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 February 4th, 2008, 07:46 AM   #101
Anberlin
Registered User
 
Anberlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,926
Likes (Received): 31

LOLOLOL nice.
Anberlin no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old February 10th, 2008, 07:37 AM   #102
TalB
Refugee
 
TalB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 7,537
Likes (Received): 78

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02082008...tox_546672.htm
DEUTSCHE TO UNDERGO 'DETOX'

Post Wire Services

February 8, 2008 -- Workers will clean toxic dust out of the problem-plagued Deutsche Bank building before taking it down, the government agency in charge of the demolition announced yesterday.

The Lower Manhattan Development Corp. released new plans on dealing with the long-delayed dismantling of the building, which was badly damaged on 9/11 and where two firefighters were killed in an August blaze.

Responding to concerns that the building be made safe in case of future emergencies, the plans call for round-the-clock safety managers and a strict no-smoking policy.

Contractors will first clean several floors of the 26-story tower of toxic dust. Two stairwells will remain accessible to firefighters and be cleaned later.

LMDC officials say they hope to take the building down this year.
__________________
I respected your views, so I expect you do to the same.
TalB no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 03:39 AM   #103
TalB
Refugee
 
TalB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 7,537
Likes (Received): 78

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/14/ny...l?ref=nyregion
Agency Sued Over Death of Firefighter at Tower

By ANEMONA HARTOCOLLIS
Published: February 14, 2008

The sister of one of the two firefighters killed in August fighting a fire at the former Deutsche Bank building sued the government agency that owns the building and several contractors on Wednesday, charging they knowingly created dangerous conditions that led to her brother’s death.

The sister, Barbara Beddia Crocco, contends in the suit that her brother, Robert Beddia, 53, died because of conditions caused during the dismantling of the building, including piles of combustible debris, dismantled fire connections, compromised stairwell walls and barricaded exits.

The lawsuit says the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, which owned the building, and several private companies knew of the potentially fatal conditions before the fire.

But in a striking omission, Ms. Crocco did not sue New York City or the city’s Fire Department, even though city officials relieved three senior fire officers of their posts about 10 days after the Aug. 18 fire. Aryeh Portnoy, a lawyer for Ms. Crocco, said his client had not ruled out suing the Fire Department, “at the right time.”

“Tragically,” according to the papers filed in State Supreme Court in Manhattan, “the conditions created by the defendants were too much for Beddia to withstand, and he was killed by toxic smoke, unable to escape because of the stairwell barricades erected by the defendants.”

Mr. Portnoy said that the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation and the contractors at the site “knowingly created those conditions.” He added, “They had a responsibility to let the firefighters know, and they failed to do that.”

Warner Johnston, a spokesman for the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, declined comment on Wednesday.

The suit seeks unspecified punitive and compensatory damages. Mr. Beddia and a second firefighter, Joseph Graffagnino, 33, died when a broken standpipe in the basement could not deliver water to the fire, which fire marshals said was probably started by a cigarette. At a news conference in August, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said three senior fire officials had been stripped of their command during an investigation into the fatal fire.

The mayor said the local firehouse had failed to conduct any required inspections of the building, which was on the edge of ground zero, since 2006.

John C. Meringolo, a lawyer representing the family of Mr. Graffagnino, said on Wednesday that he intends to file suit as well.
__________________
I respected your views, so I expect you do to the same.
TalB no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 05:11 AM   #104
Dallasbrink
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Dallas/Amarillo TEXAS
Posts: 1,105
Likes (Received): 38

this is a frivolous law suite, since when are your basic civilians masters of building design? I understand that she is mad, but he died on the job, doing a job he know he could die from, and she needs to be at peace with that. If she wins, people will start sueing everyone, the government for putting there kids in a dangerous environment, so on and so on. Soon the owners of these buildings would rather have there towers burn down then let another fire fighter die because of the pointless law suits.
Dallasbrink no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 05:33 AM   #105
Ebola
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,658
Likes (Received): 94

5WTC is being designed again so I think it will be safe to expect a totaly new tower for WTC Tower 5's plot @ 130 Liberty Street.
Ebola no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 06:02 AM   #106
Msradell
Always looking up
 
Msradell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 1,772
Likes (Received): 209

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallasbrink View Post
this is a frivolous law suite, since when are your basic civilians masters of building design? I understand that she is mad, but he died on the job, doing a job he know he could die from, and she needs to be at peace with that. If she wins, people will start sueing everyone, the government for putting there kids in a dangerous environment, so on and so on. Soon the owners of these buildings would rather have there towers burn down then let another fire fighter die because of the pointless law suits.
While I agree many lawsuits are frivolous, this one isn't. Yes, the firefighter died doing his job but the only reason he died was because the demolition contractors didn't do what they were supposed to. If they had provided the operational standpipe system they were supposed to the firefighters would not have died! Firefighting is a dangerous profession but as long as codes are followed by contractors and designers the risks are minimized. In this case the contractors DID NOT do what they were supposed to. They need to get sued and should lose!
__________________
"Written using Dragon Naturally Speaking"
I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
Msradell no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 01:55 PM   #107
chjbolton
chjbolton
 
chjbolton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles, London, Paris, Munich
Posts: 797
Likes (Received): 75

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebola View Post
5WTC is being designed again so I think it will be safe to expect a totaly new tower for WTC Tower 5's plot @ 130 Liberty Street.

Good! It wasn't attrocious, but still... They needed to flush that design down the toilet... ARF ARF ARF!!!

I'm sorry but that was too tempting...
__________________
B O L T O N
chjbolton no está en línea  
Old February 15th, 2008, 10:15 PM   #108
TalB
Refugee
 
TalB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 7,537
Likes (Received): 78

Quote:
Originally Posted by Msradell View Post
While I agree many lawsuits are frivolous, this one isn't. Yes, the firefighter died doing his job but the only reason he died was because the demolition contractors didn't do what they were supposed to. If they had provided the operational standpipe system they were supposed to the firefighters would not have died! Firefighting is a dangerous profession but as long as codes are followed by contractors and designers the risks are minimized. In this case the contractors DID NOT do what they were supposed to. They need to get sued and should lose!
The fact that the LMDC cut corners on the demolition is the main reason they should be sued on this.
__________________
I respected your views, so I expect you do to the same.
TalB no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2008, 06:35 AM   #109
TalB
Refugee
 
TalB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 7,537
Likes (Received): 78

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/ny...l?ref=nyregion
Bank Tower Contractors Accused of 44 Violations

By WILLIAM K. RASHBAUM and CHARLES V. BAGLI
Published: February 20, 2008


On Sept. 11, 2001, the former Deutsche Bank building at 130 Liberty Street in Lower Manhattan, was damaged by pieces of the World Trade Center. The building, seen here on July 17, is being dismantled. The plywood-enclosed area at the top of the building was in the process of undergoing abatement for asbestos and other hazardous contaminants.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



After abatement is completed, each floor of the building looks like this. The dismantling process represents the first complete removal of a building so large and so badly contaminated. Excessive levels of seven hazardous substances, including asbestos, dioxin, lead and chromium were measured in the building.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



Where windows were removed, plywood was inserted in place of glass.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



A mechanical excavator worked to break apart one of the building's concrete floors. Water was sprayed to hold down dust. The workers can dismantle one floor about every four days.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



Once the concrete slab and metal decking are removed, what remains is a steel skeleton of each floor.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



Steel beams that framed the horizontal structure of the building were cut away with torches.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



As more and more beams and columns are removed, what was once an enclosed building opens up to the sky.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



An internal staircase, which served as a fire exit, was one of the last remaining structures on the 27th floor.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



Once the interior stairs are removed, workers must reach the upper floors using these external stairways, which are built into scaffolding.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



A welder made a final cut to a beam, freeing up the last exterior bay remaining on the 27th floor.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



Two skid steer loaders pulled down the bay, which was already cut at the base of each column.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



As the loaders roared into reverse, the cables became taut and the bay began to topple. There was still enough resistance, however, that the front wheels of the loader on the right reared slightly into the air.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



Within seconds, the whole bay had toppled, landing on the floor slab with a large jolt.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



The same compact loader that pulled the wall down was used to cart away debris for removal by crane.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



A large container filled with debris, seen at left, was hoisted from the roof.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



The container was lowered to a staging area on the south side of Liberty Street.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times



An crane waited to unload the container.

Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times


Federal safety regulators have accused the contractors who were taking down the former Deutsche Bank tower in the summer of indifference or intentional disregard for dangerous conditions that led to a fatal fire there, and of a host of other serious safety violations, officials said on Tuesday.

The regulators cited the project’s general contractor, Bovis Lend Lease, an international construction management company, and its former subcontractor, the John Galt Corporation, for 44 safety violations, and proposed fining them nearly half a million dollars.

Most of the violations, cited by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration as a result of an inspection it began after the Aug. 18 fire, were classified as serious, and five were listed as willful, the agency’s most severe category.

OSHA focused on fire-related hazards, including a missing section of standpipe that delayed the flow of water to firefighters, and insufficient water supply and water pressure. The blaze killed two firefighters inside the tower, which was being taken apart after being extensively damaged on 9/11.

OSHA also cited the companies for hazards like blocked and unmarked exits, a lack of fire extinguishers, and allowing smoking — which fire investigators have said was the likely cause of the blaze. The contractors exposed workers “to death or serious injury from falls, falling objects, electrocution and the inability to exit the tower swiftly and safely” in the event of a fire, the agency said.

“Employers must adhere to safety and health standards, and prepare completely and effectively for workplace emergencies,” said Richard Mendelson, OSHA’s area director in Manhattan, who oversaw the investigation.

“Failure to do so can — and, in this case, did — cost lives,” he said.

Bovis fired the Galt company in the days after the fire. Both Bovis and Galt have filed papers with the agency contesting the citations and, in statements, said that they would vigorously fight the accusations.

The breadth and scope of the accusations provide the most detail to date of the systemic failure of oversight at what is arguably the most regulated demolition and asbestos abatement site in the country.

They also raise questions about the role of an alphabet soup of local, state and federal agencies, from the city’s Buildings and Fire Departments and the federal Environmental Protection Agency to the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, the state authority overseeing the rebuilding effort at ground zero.

Several agencies had inspectors assigned to the site all day, every day — there were four Buildings Department inspectors and a supervisor whose only responsibility was the bank tower — while city officials have said that the Fire Department failed to inspect the building at all, as it was required to do.

“How is it possible that these violations occurred?” said Joel Shufro, executive director of the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health, a nonprofit coalition of unions and health professionals that has long been critical of the project’s contractors and the demolition project. “Clearly, there was a systematic failure of oversight.”

Although OSHA’s findings suggest that the myriad violations occurred under the noses of all those inspectors and other private contractors, including a construction company, URS, hired by the development corporation to oversee the job, the safety agency regulates only private contractors.

The office of the Manhattan district attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, however, is conducting a broad criminal investigation into the deaths and the entire project, which was mired in delays, multimillion-dollar cost overruns and regulatory red tape long before the fire halted the deconstruction of the tower. The criminal inquiry is focused in part on failures by the city, including the Fire and the Buildings Departments, and prosecutors in Mr. Morgenthau’s office have begun presenting evidence to a grand jury.

They are also examining how the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation and Bovis selected Galt, a company that had never before performed such work. City investigators had cautioned development officials against hiring Galt; the company was an arranged marriage of sorts between a scaffolding company with no demolition experience and executives from a company called Safeway Environmental, which city officials suspected of having ties to organized crime.

The 41-story Deutsche Bank building has stood beside ground zero as an ugly reminder of the Sept. 11 attack and the slow progress of rebuilding Lower Manhattan. The complex project, perhaps the most closely scrutinized undertaking of its kind, involved removing asbestos and other potentially toxic materials from the tower and tearing it down floor by floor. The deconstruction work had torn down the building to its 26th floor when the fire suspended the project.

The fire, which occurred at the end of a workday on the 14th floor, left Firefighters Robert Beddia, 53, and Joseph Graffagnino, 33, dead, apparently trapped by stairwells that had been sealed off because of concerns about asbestos contamination.

OSHA cited the two contractors for a total of $464,500 in proposed fines. It listed 3 willful and 22 serious violations by Galt, carrying fines of $271,500, and 2 willful and 17 serious violations by Bovis, with $193,000 in fines. The contractors, which were formally served with the citations on Friday, have 15 days from then to request an informal conference or fight the allegations before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

According to the OSHA citations, which covered the four-day period before the fire, Bovis willfully failed to inspect the building’s standpipe and to maintain it in operating condition and willfully failed to ensure there was an adequate water supply for firefighters to operate their equipment.

OSHA said the other willful violations included Galt’s failure to enforce no-smoking regulations, and the blockage of access to the building’s stairwells by both Galt and Bovis.

The agency defines a willful violation as one committed “with plain indifference to or intentional disregard for employee safety and health.” A serious citation, according to the agency, is one in which “death or serious physical harm is likely to result from a hazard about which the employer knew or should have known.”

A Bovis spokeswoman, Mary Costello, said in a statement that the company “strongly disagrees” with the citations, and that it would fight the allegations and the proposed penalties.

The company’s statement, noting that the deconstruction of the former bank tower at 130 Liberty Street was one of the most complex and highly regulated asbestos abatement and demolition projects ever undertaken in the city, said that work before the fire “was proceeding under an approved and closely monitored” plan.

It also said that Bovis had worked with city, state and federal regulators since the fire in planning for the resumption of work, and had developed a revised health and safety plan for the rest of the project, with a new subcontractor, LVI Environmental Services.

But the project was nearly derailed late last year by a dispute in which the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation threatened to fire Bovis. They eventually worked out an agreement to proceed.

Galt, in a statement, rejected the accusations and vowed to defend itself. The company contended that the government agencies overseeing the site often issued conflicting directives that resulted in “massive slowdowns and cost overruns.”

“Every detail of the work was scrutinized, criticized and finally approved before it could be done," the statement said. "It is inconceivable that these agencies, including OSHA, whose trained inspectors were present at the site on a daily basis, could not detect, or were oblivious to the alleged ‘serious and willful’ violations that supposedly existed prior to the fire."

The statement said that if government regulators, including OSHA, failed to discover the alleged violations before the fire, they should be the ones charged with failing to do their duty.

Earlier this month, the Environmental Protection Agency approved the state’s revised plan for the decontamination and demolition of the tower’s remaining 26 floors, allowing work to resume for the first time since the August fire. The development corporation expects the job to be completed by the end of the year.
__________________
I respected your views, so I expect you do to the same.
TalB no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2008, 01:07 PM   #110
LeMoN-SK
Regular Fool
 
LeMoN-SK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bratislava
Posts: 2,851
Likes (Received): 81

I hope the safety conditions there will improve...

Well-made documentation of the dismantling process though...
LeMoN-SK no está en línea  
Old February 21st, 2008, 10:26 PM   #111
TalB
Refugee
 
TalB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 7,537
Likes (Received): 78

It just shows what happens when you hire a non-union company just to save time and money.
__________________
I respected your views, so I expect you do to the same.
TalB no está en línea  
Old February 24th, 2008, 11:46 PM   #112
Highcliff
Fake democracy
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: São Paulo
Posts: 7,384
Likes (Received): 5011

Nice...
Highcliff no está en línea  
Old March 18th, 2008, 10:00 PM   #113
TalB
Refugee
 
TalB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 7,537
Likes (Received): 78

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03182008...ino_102500.htm
DEAL'S DOWNTOWN DOMINO

JPMORGAN'S MOVE MAY SEAL FATE OF GROUND ZERO TOWER


NOT NEEDED: JPMorgan's design for offices and trading floor may never be built.

March 18, 2008 -- BANKING giant JPMor gan Chase said yesterday that it will probably move its investment-banking unit into Bear Stearns' headquarters at 383 Madison Ave. - a step that landlords and brokers said makes it unlikely that JPMorgan will go ahead with plans for a new office tower near Ground Zero.

Meanwhile, real estate players trembled over the leasing-market fallout of a merger between two Wall Street firms with more than 11 million square-feet between them in Manhattan and Brooklyn, a number certain to be pruned significantly after the inevitable staff layoffs.

But it was the fate of JPMorgan's plan for a new, 42-story tower to house 7,000 high-earning employees downtown, most of who would move from Midtown, that had builders and brokers buzzing yesterday.

JPMorgan Chase spokesman Joe Evangelisti told us, "We would intend to move our investment bankers into the Bear Stearns building" on Madison once JPMorgan completes its chump-change purchase of Bear Stearns for $236 million. The 383 Madison tower alone is valued at around $1.2 billion.

Asked about the Ground Zero site, called 5 World Trade Center, Evangelisti said only, "We are leaving our options open downtown. It could be a very valuable opportunity for us."

That was a far cry from what JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said last June, when he termed the project "critical to our firm's long-term future," and cited pride in "taking a leadership role in supporting lower Manhattan and helping to revitalize the World Trade Center area."

Since the new tower was supposed to house JPMorgan's investment banking unit, it was unclear what use the firm would have for the building after swallowing Bear Stearns.

Port Authority spokesman Stephen Sigmund said, "We have every expectation they'll continue their commitment" to 5 WTC.

JPMorgan Chase is supposed to pay the PA $300 million to lease the land for its "beer-belly" tower, so dubbed because of a bulge in its middle floors to accommodate 56,000 square-foot trading floors.

But no lease has yet been signed.

The PA is still waiting for the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. to clear the land at 130 Liberty St., site of the ruined hulk of the former Deutsche Bank building.

Under a term sheet signed last year, the PA must turn the site over to JPMorgan Chase by September, although the deadline could be pushed back six months beyond that.

But last summer's fatal fire at 130 Liberty St. and endless delays in completing demolition have left the actual takedown timing uncertain.

A downtown source said JPMorgan Chase "has gotten increasingly antsy" over the uncertainty in knowing when it can start on a skyscraper that will cost over $1 billion to construct - particularly as inflation is driving the cost higher every month it's delayed.

Real estate insiders, most of who do business with both JPMorgan and/or Bear Stearns, did not want to speak for the record. But all expressed skepticism JPMorgan would proceed downtown.

One prominent executive said, "Jamie Dimon is the smartest guy on the planet. The Bear Stearns building is right next door to JPMorgan's Midtown campus. It's less than 10 years old and has totally adequate trading floors. The JPMorgan people have coveted it for years."

If JPMorgan Chase does back off the 5 WTC plan, it will be a psychological blow, although not necessarily an economic one, to lower Manhattan.

The new tower has been cited as a crucial vote of confidence for downtown by LMDC Chairman Avi Schick, Port Authority chiefs Anthony Coscia and Anthony Shorris and former first deputy mayor Dan Doctoroff, among many others.

But Goldman Sachs is completing an even larger new tower in Battery Park City. And a change of heart by JPMorgan wouldn't necessarily be the worst thing for the Port Authority.

"If I were them, I wouldn't be worried," said Dan Fasulo of research firm Real Capital Analytics. "I think a hotel or mixed-use project is actually the highest and best use of that site."

Downtown Alliance President Liz Berger said, "It's simply too early to tell" what JPMorgan Chase will do.

"But the truth is that while we'd like JPMorgan to build, we now have a diversified economy downtown. If they don't go ahead, it would be a loss, but not a defin ing one."

Beyond the question of a new downtown tower is the issue of how badly the absorption of Bear Stearns would hurt the overall office market.

JPMorgan currently has at least 7 million square feet of office space in Manhattan, much of it concentrated in a "campus" at 245, 270 and 277 and 345 Park Ave. Bear Stearns has about 1.5 million feet in Manhattan, some of which it was already planning to shed before the current crisis.

Leasing brokers cautioned it was too early to worry about space being dumped on the market - but every one of the usually talkative dealmakers declined to be quoted.
__________________
I respected your views, so I expect you do to the same.
TalB no está en línea  
Old March 18th, 2008, 11:22 PM   #114
TroyBoy
Registered User
 
TroyBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 778
Likes (Received): 15

I concluded it would look better if it didnt go back to being skinnier. If it insted kept the bulge.
__________________
OMG!!! ACH NEIN!!! DER ERLKONIG KOMMET
I GET HIGH OFF OF BEING HIGH
TroyBoy no está en línea  
Old March 21st, 2008, 10:03 PM   #115
TalB
Refugee
 
TalB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 7,537
Likes (Received): 78

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03212008..._it_102865.htm
CHASE TO BUILD AND 'BEAR' IT

OKS WTC PLAN DESPITE BANK BUY

By TOM TOPOUSIS

March 21, 2008 -- JPMorgan Chase will move ahead with building a tower at the World Trade Center, even though its plan to relocate its investment-banking headquarters to Ground Zero was scuttled by the acquisition of Bear Stearns earlier this week, The Post has learned.

"We are exploring other alternatives there and believe we can use it," JPMorgan Chase spokesman Joseph Evangelisti said of the World Trade Center site, where bank officials struck an agreement with the Port Authority to build Tower 5.

"We are going to utilize the agreement," Evangelisti said.

JPMorgan's intent to build at the World Trade Center was cast in doubt earlier this week when the bank acquired Bear Stearns for the rock-bottom price of $236 million. The deal includes Bear Stearns' tower and trading floors on Madison Avenue at 47th Street.

Evangelisti said JPMorgan will move its investment-banking headquarters to the Bear Stearns building but will develop the World Trade Center site for another purpose.

Sources familiar with the talks about Tower 5 said it will likely not include large trading floors that were supposed to jut out from the upper floors of the structure and that had been derided as a "beer belly."

In a bid to keep the bank at the World Trade Center site, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, whose district includes lower Manhattan, spoke with senior JPMorgan officials earlier this week and was told the company would develop the site.

"We have every expectation that they will be there, but the design of the building may change," said Silver spokesman Dan Weiler.

JPMorgan and the PA agreed last June to a deal that would allow the bank to build a 1.3 million-square-foot tower in exchange for a 92-year lease worth roughly $300 million to the agency, which owns the World Trade Center.

"The company is giving every indication of its continued interest and we look forward to JP Morgan playing an important role in rebuilding the World Trade Center," PA spokeswoman Candace McAdams said yesterday.

The site is now the location of the old Deutsche Bank building, which has been vacant since the 9/11 terror attacks. The building is expected to be decontaminated and removed by the end of this year.

[email protected]
__________________
I respected your views, so I expect you do to the same.
TalB no está en línea  
Old March 21st, 2008, 10:47 PM   #116
jimbo
Registered User
 
jimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Leeds/London
Posts: 4,673
Likes (Received): 6

not going down the toilet then? There's so much going on with towers 1-4, plus the Church Street tower and Beekman Street, the loss of this (even temporarily) wouldn't be a huge issue, but I'm sure it something will go ahead on here at some point in the future.
jimbo no está en línea  
Old March 22nd, 2008, 07:03 AM   #117
philvia
Registered User
 
philvia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Nyc
Posts: 1,022
Likes (Received): 33

Quote:
Originally Posted by TalB View Post
Sources familiar with the talks about Tower 5 said it will likely not include large trading floors that were supposed to jut out from the upper floors of the structure and that had been derided as a "beer belly."
i liked the "beer belly"
all i imagine being built there is a boring box. which then i would prefer nothing being built there for now so that we could save the plot for a better building later.
philvia no está en línea  
Old March 22nd, 2008, 11:46 PM   #118
TalB
Refugee
 
TalB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Pleasantville, NY
Posts: 7,537
Likes (Received): 78

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
not going down the toilet then? There's so much going on with towers 1-4, plus the Church Street tower and Beekman Street, the loss of this (even temporarily) wouldn't be a huge issue, but I'm sure it something will go ahead on here at some point in the future.
I agree that this plan should be flushed down along with the rest of the official plan for the WTC site.
__________________
I respected your views, so I expect you do to the same.
TalB no está en línea  
Old April 11th, 2008, 07:40 AM   #119
Jim856796
Registered User
 
Jim856796's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Citizen of the World
Posts: 8,944
Likes (Received): 844

I wanted this stupid building to have 57 floors instead of just 42. It's still gonna be one screwed-up tower
__________________
I honestly think all development projects must be sustainable and futureproof.

You support the good projects... and oppose the bad.
Jim856796 no está en línea  
Old April 12th, 2008, 01:04 AM   #120
Ebola
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,658
Likes (Received): 94

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim856796 View Post
I wanted this stupid building to have 57 floors instead of just 42. It's still gonna be one screwed-up tower
It will not have 42 floors. JP Morgan is going to make a skinny tower for the plot. The design is being changed. It was never supposed to have 57 floors since that number was from the one of the first masterplans, which is ditched.

The redesigned 5WTC may have 30 floors; it may have 60 floors.
I'm hoping it's tall, and it seems likely since it will be "skinny;" a nice crown and/or spire would be nice too. I'm hoping for something like the concept design for 99 Church Street. Who cares about floor count in the first place if there's height and building mass? This is supposed to be one of the smallest towers of the WTC anyway.

How can anyone be so mad if it's at least 520 feet tall and has at least 40 floors? That means it's one floor taller than the old 130 Liberty Street and one meter taller than the old 130 Liberty Street. I'm expecting at least 200 meters and 40-plus floors, but it could be much more. Whatever JP Morgan wants is what they get, and they ain't lacking money. I think they might use it for a little, then sell it to make a huge profit.

Last edited by Ebola; April 12th, 2008 at 01:12 AM.
Ebola no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Tags
world trade center

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 10:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu