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 May 28th, 2014, 09:26 PM   #4021
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

It doesn't help when the PA has idiots like Lipper screwing things up... the PA will most assuredly not lose money in the long run if the damn WTC3 gets built out. It's NOT having something there that the PA should worry about... hopefully Silverstein will put in a little bit more so the PA can save face and just get out of the way and let it get built.
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 28th, 2014, 09:43 PM   #4022
weidncol
WTC Enthusiast/Researcher
 
weidncol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,098
Likes (Received): 4623

So other things are being worked out, or is it just completely screwed now?
__________________
#Save2WTC
weidncol no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 09:46 PM   #4023
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,482

What an embarrasment for NY.
ThatOneGuy está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 09:53 PM   #4024
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,514
Likes (Received): 22509

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
What an embarrasment for NY.
how is it an embarrassment for the city? it might be a setback for Silverstein, but other projects are doing very well in the rest of NYC.
__________________

baseball1992 liked this post
Hudson11 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 10:04 PM   #4025
Ghostface79
Registered User
 
Ghostface79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,536
Likes (Received): 4604

It sure is an annoying process but there's nothing there that says that the tower won't be moving forward. In fact even the biggest detractor at the PA wants this tower built with some help from the PA but under different terms, and if you read the whole article seems like those other options are being worked on. I have very little doubt that the tower will be moving forward cause the PA stands to lose too much by it being on hold.
The more I read about it the more I don't see the Lipper's position as unreasonable, he's ok with the PA providing a portion of the financing provided it's less exposed to any kind of risk, I think it's now up to Sliverstein to get the deal done. Quite frankly he's the one looking a bit unreasonable right now, if he wants the tower to rise, work with the PA, get a bit more private financing or put more of your own money on the table (which he must have considering he's pursuing other opportunities around the city) and let's move on.
Chop Chop now, it's crunch time!
__________________

baseball1992 liked this post

Last edited by Ghostface79; May 28th, 2014 at 11:18 PM.
Ghostface79 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 10:18 PM   #4026
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: California to Barcelona
Posts: 4,054
Likes (Received): 1863

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
What an embarrasment for NY.

For NY? No. For the PA? Yes absolutely.

They will work something out though, it's just another bump in the road.

A more positive excerpt:

Quote:
Port Authority vice chairman Scott Rechler, who is also the head of development firm RXR Realty, said that he had a “very high degree of confidence” that the Port and Silverstein Properties could put together a structure that would allow Silverstein to build the tower and bring its anchor tenant GroupM to Lower Manhattan.

“There have been a lot of zigs and zags but ultimately we have been successful,” said Rechler, who commended the developer for “meeting the hurdles that have been put in front of them.”

Silverstein said in a statement that “having agreed to the requests conveyed by Port Authority leadership, we are surprised that the discussions did not yield a successful resolution. We remain committed to working with the Port Authority to reach an agreement that accomplishes our shared mission of building 3 WTC.”
__________________

A.J.B 22, citybooster liked this post
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 10:29 PM   #4027
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

I would love for GroupM jump to the Yards. That would be awesome for the Hudson Spire.
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 10:51 PM   #4028
LastConformist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 195
Likes (Received): 119

This is a victory for sanity in the Port Authority. It would have been a disastrous embarassment if they had approved giving away yet another sweetheart deal to a private developer for literally no reason whatsoever. The idiots are the ones who were pushing for the guarantee, not the people opposed to it.

And suddenly it's entirely feasible to get private backing for the project again, when a few months ago when Larry Silverstein "needed" handouts it was downright impossible, poor woeful soul. Let me roll my eyes harder. Corporate welfare at its most vile and corrupt.

The project will go forward as quickly as it would have otherwise or faster, now that Silverstein knows he can't sabotage the process and beg for money from the Port Authority every few months to get an even sweeter deal each time.
__________________

MarshallKnight, Tower Dude liked this post
LastConformist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 11:02 PM   #4029
baseball1992
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 279
Likes (Received): 262

Quote:
Originally Posted by LastConformist View Post
This is a victory for sanity in the Port Authority. It would have been a disastrous embarassment if they had approved giving away yet another sweetheart deal to a private developer for literally no reason whatsoever. The idiots are the ones who were pushing for the guarantee, not the people opposed to it.

And suddenly it's entirely feasible to get private backing for the project again, when a few months ago when Larry Silverstein "needed" handouts it was downright impossible, poor woeful soul. Let me roll my eyes harder. Corporate welfare at its most vile and corrupt.

The project will go forward as quickly as it would have otherwise or faster, now that Silverstein knows he can't sabotage the process and beg for money from the Port Authority every few months to get an even sweeter deal each time.
I have a feeling this decision is all about the PA calling out Larry's bluff. He is trying to milk as much money from them as possible
baseball1992 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 11:15 PM   #4030
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

Both sides have played games here but Silverstein has the motivation to get this up before he dies. The PA is worse than Silverstein... wasting billions on a grand monument of a station, a frigging unnecessary museum that sells cheap tacky crap to the public for mementos.... let's hope all this blustering is just that and they really can come to a mutually agreeable deal because if it isn't, it's going to be a huge embarrassment to the PA and to Governor Cuomo, who points out what a doer he is then lets this develop into a mess.
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 11:17 PM   #4031
citybooster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 943
Likes (Received): 509

It's the guarantee they'll back him up if it's not profitable..no extra money will likely have to be paid and in the long run building WTC would be far more beneficial to the PA than just letting it stand as a stub.
citybooster no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 11:24 PM   #4032
LastConformist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 195
Likes (Received): 119

Quote:
Originally Posted by citybooster View Post
Both sides have played games here but Silverstein has the motivation to get this up before he dies. The PA is worse than Silverstein... wasting billions on a grand monument of a station, a frigging unnecessary museum that sells cheap tacky crap to the public for mementos.... let's hope all this blustering is just that and they really can come to a mutually agreeable deal because if it isn't, it's going to be a huge embarrassment to the PA and to Governor Cuomo, who points out what a doer he is then lets this develop into a mess.
You're a fool if you think Silverstein cares about a "legacy". He just cares about money.

The Museum was not the Port Authority's fault and was built and paid for primarily by a private foundation. Also, you can't expect a new museum without a real endowment to get by without selling a bunch of crap. I think a museum was totally inappropriate (and there just isn't enough content for a real museum anyway), but you can't blame the PA--that's squarely on political figures like George Pataki, Rudy Giuliani, Chuck Schumer and George Bush who spent years grandstanding for a museum.

The transit center is not nearly as expensive as reported. The $4 billion figure includes *all* foundation and structure costs for the entire site, excluding only the museum and the various above-ground buildings other than the transit building. Yes, it was overpriced, but not nearly as much as is often reported. Also, they will make their money back--Westfield is paying far more in rent to run the new mall than the annual cost of servicing the debt the Port Authority took on to build it. The transit hub is a huge money-maker for the Port Authority.

It's the towers that are money-losers. The Port Authority will lose tens of millions annually on 1WTC going forward, with little prospect of breaking even for at least a decade. Silverstein is somewhat less saddled by excessive security costs, etc. because his buildings aren't the tallest one (so the NYPD and politicians interfered less, plus they have less power over the Silverstein buildings), but they still don't have great prospects. Small wonder the Port Authority is uninterested in throwing even more money into the pit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by citybooster View Post
It's the guarantee they'll back him up if it's not profitable..no extra money will likely have to be paid and in the long run building WTC would be far more beneficial to the PA than just letting it stand as a stub.


If a guarantee were free, banks would be falling all over themselves to give Larry Silverstein a big fat guarantee. As a practical matter, there is a very real chance that this project will not make money and have serious trouble servicing its debt. It's not certain, but it's a big risk, and taking on risks is expensive. 4WTC and 1WTC are already struggling to sign full rosters of tenants, and the commercial real estate market is not getting stronger in lower Manhattan. That guarantee will be expensive in the private markets; the Port Authority would be effectively paying Silverstein the money it will now cost him to go buy a guarantee from a bank.

Or would you like to be the one telling us ten years from now how providing the guarantee was free when the development goes bankrupt, the Port Authority owes $1 billion and Larry Silverstein owes nothing? It's precisely this gross financial ignorance that leads political figures to make terrible decisions for their cities in providing huge giveaways and corporate welfare to projects like 3WTC and giant football stadiums.
__________________

citybooster liked this post

Last edited by LastConformist; May 28th, 2014 at 11:34 PM.
LastConformist no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 11:36 PM   #4033
iiConTr0v3rSYx
Brooklyn Boy
 
iiConTr0v3rSYx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 1,342
Likes (Received): 2913

Sounds like you have a personal vendetta again Silverstein. Pathetic.

And it looks like I get to keep my account.
__________________
Want to take a magical aerial tour of NY?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBPrNUzk1BA

Check this guy out for Monthly updates on the WTC.
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc3yuNST1YhPioYxJtqJWtQ

Vertical_Gotham liked this post
iiConTr0v3rSYx no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 11:42 PM   #4034
Vertical_Gotham
Registered User
 
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,437
Likes (Received): 6488

And if there is something positive with all this...it's that you get to keep it. I was oh boy!! I was worried about ya. It's like you were willing to give up your right hand and I don't want to see that.



I kid I kid. jk
__________________
Vertical_Gotham no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2014, 11:56 PM   #4035
Dale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 9,177
Likes (Received): 5505

But we do have to worship Silverstein, right ?
Dale no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2014, 12:19 AM   #4036
Enigmatism415
Registered User
 
Enigmatism415's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 282
Likes (Received): 169

Quote:
Originally Posted by LastConformist View Post
for literally no reason whatsoever.
What an unapologetically untenable assertion.

The supporters of this proposal are exercising what is known as foresight. They rightfully anticipate that this tower will make money for the Port Authority, because GroupM signed a lease to that effect. Maintaining 3WTC as a stub is tantamount to suicide for the attractiveness of the complex as a whole, which is unacceptable considering how much money has been poured into the PATH station and other infrastructure. This tower does not exist in a vacuum! Its state of completion affects the entire site, and even the entire neighborhood to an extent. It's all interconnected. What's good for 3WTC is also good for everything around it, and vice versa; the proposal's proponents understand this delicate balance. The building itself may belong to Silverstein, but it's also a part of our home here in FiDi, which has spent over a decade rebuilding itself.

It's game over for the WTC complex if July rolls around and the financing isn't secured; GroupM will leave, the structure will become a time capsule, and the entire process will revert to square one, but this time marked with a scar of embarrassment that will damn any new interest in reviving the project for years to come. It would also crush any reasonable hope of building 2WTC within the next few decades.

Since we've only about a month left 'til the shit hits the fan, something's gotta give. Larry needs to excavate his pockets down to the bedrock, perhaps offer a 25% share in the tower's revenue to the Port Authority (increased from 15%) until it adds up to $1.2 billion, or find an additional tenant very quickly so that he can secure a loan elsewhere. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and GroupM's lease is the only momentum this tower has going for it as of yet. It's now on Larry to take a fiscal bullet for the sake of his legacy (yes, this project is his legacy project, and it does truly matter to him, especially at his age).

What can we here do? Maybe it's time to write some letters...
__________________

Eric Offereins, citybooster liked this post
Enigmatism415 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2014, 12:36 AM   #4037
spectre000
Moderator
 
spectre000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 7,904
Likes (Received): 5170

I don't understand the hate on Silverstein. I don't worship him, but I respect what he's trying to accomplish in rebuilding the WTC site.

If 3WTC were to "fail" shortly after its completion, Silverstein loses big. He loses the hundreds of millions of dollars he would've put into having it built and his company loses ownership of it as well.

I think Silverstein is entitled to make as much money on his WTC buildings as he's able to. If a building fails, he loses it. Office buildings work just like SFH mortgages. You fall behind on the bills, and the bank forecloses. You lose everything.

While true he's asking for a big subsidy. He's putting hundreds of millions into this building. If it succeeds, he wins big. If it fails, he loses it all.

And as long as it remains just a stub of a building, neither the PA or Silverstein gain anything.
__________________

Eric Offereins, citybooster liked this post
spectre000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2014, 12:48 AM   #4038
weidncol
WTC Enthusiast/Researcher
 
weidncol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 2,098
Likes (Received): 4623

I don't think the PA is quite realizing just how much of a mistake they are making if they don't help fund this. The tower is sitting on their land, which does them no good if it's just a stump. GroupM backing out would affect Tower 1 as well in that future tenants would hear about what happened with Tower 3 and not want to invest their company earnings by moving to the WTC site. Leaving Tower 3 as a stump does absolutely no good to the site as a whole, and I don't think the PA is seeing the reasoning behind any of this. All they care about is infrastructure and transportation, which is a joke because they are forking out a huge amount for the Transit Hub. In order for that to serve up to it's full value, everything must be built out completely on the site.
__________________
#Save2WTC

citybooster liked this post
weidncol no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2014, 12:49 AM   #4039
ThatOneGuy
Psst! Check my signature!
 
ThatOneGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto - Bucharest - Freeport
Posts: 21,482

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson11 View Post
how is it an embarrassment for the city? it might be a setback for Silverstein, but other projects are doing very well in the rest of NYC.
The fact that it takes so long to build four towers is an embarrasment in itself.
ThatOneGuy está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2014, 12:57 AM   #4040
Hudson11
Stuck on the Cross Bronx
 
Hudson11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 9,514
Likes (Received): 22509

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThatOneGuy View Post
The fact that it takes so long to build four towers is an embarrasment in itself.
the city does not build the towers, nor does it sell the space within them.
Hudson11 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 07:17 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