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 > Supertalls

Supertalls Discussions of projects under construction between 300-599m/1,000-1,999ft tall.
» Proposed Supertalls



Global Announcement

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 12th, 2014, 10:28 PM   #3681
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

I'm almost afraid to be premature with a celebration.... but.. drool!

that's it.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 12th, 2014, 10:30 PM   #3682
DubaiM
Registered User
 
DubaiM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,626
Likes (Received): 4512

Not be too euphoric. Wait and see.
__________________
''There are 360 degrees, so why stick to one?'' - RIP Zaha Hadid
DubaiM no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2014, 10:31 PM   #3683
weidncol
WTC Enthusiast/Researcher
 
weidncol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,098
Likes (Received): 4623

We'll know it's official when the crane boom comes in. I'm still thinking it'll be resuming at least by summer.
__________________
#Save2WTC

Eric Offereins liked this post
weidncol no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2014, 11:05 PM   #3684
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,510
Likes (Received): 22488

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay View Post
1170 to the spires according to the official site and just shy of 1100 to the roof

Official figures have not been released though.
that's correct.
http://www.wtc.com/leasing/leasing-tower-3

Quote:
Designed by Richard Rogers, 3 World Trade Center (175 Greenwich Street) will rise 1,170 ft feet above street level. The 80-story building will include 2.5 million square feet of office space spread across 53 column-free floors and five trading floors.
Hudson11 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2014, 10:52 PM   #3685
wtcforever
higher than 1wtc
 
wtcforever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: St.petersburg,Florida
Posts: 768
Likes (Received): 684

Quote:
Originally Posted by j-biz View Post
Clearly, he's erecting steel. We're going vertical, baby!
hes probably taking pictures, look at the position hes in
__________________
wtcforever liked this post
wtcforever no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2014, 01:23 AM   #3686
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,573
Likes (Received): 28127

Quote:
Originally Posted by j-biz View Post
Clearly, he's erecting steel. We're going vertical, baby!
on his own!
__________________

A.J.B 22 liked this post
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2014, 02:26 AM   #3687
j-biz
rasorio caelum civitatem
 
j-biz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,309
Likes (Received): 2793

If a man can move a mountain, then certainly he can build a skyscraper.
__________________

A.J.B 22 liked this post
j-biz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2014, 07:06 AM   #3688
Ghostface79
Registered User
 
Ghostface79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,536
Likes (Received): 4604

Seems like wednesday will be judgement day.

Developer’s Skyscraper Is Focus of Latest Dispute at Rebuilt Trade Center

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/ny...=nyregion&_r=0
One World Trade Center, the nation’s tallest skyscraper, is nearing completion, as is a $4 billion transit hub and the Sept. 11 museum. The memorial park is finished and a second office tower, built by the developer Larry A. Silverstein, is open, if not occupied.

But the 11-member board of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is sharply divided over whether to double the level of subsidies and support for another Silverstein building, a long-stalled $2.3 billion office tower, at the 16-acre site.

The dispute, which pits one appointee of Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo against another, will come up for a vote Wednesday. This is only the latest fracas involving money, the future of the downtown district, the level of public investments and the symbolic value of closing some of the wounds opened by the terrorist attack.


Proponents, led by Mr. Silverstein and Scott H. Rechler, the authority’s vice chairman, contend that the tower, 3 World Trade Center, would essentially mark the completion of the new trade center and spur the continuing transformation of Lower Manhattan into a vibrant, 24-hour commercial and residential district no longer reliant on the financial industry.

Critics argue that it makes no sense to subsidize another downtown office tower with plenty of vacant space that would compete for tenants with other nearby buildings and the Port Authority’s own, half-empty tower at 1 World Trade Center, one of the world’s most expensive skyscrapers.

Kenneth Lipper, a Port Authority commissioner and an investment banker, said that Mr. Rechler’s proposal to guarantee up to $1.2 billion in construction loans for Mr. Silverstein could hurt the authority’s credit rating and even its budget, which is partly reliant on bridge and tunnel tolls.

“The idea of giving a $1.2 billion subsidy to a private developer at a time when the market downtown is in a state of glut defies the public interest and the economic interest,” said Mr. Lipper, a former New York City deputy mayor. “It would turn a patriotic gesture into a vanity project. And it could jeopardize our mission, which is to improve the transportation system in the region.”

Rebuilding the trade center and Lower Manhattan has been an enormous undertaking, with $20 billion alone coming from the federal government. The Port Authority, a bistate agency focused on transportation, has also invested billions....

.....Under the agreement, the authority, the city and the state agreed to provide Mr. Silverstein with up to $600 million in assistance for 3 World Trade Center if he secured a tenant for at least 400,000 of the 2.5-million-square-foot tower and raised $300 million in cash.

If he failed to meet those conditions, he was to cap the building at about seven stories, until he found a large tenant and private financing. His third tower would wait until there was enough demand to justify construction.

Port Authority commissioners are now at odds over whether to renegotiate the deal with Mr. Silverstein, again.

In late December, Mr. Silverstein met one of the conditions of the current deal. GroupM, an advertising company, agreed to lease 516,000 square feet, or roughly one-fifth of the 72-story tower.

Although rents downtown are generally 20 to 30 percent cheaper than in Midtown, GroupM qualified for special tax breaks at the trade center worth about $75 million. In addition, state and city officials agreed to give GroupM $15 million.

But Mr. Silverstein could not obtain financing for the project. Lenders today usually want 50 percent of the building leased before they are willing to lend money.

Eager to get the building up, Mr. Rechler, the authority’s vice chairman, crafted a proposal with the developers’ advisers at Goldman Sachs: The Port Authority would guarantee a $1.2 billion construction loan — half the cost of the building, and double the previous commitment — for Mr. Silverstein. That essentially promises Mr. Silverstein’s lenders that the authority would pay the loan if he could not. The developer would also have the use of $1.3 billion in tax-exempt bonds, which can be attractive to investors.

In return, Mr. Silverstein would have to put up about $450 million in cash and, unlike the old deal, pay interest and fees to the authority, which would also have to right to foreclose if Mr. Silverstein defaulted on his payments for the $1.2 billion loan.

Mr. Rechler, the chairman of RXR Realty, told commissioners that his proposed deal put the Port Authority in a better financial position. After he develops 3 World Trade Center, Mr. Silverstein will begin paying rent to the authority on the land underneath it, and another developer will be able to compete for the retail elements of the project. It will not, Mr. Rechler said, affect the authority’s budgets.


“We need to build it out,” Mr. Rechler said. “There’s a tenant that would enhance the transformation of Lower Manhattan beyond the financial sector. To let it go would stunt the momentum.”

But Mr. Silverstein’s second tower would be competing for tenants with the authority’s own $3 billion tower, where there is over 1.5 million square feet available, as well as 1 million square feet at the developer’s first tower, 1.5 million square feet at Chase Manhattan Plaza and 2 million square feet at nearby Brookfield Place. The authority has not been able to find a large tenant since 2011, when it signed a lease with Condé Nast Publications.

Mr. Lipper and several other commissioners opposed to the new guarantee say they, too, want to see 3 World Trade Center completed. “It’s not a question of whether to build it,” Mr. Lipper said. “We’re only talking about timing and who’s going to pay for it, the public or the private sector. I want to finance it consistent with our mission, regional transportation.”
__________________

A.J.B 22, spectre000 liked this post

Last edited by Ghostface79; March 17th, 2014 at 07:22 AM.
Ghostface79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2014, 02:01 PM   #3689
weidncol
WTC Enthusiast/Researcher
 
weidncol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,098
Likes (Received): 4623

If they ever want the chance to get more tenant, this needs to get fully built.
__________________
#Save2WTC
weidncol no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2014, 05:04 PM   #3690
j-biz
rasorio caelum civitatem
 
j-biz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,309
Likes (Received): 2793

Quote:
Originally Posted by weidncol View Post
If they ever want the chance to get more tenant, this needs to get fully built.
Obviously I would love to see this tower built, that's why I'm here. But there's no real rationale behind it right now. There are 6M sqf of empty office space in a quarter-mile radius.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostface79 View Post
"And it could jeopardize our mission, which is to improve the transportation system in the region.”
This is the most compelling argument against the deal, IMO. We have a serious transportation issue in NYC that, if actions are not taken, will cripple the region within a decade. How can people work in an office they can't get to? Who wants to rent space in a place that is no longer accessible? The Port Authority needs to do it's job.
__________________

A.J.B 22 liked this post
j-biz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2014, 07:53 PM   #3691
LastConformist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 195
Likes (Received): 119

Quote:
Originally Posted by j-biz View Post
Obviously I would love to see this tower built, that's why I'm here. But there's no real rationale behind it right now. There are 6M sqf of empty office space in a quarter-mile radius.



This is the most compelling argument against the deal, IMO. We have a serious transportation issue in NYC that, if actions are not taken, will cripple the region within a decade. How can people work in an office they can't get to? Who wants to rent space in a place that is no longer accessible? The Port Authority needs to do it's job.
Exactly. The Port Authority should not be offering a private bail-out of Larry Silverstein. Of course, that should come along with opening up the development to other options, to allow hotel or residential space (though it may be too far along in construction to change to residential-workable floor plates), but this project as an office building was always an economically non-viable project borne of pathetic vanity and political considerations.
LastConformist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2014, 10:56 PM   #3692
Eric Offereins
The only way is up
 
Eric Offereins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 68,573
Likes (Received): 28127

Quote:
Originally Posted by j-biz View Post
Obviously I would love to see this tower built, that's why I'm here. But there's no real rationale behind it right now. There are 6M sqf of empty office space in a quarter-mile radius.



This is the most compelling argument against the deal, IMO. We have a serious transportation issue in NYC that, if actions are not taken, will cripple the region within a decade. How can people work in an office they can't get to? Who wants to rent space in a place that is no longer accessible? The Port Authority needs to do it's job.
I agree. The market doesn't want to lend him the money he needs for a reason.
That is why Silverstein turns to the government.
Eric Offereins no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2014, 04:17 AM   #3693
Wbino49
Registered User
 
Wbino49's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: NJ..I know...
Posts: 285
Likes (Received): 246

Someone tell me how wonderful Mr. Silverstein is again?
Privatize the profits, socialize the losses.....
__________________

j-biz, Eric Offereins liked this post
Wbino49 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2014, 04:49 AM   #3694
Shakkur98
Registered User
 
Shakkur98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Columbia, South Carolina
Posts: 293
Likes (Received): 271

So can someone explain this in a simple sentence not a whole essay.
Shakkur98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2014, 06:53 AM   #3695
Innsertnamehere
insertoronto
 
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,948
Likes (Received): 677

There is no market for office space in downtown so they are trying to force the government to take the losses required to make this project viable.
Innsertnamehere no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2014, 07:03 AM   #3696
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

Blocking 3 World Trade Center deal a bad idea:
http://nypost.com/2014/03/17/blockin...al-a-bad-idea/

[IMG]http://****************.wordpress.com/2014/03/worldtradeinset.jpg?w=720&h=480&crop=1[/IMG]

Downtown is Manhattan’s most dramatically resurgent commercial district, home to spectacular new construction and near-frenzied leasing as company after company relocates there from Midtown.

But the hard-earned, charging-rhino momentum could be cut down in its tracks by short-sighted resistance to restructuring a financing agreement between the Port Authority and Larry Silverstein for 3 World Trade Center. The planned 80-story skyscraper has risen to a 7-story “podium” height. Silverstein has already signed major global media company GroupM to a more than half-million-square-foot lease worth $800 million over 20 years.

But in a constricted lending market, he hasn’t yet secured a construction loan for the tower portion of the 2.5 million-square-foot, $2.8 billion project — so the PA and the developer are working out a deal that will make it easier for Silverstein to borrow while simultaneously bring the cash-strapped PA more revenue, both short- and long-term.

Hoping to block the deal — which is to be voted on by the PA board as early as Wednesday — PA commissioner Ken Lipper invoked the dreaded “G”-word.

That of course means “glut,” as in this statement he made to the New York Times on Monday: “The idea of giving a $1.2 billion subsidy to a private developer at a time when the market downtown is in a state of glut defies the public interest and the economic interest.”

Lipper fears a restructured deal with Silverstein might jeopardize the agency’s credit rating. He’s a well-regarded real estate and public-sector professional. There’s nothing wrong with him watching out for the embattled PA’s bottom line.

But it’s impossible to see how the agency could benefit from turning back the clock at the WTC to the go-nowhere years after 9/11. The PA since then has invested a fortune in helping to create a new complex attuned to 21st Century business needs, a strategy that’s already drawn Condé Nast from uptown.

What signal would be sent now by an unfinished, empty, 7-story stump amidst nearly completed 1 and 4 WTC and the Santiago Calatrava-designed Transportation Hub?

PA vice-chairman Scott Rechler — like Lipper, an appointee of Gov. Andrew Cuomo — is also a distinguished real estate pro. And his position that the deal Silverstein wants is a boon to the PA seems more attuned to the realities of the WTC site.

What’s wrong with Lipper’s premise? Just about everything.

For starters, the “subsidy” Silverstein wants isn’t a dime out of the PA’s pocket. The PA has successfully restructured several major WTC deals in the past few years, including with site retail operator Westfield America, and the one it’s considering with Silverstein is as much in its own interests as were the others.

It would replace a previous $600 million “backstop” for Silverstein at 3 WTC — a combination of PA, city and state contributions toward construction and to subsidize interest and operating expenses — with a credit enhancement in the form of a $1.2 billion PA guarantee of the senior portion of a construction loan.

It would not be a gift, but a sensible trade-off for significant concessions by the developer. One concession is increasing the equity he must put in — to $450 million from $300 million.

Also, if the tower isn’t built to its full height, the agency stands to lose a fortune on ground rent to be paid in perpetuity. Sources said Silverstein currently pays only around $5 million a year, but the rent will double when construction begins and rise to $25 million when the project is completed.

Failure to build above the podium would also cost the PA $130.6 million it’s due to collect from retail mall operator Westfield America, which last year bought out the PA’s stake in all of the WTC’s store space. Westfield is obligated to pay “upon delivery” of 3 WTC’s 180,000 square feet of retail — but not if the tower above is in limbo.

As for Lipper’s “glut,” it’s a crock. The downtown leasing market enjoyed a banner 2013. Today’s reasonable 12.2 percent “availability” rate is due mainly to counting leases due to expire in the next 12 months. Actual vacancy is a mere 10.7 percent, according to CBRE.

In the past five years, former Midtown tenants have claimed 7 million square feet downtown. Of last year’s 6 million square feet of leasing, half was accounted for by relocations from uptown. Four new leases of more than 200,000 square feet each were signed in the last quarter of 2013 alone.

The GroupM deal’s the icing on the cake, but it would be a catastrophe for downtown, and for the whole WTC, if the firm can’t move to 3 WTC because it wasn’t built.
In a letter to PA executive director Pat Foye on Monday, Downtown Alliance chairman Robert Douglass and president Jessica Lappin warned that if GroupM can’t move to 3 WTC, “it could discourage potential tenants or brokers from investing in complex and sizable transactions at the site in the future.”

GroupM couldn’t simply switch to 1 WTC (owned by the PA and the Durst Organization) or to Silverstein’s 4 WTC. GroupM chose 3 WTC specifically for its enormous floor plates and infrastructure to support them. If it can’t go there, it will seek out another new tower built to its exacting specifications at Hudson Yards or Manhattan West uptown.

GroupM’s dependence on 3 WTC illustrates how the tower won’t compete with the other two at all, the Times’ assertion to the contrary. Already more than half-leased, 1 WTC will likely be full within a year. And while 4 WTC has yet to land a private-sector tenant, it surely will by the time 3 WTC can be completed nearly four years from now, in late 2017.

Cuomo’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Reps for the PA and for Silverstein declined to comment.
Rechler and Lipper could not be reached.
__________________
-------------------------



Hudson Yards mega development Map: June 2015
http://i.imgur.com/FVrYwpy.jpg
(click again once inside to enlarge the map)
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2014, 07:12 AM   #3697
weidncol
WTC Enthusiast/Researcher
 
weidncol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,098
Likes (Received): 4623

I have a strong feeling they will give the green light Wednesday. Then again, I'm optimistic.
__________________
#Save2WTC

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
weidncol no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2014, 05:36 PM   #3698
StrongIsland
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 717
Likes (Received): 282

They definitely will, how embarrassing if Group M had to back out because they couldn't get their shit together...this tower NEEDS to go up...it will greatly reduce the hole in the skyline and it will make the site basically complete besides the little corner for 2WTC...fingers crossed.
StrongIsland no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2014, 07:24 AM   #3699
ILNY
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 430
Likes (Received): 5302

3.14.14

image hosted on flickr



image hosted on flickr
__________________
ILNY no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2014, 12:14 PM   #3700
oli83
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Munich
Posts: 1,684
Likes (Received): 999

Quote:
Originally Posted by StrongIsland View Post
They definitely will, how embarrassing if Group M had to back out because they couldn't get their shit together...
I agree, but embarrassing for Larry, the PATH is no real estate developer. As much as I want this tower to be built, if I were a New Yorker I would not want to pay higher tolls for bridges etc. because the transportation agency subsidizes skyscrapers owned by a private developer.

I do not understand that Larry does not find another investor if GroupM is willing to occupy 20% of it and with everything around finished (except for 2 WTC), the area will definately get more attractive for companies.
oli83 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
new york, silverstein, supertall, 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 11:44 AM.


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