daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old June 12th, 2007, 04:53 PM   #201
rogerick1970
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 208
Likes (Received): 62

These are the schedules of the construction on the WTC site according to my uncle, Anthony Shorris who is the executive director for the Port Authority.

Tower 1:

January 2008- visible above grade; Spring 2009-Topped Out;
Summer 2010-Facade/Building Amenities Completed; 1st Quarter 2011-Tenants Move In

Tower 2:

Spring/Summer 2008- Excavation/Foundation work begins; Spring 2009- visible above grade; December 2010- Topped Out;
Early Fall 2011- Facade/Building Amenities Completed; 2nd Quarter 2012- Tenants Move In

Towers 3 and 4

December 2007-Excavation/Foundation works begins; Early 2009- visible above grade; Spring 2010- Topped Out; Early 2011- Facade/Building Amenities Completed; 3rd Quarter 2011- Tenants Move In

Tower 5

He didnt give me a specific Timetable for when Tower 5 will be completed. But he did estimate that the Deustche building will be totally deconstructed no later than early 2008. However, information on the use of the tower, its height, and design probably will not be released until Summer of next year.



* I also asked him about the rest of the complex. He told me that everything is running smoothly, and will be completed as planned. He mentioned that the East Bathtub was actually going ahead of schedule, which means that the timetable for construction of towers 2,3,&4 may be altered a few months. So basically to sum it all up, we will have a completely rebuilt WTC by 2012
rogerick1970 no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old June 14th, 2007, 07:35 PM   #202
Ebola
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,658
Likes (Received): 94

Chase Bank Set to Build Tower by Ground Zero


By CHARLES V. BAGLI
Published: June 14, 2007

After months of sharp bargaining and threats to relocate, JPMorgan Chase is expected to announce today that it has struck a deal to build a skyscraper near ground zero and move its investment banking headquarters from Midtown, according to government officials and real estate executives.

The bank’s planned 42-story, 1.3 million-square-foot tower would rise at the corner of Greenwich and Cedar Streets, the site of the soon-to-be demolished former Deutsche Bank building. Chase plans to move thousands of executives from its Midtown offices at 277 Park Avenue to Lower Manhattan, in what is widely regarded as a boost for the downtown district. It will keep its world headquarters at 270 Park Avenue.

The move would be a reverse in the traditional migratory patterns of financial institutions, which have been moving from the financial district to Midtown for more than 30 years. Government officials and downtown business executives have said that Chase’s move would re-establish Lower Manhattan as a world financial center and validate the trade center as a commercial complex.

Word of Chase’s impending deal with Gov. Eliot Spitzer and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has been circulating in real estate and political circles this week, although the Spitzer administration had sworn many people to secrecy.

The governor is scheduled to make the announcement today at his offices on Third Avenue, with executives from Chase and the Port Authority as well as state and city officials on hand.

The governor’s office, the Port Authority and Chase declined to comment.

The agreement provides Chase with a lucrative incentive deal. Plans for the bank’s tower are almost sure to ignite a controversy with the local community board. Because the site is relatively small, the bank tower will have to jut out about 100 feet over a planned park and church on Liberty Street, as well as over Cedar Street, to accommodate trading floors for the investment bank. The tower will therefore cast a permanent shadow over the one-acre park.

The building’s design will require public hearings and a change in the master plan for rebuilding Lower Manhattan.

Chase had actually come to a tentative agreement in April with the Port Authority to pay $300 million for the development rights on the parcel at Cedar and Greenwich Streets, after a series of meetings in December and January between James Dimon, Chase’s chairman, and Anthony R. Coscia, the Port Authority chairman.

It was a remarkable turnaround for Chase, which appeared to be pulling out of downtown only six years ago. It sold its tower at 60 Wall Street and leased space at 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza to other companies.

But after state and city officials refused to provide Chase with what they considered an excessive subsidy package, the bank threatened to move thousands of employees to Stamford, Conn., instead.

Chase had sought a batch of subsidies akin to what Goldman Sachs received from the Pataki and Bloomberg administrations in 2005 to build a headquarters in Battery Park City. Critics of the Goldman deal, who put the value of the incentives at more than $650 million, described the arrangement as the most egregious example of corporate welfare in city history.

Many officials regarded Chase’s threat as part of the usual bluster employed by companies seeking subsidies. Indeed, Dannel Malloy, the mayor of Stamford, said yesterday that the bank had never even contacted him.

Officials in both the Spitzer and Bloomberg administrations have privately renounced the Goldman deal, blaming former Gov. George E. Pataki. They wanted to avoid similar recriminations in coming to an agreement with Chase.

One official familiar with the Chase deal said that the city and the state ultimately agreed to provide the bank with tax breaks, discounted electric power and rent subsidies worth about $100 million, most of which are available to tenants moving to the trade center site.

But it depends on how the dollars are counted. For example, Chase will get a rent subsidy worth about $50 million a year for about 15 years, or $5 a square foot for 750,000 square feet. Tenants at the developer Larry Silverstein’s recently rebuilt 7 World Trade Center got the same deal.

One executive who had been briefed on the deal by Chase said that it would not have been closed unless it was fairly comparable with Goldman’s. “It was a very competitive deal from an overall cost perspective,” the executive said.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
Ebola no está en línea  
Old June 14th, 2007, 09:42 PM   #203
tobyas333
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 68
Likes (Received): 16

So finally we have a Wtc 5? 41 Stories so perhaps 200m?
__________________
Sorry for my bad english ;)
tobyas333 no está en línea  
Old June 14th, 2007, 09:44 PM   #204
rogerick1970
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 208
Likes (Received): 62

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebola View Post
Chase Bank Set to Build Tower by Ground Zero


By CHARLES V. BAGLI
Published: June 14, 2007

After months of sharp bargaining and threats to relocate, JPMorgan Chase is expected to announce today that it has struck a deal to build a skyscraper near ground zero and move its investment banking headquarters from Midtown, according to government officials and real estate executives.

The bank’s planned 42-story, 1.3 million-square-foot tower would rise at the corner of Greenwich and Cedar Streets, the site of the soon-to-be demolished former Deutsche Bank building. Chase plans to move thousands of executives from its Midtown offices at 277 Park Avenue to Lower Manhattan, in what is widely regarded as a boost for the downtown district. It will keep its world headquarters at 270 Park Avenue.

The move would be a reverse in the traditional migratory patterns of financial institutions, which have been moving from the financial district to Midtown for more than 30 years. Government officials and downtown business executives have said that Chase’s move would re-establish Lower Manhattan as a world financial center and validate the trade center as a commercial complex.

Word of Chase’s impending deal with Gov. Eliot Spitzer and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has been circulating in real estate and political circles this week, although the Spitzer administration had sworn many people to secrecy.

The governor is scheduled to make the announcement today at his offices on Third Avenue, with executives from Chase and the Port Authority as well as state and city officials on hand.

The governor’s office, the Port Authority and Chase declined to comment.

The agreement provides Chase with a lucrative incentive deal. Plans for the bank’s tower are almost sure to ignite a controversy with the local community board. Because the site is relatively small, the bank tower will have to jut out about 100 feet over a planned park and church on Liberty Street, as well as over Cedar Street, to accommodate trading floors for the investment bank. The tower will therefore cast a permanent shadow over the one-acre park.

The building’s design will require public hearings and a change in the master plan for rebuilding Lower Manhattan.

Chase had actually come to a tentative agreement in April with the Port Authority to pay $300 million for the development rights on the parcel at Cedar and Greenwich Streets, after a series of meetings in December and January between James Dimon, Chase’s chairman, and Anthony R. Coscia, the Port Authority chairman.

It was a remarkable turnaround for Chase, which appeared to be pulling out of downtown only six years ago. It sold its tower at 60 Wall Street and leased space at 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza to other companies.

But after state and city officials refused to provide Chase with what they considered an excessive subsidy package, the bank threatened to move thousands of employees to Stamford, Conn., instead.

Chase had sought a batch of subsidies akin to what Goldman Sachs received from the Pataki and Bloomberg administrations in 2005 to build a headquarters in Battery Park City. Critics of the Goldman deal, who put the value of the incentives at more than $650 million, described the arrangement as the most egregious example of corporate welfare in city history.

Many officials regarded Chase’s threat as part of the usual bluster employed by companies seeking subsidies. Indeed, Dannel Malloy, the mayor of Stamford, said yesterday that the bank had never even contacted him.

Officials in both the Spitzer and Bloomberg administrations have privately renounced the Goldman deal, blaming former Gov. George E. Pataki. They wanted to avoid similar recriminations in coming to an agreement with Chase.

One official familiar with the Chase deal said that the city and the state ultimately agreed to provide the bank with tax breaks, discounted electric power and rent subsidies worth about $100 million, most of which are available to tenants moving to the trade center site.

But it depends on how the dollars are counted. For example, Chase will get a rent subsidy worth about $50 million a year for about 15 years, or $5 a square foot for 750,000 square feet. Tenants at the developer Larry Silverstein’s recently rebuilt 7 World Trade Center got the same deal.

One executive who had been briefed on the deal by Chase said that it would not have been closed unless it was fairly comparable with Goldman’s. “It was a very competitive deal from an overall cost perspective,” the executive said.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company


This is great news. Now all we need is for them to Deconstruct that building.
rogerick1970 no está en línea  
Old June 14th, 2007, 11:08 PM   #205
ZZ-II
I love Skyscrapers
 
ZZ-II's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Near Ingolstadt in Bavaria
Posts: 33,532
Likes (Received): 6562

the site of Tower 3 ( June 10th ):

image hosted on flickr
ZZ-II está en línea ahora  
Old June 15th, 2007, 07:26 PM   #206
rogerick1970
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 208
Likes (Received): 62

Its just so amazing to see this rebuilding process actually happening
rogerick1970 no está en línea  
Old June 15th, 2007, 08:31 PM   #207
RandySavage
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 36
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerick1970 View Post
This is great news. Now all we need is for them to Deconstruct that building.
They've actually made quite a bit of visible progress in bringing it down:

http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne...9618450&size=o
RandySavage no está en línea  
Old June 15th, 2007, 09:48 PM   #208
Texas Super
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ft Worth, Texas
Posts: 8
Likes (Received): 1

I was in New York about 5 weeks ago and I saw construction of a pretty heavy structural steel building going up across the intersection of the Northwest corner of the World Trade Center Site and it was about 4 floors up at that time but I couldnt find out what the name of the building or project is, does anyone know? Is it going to be part of the FT Project?
Texas Super no está en línea  
Old June 15th, 2007, 09:54 PM   #209
poshbakerloo
***Alexxx***
 
poshbakerloo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London, Manchester, Cheshire, Sheffield, Moscow
Posts: 5,094
Likes (Received): 292

are the two pools at the base of the towers where the original wtc1 and 2 were?
__________________
"BEFORE WE MARRY...I HAVE A SECRET!"

I <3 London
poshbakerloo no está en línea  
Old June 15th, 2007, 10:11 PM   #210
mudvayneimn
Evry City Nds a Blk Box!
 
mudvayneimn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 330
Likes (Received): 17

Poshbakerloo- Yes, the pools are going to be where the original towers were.

Texas Super- I'm pretty sure the building you are talking about is the Goldman Sachs building.
mudvayneimn no está en línea  
Old June 15th, 2007, 10:39 PM   #211
Texas Super
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ft Worth, Texas
Posts: 8
Likes (Received): 1

Poshbakerloo- Yes, the pools are going to be where the original towers were.

Texas Super- I'm pretty sure the building you are talking about is the Goldman Sachs building.

Yes, thats the one. I saw how massive those windload columns were and I knew that wasnt going to be a 10 story. I had heard of the G.S. building but I was thinking of the new one they just built in New Jersey unless Im still confused. Thanks for the Info, I appreciate it.
Texas Super no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2007, 12:36 AM   #212
CrazyAboutCities
Registered User
 
CrazyAboutCities's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, Washington
Posts: 8,549
Likes (Received): 240

I'm sorry, this World Financial Center needs to clean their green domes asap. It is very distracting from this WTC complex construction.
CrazyAboutCities no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2007, 12:39 AM   #213
Sentient Seas
Industrial Twilight
 
Sentient Seas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,097
Likes (Received): 42

This may be sort of an un-educated question, but how many floors where the original world trade centers? For some reason I never found out the official floor count for those towers.
__________________
"Only the dead have seen the end of war" - Plato
Sentient Seas no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2007, 01:10 AM   #214
poshbakerloo
***Alexxx***
 
poshbakerloo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London, Manchester, Cheshire, Sheffield, Moscow
Posts: 5,094
Likes (Received): 292

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentient Seas View Post
This may be sort of an un-educated question, but how many floors where the original world trade centers? For some reason I never found out the official floor count for those towers.
i think both were 110...
__________________
"BEFORE WE MARRY...I HAVE A SECRET!"

I <3 London
poshbakerloo no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2007, 01:11 AM   #215
ramvid01
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 749
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyAboutCities View Post
I'm sorry, this World Financial Center needs to clean their green domes asap. It is very distracting from this WTC complex construction.
What are you a neat freak? I mean theres a giant construction site in front of it and your worrying about streaks on a building?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sentient Seas View Post
This may be sort of an un-educated question, but how many floors where the original world trade centers? For some reason I never found out the official floor count for those towers.
110
ramvid01 no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2007, 04:46 AM   #216
mgk920
Nonhyphenated-American
 
mgk920's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Appleton, WI USA
Posts: 2,583
Likes (Received): 68

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramvid01 View Post
110
Another little tidbit that not a lot of people knew is that the roof height of 1 WTC (the north tower, the one with the antenna mast) was about 2 meters higher than that of 2 WTC (south tower).

I never learned why.

Mike
mgk920 no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2007, 07:32 AM   #217
Chicagophotoshop
Chicago Photographer
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 2,832
Likes (Received): 14

why is this going so slow?
__________________
Portfolio | Twitter | Facebook | Flickr | Gear
| SmugMugPro
Chicagophotoshop no está en línea  
Old June 16th, 2007, 07:39 AM   #218
i_am_hydrogen
muted
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 7,080
Likes (Received): 203

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicagophotoshop View Post
why is this going so slow?
Because foundational work for buildings of this magnitude takes a lot of time. It's taken Waterview in Chicago over a year to reach street-level.
__________________
flickrgallery
i_am_hydrogen no está en línea  
Old June 19th, 2007, 03:52 AM   #219
CrazyAboutCities
Registered User
 
CrazyAboutCities's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle, Washington
Posts: 8,549
Likes (Received): 240

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramvid01 View Post
What are you a neat freak? I mean theres a giant construction site in front of it and your worrying about streaks on a building?
Yes. It drove me nut when I tried to focus on this construction part not that streaks on a building. It is just big distracting for me.
CrazyAboutCities no está en línea  
Old June 19th, 2007, 09:39 AM   #220
thf5007
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 53
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyAboutCities View Post
Yes. It drove me nut when I tried to focus on this construction part not that streaks on a building. It is just big distracting for me.
Actually I was thinking the same. A little paint job wouldn't hurt. Besides, those were good looking buildings when their domes were clean and they can be again very easily.
thf5007 no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium