately 166,312 shares of restricted stock (as adjusted for forfeitures) were allocated under the 2005 Plan.
In accordance with the terms of the program, 40% of each award vested on March?31, 2007 and the remainder vested ratably over the subsequent three years based on continued employment.
The fair value of the awards under this program on the date of grant was determined to be $3.2?million.
This fair value is expensed over the term of the restricted stock award.
Forty percent of the value of the award was amortized over four years from the date of grant and the balance was amortized, in equal parts, over five, six and seven years (i. e. , 20% of the total value was amortized over five years (20% per year), 20% of the total value was amortized over six years (16.67% per year) and 20% of the total value was amortized over seven years (14.29% per year).
We recorded compensation expense of $23,000 and $0.1?million related to this plan during the years ended December?31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
The cost of the 2003 Outperformance Plan had been fully expensed as of March?31, 2010.2005 Long- Term Outperformance Compensation Program In December 2005, the compensation committee of our board of directors approved a long- term incentive compensation program, the 2005 Outperformance Plan.
Participants in the 2005 Outperformance Plan were entitled to earn LTIP Units in our Operating Partnership if our total return to stockholders for the three- year period beginning December?1, 2005 exceeded a cumulative total return to stockholders of 30%; provided that participants were entitled to earn LTIP Units earlier in the event that we achieved maximum performance for 30 consecutive days.
The total number of LTIP Units that could be earned was to be a number having an assumed value equal to 10% of the outperformance amount in excess of the 30% benchmark, subject to a maximum dilution cap equal to the lesser of 3% of our outstanding shares and units of limited partnership interest as of December?1, 2005 or $50.0?million.
On June?14, 2006, the compensation committee determined that under the terms of the?2005 Outperformance Plan, as of June?8, 2006, the performance period had accelerated and the maximum performance pool of $49,250,000, taking into account forfeitures, had been earned.
Under the terms of the 2005 Outperformance Plan, participants also earned additional LTIP Units with a value equal to the distributions that would have been paid with respect to the LTIP Units earned if such LTIP Units had been earned at the beginning of the performance period.
The total number of LTIP Units earned under the 2005 Outperformance Plan by all participants as of June?8, 2006 was 490,475.
Under the terms of the 2005 Outperformance Plan, all LTIP Units that were earned remained subject to time- based vesting, with one- third of the LTIP Units earned vested on each of November?30, 2008 and the first two anniversaries thereafter based on continued employment.
The earned LTIP Units received regular quarterly distributions on a per unit basis equal to the dividends per share paid on our common stock, whether or not they were vested.
The cost of the 2005 Outperformance Plan (approximately $8.0?million, subject to adjustment for forfeitures) was amortized into earnings through the final vesting period.
We recorded approximately $1.6?million and $2.3?million of compensation expense during the years ended December?31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, in connection with the 2005 Outperformance Plan.
The cost of the 2005 Outperformance Plan had been fully expensed as of June?30, 2010.2006 Long- Term Outperformance Compensation Program On August?14, 2006, the compensation committee of our board of directors approved a long- term incentive compensation program,?the 2006 Outperformance Plan.
The performance criteria under the 2006 Outperformance Plan were not met and, accordingly, no LTIP Units were earned under the 2006 Outperformance Plan.
The cost of the 2006 Outperformance Plan (approximately $16.4?million, subject to adjustment for forfeitures) was amortized into earnings through July?31, 2011.
We recorded approximately $70,000, $0.2?million and $0.4?million of compensation expense during the years ended December?31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively, in connection with the 2006 Outperformance Plan.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements In June 2009, we acquired an operating sub- leasehold position at 420?Lexington Avenue for approximately $7.7?million.
These sub- leasehold positions were scheduled to mature in December?2029.
In October 2009, we acquired the remaining sub- leasehold position for $7.6?million.
The property located at 711?Third Avenue operates under an operating sub- lease, which expires in 2083.
Under the sub- lease, we were responsible for ground rent payments of $1.55?million annually through July 2011 on the 50% portion of the fee we do not own.
The ground rent was reset in July 2011.
Following the reset, we are responsible for ground rent payments of $5.25?million annually through July 2016 and then $5.5?million annually thereafter on the 50% portion of the fee we do not own.
The property located at 461?Fifth Avenue operates under a ground lease (approximately $2.1?million annually) with a term expiration date of 2027 and with two options to renew for an additional 21 years each, followed by a third option for 15 years.
We also have an option to purchase the ground lease for a fixed price on a specific date.
The property located at 625?Madison Avenue operates under a ground lease (approximately $4.6?million annually) with a term expiration date of 2022 and with two options to renew for an additional 23 years.
The property located at 1185 Avenue of the Americas operates under a ground lease (approximately $6.9?million annually) with a term expiration of 2020 and with an option to renew for an additional 23 years.
In April 1988, the SL?Green predecessor entered into a lease agreement for the property at 673?First Avenue, which has been capitalized for financial statement purposes.
Land was estimated to be approximately 70% of the fair market value of the property.
The portion of the lease attributed to land is classified as an operating lease and the remainder as a capital lease.
The initial lease term is 49 years with an option for an additional 26 years.
Beginning in lease years 11 and 25, the lessor is entitled to additional rent as defined by the lease agreement We continue to lease the property located at 673?First Avenue, which has been classified as a capital lease with a cost basis of $12.2?million and cumulative amortization of $6.0?million and $5.8?million at December?31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The following is a schedule of future minimum lease payments under capital leases and non- cancellable operating leases with initial terms in excess of one year as of December?31, 2011 (in thousands):
## Table 3 ##
17.
Financial Instruments: Derivatives and Hedging We recognize all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value.
?Derivatives that are not hedges must be adjusted to fair?value through earnings.
If a derivative is a hedge, depending on the nature of the hedge, changes in the fair value of the derivative will either be offset against the change in fair value of the hedged asset, liability, or firm commitment through earnings, or recognized in other comprehensive income until the hedged item is recognized in earnings.
The ineffective portion of a derivative’s change in fair value will be immediately recognized in earnings.
Reported net income and equity may increase or decrease prospectively, depending on future levels of interest rates and other variables affecting the fair values of derivative instruments and hedged items, but will have no effect on cash flows.
The following table summarizes the notional and fair value of our derivative financial instruments and foreign currency hedges at December?31, 2011 based on Level?2 information pursuant to ASC 810-10.
The notional value is an indication of the extent of our involvement in these instruments at that time, but does not represent exposure to credit, interest rate or market risks (in thousands).

<table><tr><td> Location</td><td> Ownership</td><td> Number of Properties</td><td> Square Feet</td><td> Weighted Average Occupancy<sup>-1</sup></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Manhattan</td><td>Consolidated properties</td><td>21</td><td>13,782,200</td><td>94.6%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Unconsolidated properties</td><td>8</td><td>9,429,000</td><td>95.6%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Suburban</td><td>Consolidated properties</td><td> 25</td><td> 3,863,000</td><td> 84.8</td><td> %</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Unconsolidated properties</td><td>6</td><td>2,941,700</td><td>93.7%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>60</td><td>30,015,900</td><td>93.4%</td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> Loan Type</td><td> December 31, 2011 Senior Financing</td><td>December 31, 2011 Amount Outstanding, Net of Discounts</td><td>December 31, 2010 Amount Outstanding, Net of Discounts</td><td> Initial Maturity Date</td></tr><tr><td>Other Loan<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$15,000</td><td>$3,500</td><td>$3,500</td><td>September 2021</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage/Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1</sup></td><td>205,000</td><td>64,973</td><td>60,407</td><td>February 2016</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage/ Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1</sup></td><td>171,549</td><td>46,416</td><td>46,358</td><td>May 2016</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1</sup></td><td>165,000</td><td>40,375</td><td>39,711</td><td>November 2016</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1(2)(3)(6)(7)</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>27,187</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1(7)(14)</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>15,697</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Junior Participation<sup>-1(4)(6)(7)</sup></td><td>—</td><td>8,725</td><td>9,938</td><td>April 2008</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage/Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1(8)(18)</sup></td><td>1,109,000</td><td>108,817</td><td>84,062</td><td>March 2017</td></tr><tr><td>Junior Participation<sup>-1(6)</sup></td><td>53,000</td><td>11,000</td><td>11,000</td><td>November 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Junior Participation<sup>-6</sup></td><td>61,250</td><td>10,875</td><td>10,875</td><td>June 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Junior Participation<sup>-6</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5,866</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Junior Participation<sup>-5(6)</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>47,484</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage/ Mezzanine Loan<sup>-2(9)</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>137,222</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Junior Participation<sup>-11</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>42,439</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Junior Participation</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>9,200</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1(12)</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>202,136</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1(17)</sup></td><td>75,000</td><td>7,650</td><td>15,000</td><td>July 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage<sup>-10</sup></td><td>—</td><td>86,339</td><td>86,339</td><td>June 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage<sup>-13</sup></td><td>28,500</td><td>3,000</td><td>26,000</td><td>February 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-15</sup></td><td>796,693</td><td>8,392</td><td>13,536</td><td>August 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1(16)</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>38,892</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1</sup></td><td>177,000</td><td>17,112</td><td>—</td><td>May 2016</td></tr><tr><td>Junior Participation<sup>-1</sup></td><td>133,000</td><td>49,000</td><td>—</td><td>June 2016</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan</td><td>170,000</td><td>60,000</td><td>—</td><td>August 2014</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-1</sup></td><td>55,000</td><td>35,000</td><td>—</td><td>July 2016</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan<sup>-19</sup></td><td>81,000</td><td>34,940</td><td>—</td><td>October 2016</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan</td><td>45,000</td><td>10,000</td><td>—</td><td>January 2015</td></tr><tr><td>Mezzanine Loan</td><td>467,000</td><td>30,747</td><td>—</td><td>July 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Other Loan</td><td>48,300</td><td>3,196</td><td>—</td><td>May 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Loan loss reserve<sup>-6</sup></td><td>—</td><td>-19,125</td><td>-40,461</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$3,856,292</td><td>$620,932</td><td>$892,388</td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at beginning of year</td><td>2,728,290</td><td>2,330,532</td><td>1,824,190</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>185,333</td><td>400,925</td><td>506,342</td></tr><tr><td>Cancelled</td><td>-1,167</td><td>-3,167</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at end of year</td><td>2,912,456</td><td>2,728,290</td><td>2,330,532</td></tr><tr><td>Vested during the year</td><td>66,299</td><td>153,644</td><td>420,050</td></tr><tr><td>Compensation expense recorded</td><td>$17,365,401</td><td>$15,327,206</td><td>$23,301,744</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average fair value of restricted stock granted during the year</td><td>$21,768,084</td><td>$28,269,983</td><td>$4,979,218</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td> Notional Value</td><td> Strike Rate</td><td> Effective Date</td><td> Expiration Date</td><td>Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Interest Rate Cap</td><td>$110,180</td><td>6.000%</td><td>2/2011</td><td>2/2012</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Interest Rate Cap</td><td>$139,672</td><td>5.000%</td><td>1/2011</td><td>1/2012</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Interest Rate Swap</td><td>$30,000</td><td>2.295%</td><td>7/2010</td><td>6/2016</td><td>$-1,716</td></tr><tr><td>Currency Hedge</td><td>$20,748</td><td>1.55185GBP-USD</td><td>9/2010</td><td>12/2012</td><td>$-151</td></tr></table>

Question: What's the sum of Suburban of Square Feet, Interest Rate Cap of Notional Value, and Weighted average fair value of restricted stock granted during the year of 2009 ?
Answer: 8981890