[NYguy]

:( Any rendering from PA ?

They haven't released any renderings, for obvious reasons, but its basically the same plan they did release renderings for a few years ago.

[NYguy]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05122009/postopinion/editorials/speaking_power_to_jersey_168841.htm

SPEAKING POWER TO JERSEY

POST EDITORIAL
May 12, 2009

Way to go, Shelly Silver.

"Seven years and eight months after the [9/11] attacks," Silver fumed on Friday, "I am fed up with the stalling and exasperated with the current state of the World Trade Center project."

Hear, hear.

The fact that the project has faltered yet again is an infamy.

It is not only New York that is shamed by this; the nation stands humiliated before the world.

A heroic response to Islamic terror? A show of strength and resilience?

Forget that.

The latest?

Developer Larry Silverstein, who holds the lease on the World Trade Center site, is again at swords' points with the Port Authority. He needs the agency's help with financing in a tough credit market.

But the agency -- a tool used expertly by New Jersey to aid that state at New York's expense -- openly admits that it prefers projects like a new cross-Hudson commuter train tunnel to restoring Ground Zero to normalcy.

And with David Paterson having long since evaporated, Silver has stepped up.

For all our disagreements with the Assembly speaker, we'll give Silver this much: He can be tough when it counts.

"There are other things [NJ Gov. Jon] Corzine wants from the Port Authority," Silver says. "We're either going to accommodate each other or stalemate each other."

Now, no one should want a stalemate.

Yet, clearly, the PA has no intention of letting Ground Zero reconstruction go forward on anything but its own terms.

So if it takes Silver shutting down projects that are important to New Jersey, then we say: Shut 'em down.

Sure, talk first. And, happily, Mayor Bloomberg graciously has offered to host negotiations at Gracie Mansion.

Such a conversation might even succeed -- if Silver makes crystal clear that the price of failure would be a stalemated cross-Hudson train tunnel.

Paterson is hopeless.

So, Silver to the rescue.

[NYguy]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05122009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/enter__bloomberg_168813.htm

ENTER, BLOOMBERG
MAYOR JOINING GROUND ZERO FRAY

http://www.nypost.com/img/cols/stevecuozzo.jpg
May 12, 2009

SO Mayor Bloomberg has invited all of Ground Zero's squabbling tribes to Gracie Mansion soon "to find a way to align incentives and keep progress moving," he said.

That's good news, and we're delighted the mayor apparently took to heart The Post's advice on this page back on April 20; our column that day was headlined: "It's Up to Mike -- Ground Zero Rebuild Needs a Rescuer."

We said that in the absence of leadership from Albany, the warring players at the World Trade Center site needed a "boss, referee or honest broker" to mediate the dangerous impasse between Larry Silverstein and the Port Authority -- a role that must fall to Bloomberg.

Thanks to Ground Zero's overcrowded site plan, the logjam threatens not only the office towers the two sides are fighting over, but everything else on the 16-acre site, even the memorial; too much interlocked infrastructure gives each side the ability to thwart the other.

The best news would be for Bloomberg to perform a task that's beyond Gov.-in-name-only Paterson: Namely, to tell New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine and Port Authority chiefs Anthony Coscia and Chris Ward to shut up about scratching two of Silverstein's three planned office towers. Instead, they need to shrink the PA's grandiose, wildly over-budget, useless "World Trade Center Transportation Hub" -- an elephantine PATH terminal for a handful of Jersey commuters.

The PA's threat is merely its latest negotiating ploy against Silverstein, who earlier buffaloed the agency by demanding that it provide "backstop" financing for two of the towers. But all the bickering over the commercial space has served the PA well by diverting attention from the PATH fiasco.

New York Times architectural critic Nicolai Ouroussoff yesterday persuasively dissected the Santiago Calatrava-designed project's "fatal flaw: the striking incongruity between the extravagance of the architecture and the limited purpose it serves." Translation: a $3.2 billion (and counting) white elephant that, thanks to the need to traverse endless underground concourses, would be inconvenient even for the handful of commuters it would serve.

What's more, the project is so big that its engineering requirements get in the way of finishing everything around it.

It might be too much to hope that the PA could be prevailed upon to scale back its signature scheme, even though the agency still has no honest idea how much it would cost or how long it would take to finish. The PA has yet even to bid out the job's major components. It's possible that no contractor will offer to build the famous above-ground "wings" for anything like what the PA can spend.

But it's worth Bloomberg's trying. This is the mayor who took control of the city's public-education system despite howls from unions and their political stooges that he couldn't do it, just as Rudy Giuliani curbed crime against resistance from everywhere; to courageously establish a new agenda and see it through is called leadership.

And if it takes a great leap of courage on the mayor's part to adjust the PA's Ground Zero agenda, so be it. Political courage has been sorely lacking at Ground Zero ever since Gov. George Pataki inflicted the illogical master plan on us -- a stroke that victimized Silverstein and the PA equally.

Last week, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver -- the state's supposed master wheeler-and-dealer, who has been utterly impotent in getting anything done at or near Ground Zero -- called the WTC site's condition an "embarrassment."

How's that for originality? Your turn, Mayor Mike.

[NYguy]

More from "As the World Trade Center Turns"...

http://www.globest.com/news/1408_1408/newyork/178605-1.html?st=rss
Silverstein: 2004 WTC Plan Must Stand

By Cody Lyon
May 12, 2009

Responding to the buzz created by a New York Daily News story Monday that details an "incredible shrinking World Trade Center," Janno Lieber, president of Larry Silverstein’s World Trade Center Properties, says in a statement that the developer is "committed to the plan all stakeholders agreed on in 2004 and reaffirmed in 2006."

But sources familiar with Port Authority goings-on tell GlobeSt.com that the information in the Daily News story has been in the public domain for weeks, if not months. They say that the Port Authority’s position is that Silverstein’s Tower 4 should be built while 2 and 3 shouldn’t move up to skyscraper status until there’s a market to handle the office space Downtown.

For its part, Silverstein’s World Trade Center Properties says via Lieber that fully developing the site called Ground Zero is "essential so that Downtown can re-emerge as an economic powerhouse for New York City." Speaking to the 2006 agreement, Lieber adds that the Port Authority "received more than $2 billion out of the rebuilding fund based on their promise to cooperate in executing that exact vision. Now, with 10,000 construction workers standing ready to get to work, there is absolutely no reason for turning our backs on the promises."

[djvandrake]

I can't say that I'm really all that surprised by this to be honest. (Meaning the push to delay towers 2 and 3). I think it's an uber-dumb idea to do that just because today's market place is considerably softer than what it was when these designs came off the boards. Buildings of these size take years to design, construct, and lease out and if you cancel everything because the markets a bit soft at one time or another then nothing will ever get built.

Some of the most iconic buildings rose during the worst of times.

I will be really, really upset if political wrangling delays towers 2 and 3. I absolutely love them and think they'll be a signature sight for the city and nation. They will be filled, New York is too valuable of an office market for these to go begging.

[NYCLuver]

I'll take the towers over the Transportation Hub anyday.

[NYguy]

I'll take the towers over the Transportation Hub anyday.

Ironically, it's the towers that would at least give some justification for building the expensive train station...

New York Times architectural critic Nicolai Ouroussoff yesterday persuasively dissected the Santiago Calatrava-designed project's "fatal flaw: the striking incongruity between the extravagance of the architecture and the limited purpose it serves." Translation: a $3.2 billion (and counting) white elephant...

[CoolCzech]

So build a conventional station and spend the billions on towers 2 and 3. No Brainer, DUH!

[pattali]

Or build tower 2 & 3 , temporary station is in place, Calatrava's station will be build later. Maybe a less extravagance of the station's architecture...

[NYguy]

So build a conventional station and spend the billions on towers 2 and 3. No Brainer, DUH!

There's already a perfectly working station there now, they don't have to do anything further to it. However, those in charge know that if those billions aren't spent on the extravagant Calatrava terminal now, it never will be. But you really can't justify that kind of expenditure without the office towers present. Even moreso when you take into account that some of the exits will be in the towers themselves.

[Nomadd22]

There's already a perfectly working station there now, they don't have to do anything further to it. However, those in charge know that if those billions aren't spent on the extravagant Calatrava terminal now, it never will be. But you really can't justify that kind of expenditure without the office towers present. Even moreso when you take into account that some of the exits will be in the towers themselves.

I'd guess there'd be a big difference in standards between a station meant to last 8 years and one meant to last 200.
I can understand the bosses not wanting someone's first impression of New York being that roller skating rink they have now.

[theWatusi]

Understood, but the monstrosity that is the Calatrava station is a huge waste of money.

[JohnFlint1985]

It is a shame that after so many years, so much talk, going back and forth with designs and memorials, stopping the construction and starting it again we got to the point that we consider not building it at all. I should say - everything is vital to this place - buildings and station worthy of Manhattan.

I never wanted to compare us to Dubai or China, but it seems that the only people that have real guts don't live here anymore and immigrated to these distant lands. It is just simply unbelievable that no one seems to want to look into the future. Crisis is ending already. Slowly but true. Manhattan should retain the crown of being financial capital of the world and to that end it should have iconic skyline, buildings, transportation system and other accessories of truly great city. And we cannot rely on the 70 years old classic heritage in this - we need something new and equally striking as ESB used to be in 1930s. Otherwise NYC s we know it will come to a quick and resolute end as the capital of world.

[nygirl1]

New Yorkers and Americans deserve better than this. Down with the Port Authority!

[CoolCzech]

I'd guess there'd be a big difference in standards between a station meant to last 8 years and one meant to last 200.
I can understand the bosses not wanting someone's first impression of New York being that roller skating rink they have now.

You're making the assumption "the bosses" of the PA give two squirts of monkey piss about anyone's impression.

That's a mighty big assumption.

[NYguy]

I'd guess there'd be a big difference in standards between a station meant to last 8 years and one meant to last 200.
I can understand the bosses not wanting someone's first impression of New York being that roller skating rink they have now.

I don't know what you're talking about. Have you ever been in the PATH station at all? The station that's there is fine. They're not moving anything, just building an extravagant concourse, ironically somewhat removed away from the actual station. Do you get that at all? What you may percieve as the actually station is just an extravagant shopping mall.

What's more, it's a slap in the face to the people who actually have to use the station...

And in a particularly perverse decision PATH riders won’t be able to get from the train platforms directly to the street. Instead they will have to walk halfway along the hall’s upper balcony and past dozens of shops before exiting into one of the flanking towers — a suffocating experience no matter how beautiful the spaces turn out to be.

[Nomadd22]

I don't know what you're talking about. Have you ever been in the PATH station at all? The station that's there is fine. They're not moving anything, just building an extravagant concourse, ironically somewhat removed away from the actual station. Do you get that at all? What you may percieve as the actually station is just an extravagant shopping mall.

What's more, it's a slap in the face to the people who actually have to use the station...

Unlike yourself, it wasn't my intention to insult anybody. And how implying that the temp station wasn't what lower Manhattan deserved was a slap in the face of the commuters using it is beyond me.
I'm not sure why your civility took leave all of a sudden. This place had been one of the rare pleasures to visit. Guess all things come to an end.

[NYguy]

I'm not sure why your civility took leave all of a sudden. This place had been one of the rare pleasures to visit. Guess all things come to an end.

How you see yourself as insulted is beyond me. But, goodbye.

[NewYorker2009]

I really don't think the complex needs the Calatrava Hub but the Port Authority is all about transportation and by building this would be more of a permanent PATH station but the temporary one by Vessy Street is great, I've been there several times so it should be permanent. They better not build the Performing Arts Center if they even dare to cancel Towers 2 and 3. The site needs 2 and 3 and it would fill out nicely. Seriously if they decide to cancel Towers 2 and 3 which I hope not then I say a bunch of New Yorkers burn down the Performing Arts Center if gets built because no one needs that shit.

[A-K O.G.]

http://mycrains.crainsnewyork.com/polls/2009/05/should-the-world-trade-center.html

POLL

[NYguy]

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20090514/FREE/905149986#

Silverstein facing uphill struggle downtown
Port Authority digs in its heels; the agency will finance one building at the World Trade Center but wants one of Silverstein's plots on the site in return.

By Theresa Agovino
May 14, 2009


The Port Authority is demanding that developer Larry Silverstein give it one of the plots for his three planned towers at the World Trade Center site in exchange for helping to finance construction of one his buildings, sources say. To win its aid, the agency is also telling Mr. Silverstein to exercise a lease option that would lock New York City into renting 600,000 square feet in the building that it may back or alternatively, to find another tenant.

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Mr. Silverstein have clashed over funding the developer’s towers and their feud threatens to impede building progress on the site. Mr. Silverstein has asked the Port to help fund two of his three towers but the agency has said it will only consider one because aiding more than that would hurt its balance sheet and put public money at risk in a private, speculative real estate development.

Many real estate executives have said there is no need for new office towers downtown at a time when tenant demand is shrinking, rents are falling and vacancies are rising. Mr. Silverstein has insisted there will be tenants for the towers by the time they open, beginning in 2014. He consistently reminds people he was ridiculed for rebuilding 7 World Trade Center after it was destroyed in the Sept. 11 attacks and points out that the vast majority of the building is now occupied.

Last Friday, Mayor Michael Bloomberg called for a summit to be held this week to end the log jam. That meeting now looks likely to happen next Thursday.

Sources say that Mr. Silverstein is resisting exercising his option with the city for what is called Tower 4 because he believes the agreed upon starting rent of $59 a square foot for the 15-year lease will be way below the market when the building finally opens, currently slated for 2014. Downtown rents are currently $44.58 a square foot, down 11% from last year, according to Cushman & Wakefield Inc. The Port signed a 30-year lease at Tower 4 for 600,000 feet.

The Port, sources say, told Mr. Silverstein that if he doesn’t want to enlist the city he should find an alternate tenant because empty buildings are harder to finance and because they drive down neighborhood rents. The problem is that the recession has pushed the most major tenants to the sidelines and those still scouting the market are in no rush to ink a deal.

Accounting and consulting firm Deloitte is seeking between 600,000 and 800,000 square feet and it asked Silverstein Properties to submit a proposal for Tower 4. However, numerous developers received the requests and sources say the firm is in no hurry to make a decision.

Additionally, the Port has told Mr. Silverstein it wants to take control of the site where he would build what is referred to as Tower 3 so that it can build a squat structure that would house retail tenants. It would give Mr. Silverstein the option of building an office tower or hotel over the stump when the market improves.

Sources say the Port also wants Mr. Silverstein to hand over part of his insurance money to help build the common infrastructure for the site. In return, the Port would build Mr. Silverstein’s infrastructure, stop his rent payments and give him the financing he desperately needs—a deal the agency values at $1.2 billion, sources say.

But other sources familiar with the project say the Port is essentially confiscating Mr. Silverstein’s development rights for Tower 3 without compensation. The source notes that the agency would require Mr. Silverstein to surrender all penalties the Port has paid for missing deadlines—about $100 million—and waive the right to any future fines.

These sources add that the Port is only willing to backstop the debt payments on the tower for 10 years, which could make financing very difficult to find. They add building one tower won’t create the critical mass necessary to lure tenants and retailers to the site.

The Port declined comment on the negotiations. In a statement, Janno Lieber, president of World Trade Center Properties said that the company has already made numerous compromises on the site and that the proposal to build two towers is fair, especially since at one point the developer was supposed to construct five. Moreover, the Port has collected more than $2 billion in payments from Mr. Silverstein.

“As well as employing tens of thousands of workers, completing two buildings will assure that the WTC site is a finished, attractive and exciting place that helps, rather than hinders Downtown's revival. That's what New Yorkers have been promised throughout the past eight years,” he said.

[NYguy]

Silver says exactly what I've been saying..

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_316/fedup.html

‘Fed up’ with W.T.C. delays, Silver says build 3rd tower now

By Julie Shapiro
May 15 - 21, 2009

Silver sounded far more optimistic than that on Friday, saying that the five years it would take to build Tower 2 would be plenty of time for the economy to turn around — and if not, then New York would have bigger problems.

“We are building for 2014,’15 and beyond,” he told reporters. “If we don’t have confidence that our economy can rebound by then, then we should not be building anyplace in this city and give up.... That’s not the spirit of New York.”

[Dac150]

Personally I think all this is going to come back to bite the PA in the ass. They are doing a good job of making enemies with the wrong people and above all the city of New York.

At the end of the day this is being built to satisfy future demand, and a future that is not so far off as the PA proclaims. They're being very unrealistic and financially selfish, two things that don't mix well with a city and world for that matter that demands for the right thing to be done. Thankfully we have a group of heavy hitters that realizes the practical sense of getting this development built as shown.

[Stu]

The PA are being so short-sighted. Leave it to an old man like Silverstein to think in appropriate terms.

[uaarkson]

I can't help but sympathize with him. For most of us watching this project, we can look forward to seeing it completed, even if it's delayed. But Silverstein has very little relative time to see these towers finished, so it's easy to see that money is definitely not an issue for him.

[NYguy]

A large development like this requires tenacity, especially in New York where multiple battles are constantly being fought. I think Silverstein's up to it.

[NYguy]

Here's that earlier idea for podiums from the PA that we were talking about...
http://www.panynj.gov/drp/images/gallery/wtcth/2005/11/churchPodium.jpg

http://www.panynj.gov/drp/images/gallery/wtcth/2005/11/churchPodium.jpg


http://www.panynj.gov/drp/images/gallery/wtcth/2005/11/ChurchPodium2Twrs.jpg

[pattali]

^^^ What a beauty !!!

[NYCLuver]

A beauty sure, for suburban Minneapolis!


If it does come down to having to choose between Tower 2 and 3, I am not sure which one I would want to be built. 3's facade is more interesting but Tower 2's design I feel is just more interesting. I'd definitely want to see Tower 2 built.

I want them all built and hopefully it does come to reality.

[NYguy]

A beauty sure, for suburban Minneapolis!

If it does come down to having to choose between Tower 2 and 3, I am not sure which one I would want to be built. 3's facade is more interesting but Tower 2's design I feel is just more interesting. I'd definitely want to see Tower 2 built.

As it's being proposed now, what it would come down to is Tower 2 moving full speed ahead, straight from foundation all the way to the tip of the "diamonds". Tower 3 would also resume, but pending Silverstein's lack of financing would stop at the retail base. (Depending on who builds it, if it's the PA it could be a temporary structure, if Silverstein, the base of the tower). In the couple of years before that happens though, Silverstein cold still land the financing to complete this tower.

[ls1z28chris]

Here's that earlier idea for podiums from the PA that we were talking about...
http://www.panynj.gov/drp/images/gallery/wtcth/2005/11/churchPodium.jpg

http://www.panynj.gov/drp/images/gallery/wtcth/2005/11/churchPodium.jpg


http://www.panynj.gov/drp/images/gallery/wtcth/2005/11/ChurchPodium2Twrs.jpg

I am not from New York, nor have I ever been to New York for a visit, but that building looks out of place. It resembles the mixed use mid-rises being built all over Atlanta's suburbs. Who in their right mind would want to build something like that in Manhattan? A mixed use mid-rise more at home in suburbs/ex-urbs right next to a spinal column stolen from a t-rex, all in the middle of the largest city in the U.S. :jester:

[philvia]

how could they feel no remorse after coming up with those designs? everything about the PA is just getting worse and worse in these last couple of months.


http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/img/facepalm.jpeg

[antinimby]

That last rendering looks like Anywhere Mall, USA.

[djvandrake]

Whoever is calling the shots at Port Authority should resign in disgrace. NOW.

How Pathetic.

Here's hoping Silverstien's spine is made of steel, and smarter financers come to the table.

[Pizzuti]

I'd rather have a shopping mall at the base of an office tower than offices or a lobby all the way down to the ground.

The mall makes extra use of the ground space. It gives a street-level friendliness and a human scale to what will ultimately be huge towers.

There is no way that in a city like NYC the towers would remain unbuilt forever, especially given that it's probably the most high-profile spot in the world. I say build the shopping center so at least SOMETHING exists on that site, then put the towers on top of it. The foundation will already be built, and with it much of the construction expense, so it will probably speed the ultimate construction of the tower.

[ls1z28chris]

I'd rather have a shopping mall at the base of an office tower than offices or a lobby all the way down to the ground.

The mall makes extra use of the ground space. It gives a street-level friendliness and a human scale to what will ultimately be huge towers.

There is no way that in a city like NYC the towers would remain unbuilt forever, especially given that it's probably the most high-profile spot in the world. I say build the shopping center so at least SOMETHING exists on that site, then put the towers on top of it. The foundation will already be built, and with it much of the construction expense, so it will probably speed the ultimate construction of the tower.

On second thought, you're right. A shopping mall is a very appropriate structure to put across the plaza from the 9/11 memorial. It will be a constant reminder that when tragedy strikes, we should keep spending money.

:uhh:

[Pizzuti]

I agree with you on sentiment, but is a shopping mall any less "commercial" than a corporate office tower? They're on the same level if you ask me, and the towers were going to be there anyway.

[uaarkson]

I agree with you on sentiment, but is a shopping mall any less "commercial" than a corporate office tower? They're on the same level if you ask me, and the towers were going to be there anyway.

It doesn't matter, because corporate office towers are what stood there originally, and the new towers are consistent with the idea of rebuilding.

[NYguy]

A mall in itself is not a bad thing. But it is out of place in Manhattan. It is very out of place in the financial district of lower Manhattan (where there is precious little space to waste as it is). And it would especially be out of place accross from the memorial. As far as making the distinction between office and retail space, the towers themselves mark the rebuilding of the WTC and complement the memorial. There's a reason why it was decided not to have the retail bases facing the memorial. And if not for the office towers, what you would have is the Port Authority building a $4 billion dollar shopping mall as a response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Surely the reintroduction of the street grid wasn't for this. But I don't believe New York officials will allow that to happen.

[CoolCzech]

http://www.panynj.gov/drp/images/gallery/wtcth/2005/11/churchPodium.jpg

http://www.channel4.com/film/media/images/Channel4/film/A/airplane_xl_01--film-A.jpg
www.channel4.com


Shirley, You Jest!

[NYguy]

http://www.panynj.gov/drp/images/gallery/wtcth/2005/11/churchPodium.jpg

http://www.channel4.com/film/media/images/Channel4/film/A/airplane_xl_01--film-A.jpg
www.channel4.com
Shirley, You Jest!


LOL. The good news is that those are just the renderings they came up with of placeholders for towers 3 and 4. The bad news is that they would like to see the same stumps for towers 2 and 3 - only with Calatrava's bird-like entrance to the mall (ahem, station) between them.

Here's that infamous quote again:

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_313/wardfires.html
The Port is already designing the glossy, white retail podiums, but declined to release the renderings. They would be placeholders for Towers 2 and 3 for 10 to 15 years. Ward said the podiums could contain public space, perhaps like the World Financial Center’s Winter Garden, in addition to retail.

“In any other city, a six-story structure is a good-size building,” Ward said.

Ward wants to reduce the heart of one of the world's greatest metropolises into "any other city". Someone needs to tell this guy that in "any other city" they wouldn't be spending $3 billion dollars on a subway station for a six-story building. And then run him out of town for good.

[ls1z28chris]

LOL. The good news is that those are just the renderings they came up with of placeholders for towers 3 and 4. The bad news is that they would like to see the same stumps for towers 2 and 3 - only with Calatrava's bird-like entrance to the mall (ahem, station) between them.

Here's that infamous quote again:

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_313/wardfires.html


Ward wants to reduce the heart of one of the world's greatest metropolises into "any other city". Someone needs to tell this guy that in "any other city" they wouldn't be spending $3 billion dollars on a subway station for a six-story building. And then run him out of town for good.

From what I understand about New York, that "any other city" comment is going to result in a pretty big backlash.

Not only is New York not "any other city," but they're talking about rebuilding the WTC site after 9/11. These people are clowns.

[NYguy]

It will probably come down to a deal between New Jersey and New York. Silverstein will also play a big role into how this all turns out. But worst case scenario, we could be looking at one potential stump. And even then, we probably wouldn't be too sure for a couple of years. That is, unless Silverstein turns over one of the sites, and the PA does what it pleases.

[PhxPavilion]

I say we just build another 1 WTC and be done with it.

[NYguy]

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090517/FOREIGN/705169954/1014/ART

Twin towers’ replacement struggles to rise from the ashes

Sharmila Devi Foreign Correspondent
May 16. 2009


The gaping hole where the twin towers of the World Trade Center used to stand in downtown Manhattan before September 11 often attracts as many tourists as Times Square.

Visitors include parties of school students who go to pay homage at the site, where almost 3,000 people died. Many people also wonder why there are no completed buildings at the site, which remains a chaotic jumble of cranes and lorries more than seven years later.

“For all the talk of standing up to terrorists, memorials and new buildings rising up out of the ashes, it’s just politics as usual,” said Christine, a native New Yorker, who lost a friend in the attacks.

Even before the recession hit the city, development at the 6.5-hectare site was held up by acrimonious and unseemly squabbling between politicians and developers. In the latest twist, a row over funding threatens to reduce planned new towers to mere stumps.

The delays were “an embarrassment to our city, our state and to the nation”, Sheldon Silver, speaker of the New York state assembly, said on Friday. “For whatever reason, the dynamic has broken down again. We cannot afford to halt negotiations, to continuously alter and re-alter our plans.”

Not unsurprisingly, the city’s lively tabloid press is all over the saga. A recent New York Post editorial came out in a rare show of support for the state speaker, saying: “Way to go, Shelly Silver”.

“The fact that the project has faltered yet again is an infamy,” the editorial said. “It is not only New York that is shamed by this; the nation stands humiliated before the world. A heroic response to Islamic terror? A show of strength and resilience? Forget that.”

The dispute pits Larry Silverstein, a property magnate, against the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, a financially self-supporting public agency that owns the trade centre site. Michael Bloomberg, the New York City mayor, has stepped in to act as broker and invited all the parties to a summit to be held soon at Gracie Mansion.

Mr Silverstein has the rights to build three office towers. The Port Authority is building a transport terminal, a 540m tower and has the rights to build a fifth tower, at a cost of US$3.2 billion (Dh11.7bn).

Mr Silverstein has now asked the Port Authority to back financing for all three of his towers, but the agency has agreed to back only one amid a faltering real estate market. He is reported to be down to the last $1bn of the $4.5bn he received in insurance after the towers’ destruction.

“The port authority must be realistic about putting its limited public resources towards the most public benefit, which means keeping the memorial and the public transport projects moving forward, and building the office and retail developments to meet the market,” said Stephen Sigmund, a Port Authority spokesman.

However, the Port Authority has itself received flak over the lavishly designed transport centre and the office tower, whose original moniker “Freedom Tower” has been dropped in favour of the more neutral “One World Trade Centre”. It has promised to open the tower in 2013 and the transport terminal in 2014. It hoped to open most of the memorial in time for the 10th anniversary of the attacks.

A revised design for the transport terminal by Santiago Calatrava, the Spanish architect, was unveiled last week. It was slammed by Nicolai Ouroussoff, The New York Times’s architecture critic, as a white elephant that was far too extravagant for the limited number of passengers it would serve.

He said the building’s design, including a soaring glass and steel dome, embodied the “toxic climate” of the immediate aftermath of September 11. “While the city grieved, politicians were vowing to rebuild as fast as possible, as if that would somehow accelerate the healing process,” he wrote.

“Practical considerations were set aside. Jingoism ruled. Egotism dominated over softer, gentler voices.”

The plan for the original “Freedom Tower” was unveiled in 2003 by George Pataki, the New York state governor at the time. He promised completion of the structure by the fifth anniversary of September 11 and occupancy by the 10th anniversary.

Mr Silverstein disputed the site’s plans. Later on, architects were forced back to the drawing board after the New York Police Department said the tower would be vulnerable to a lorry bomb because it was too close to a main street.

The change in name to the legal address of “One World Trade Centre” came this year because the port authority hoped it would make it easier to market the building to prospective tenants, who might have been put off by the site’s memories as well as fears of another attack.

“I’d be honoured to work in that building,” Mr Pataki said then. “Are we going to think small and build small because we were attacked? Freedom is why we were attacked.

[Duffstuff129]

I say we just build another 1 WTC and be done with it.

If any plan would make people happy, it would be this one. Everyone loved the twins, so just imagine of we had twins that weren't giant, hideous gray boxes! New Yorkers would dance in the streets.

But that won't happen. I'd support that though.:(

[CoolCzech]

“It is not only New York that is shamed by this; the nation stands humiliated before the world. A heroic response to Islamic terror? A show of strength and resilience? Forget that.”

Heh. What could be more heroic than the PA's plan to build a mediocre shopping mall over the graves of 2,700 people?

It takes heroically self-assured stupidity to suggest such a thing.

[NYguy]

Heh. What could be more heroic than the PA's plan to build a mediocre shopping mall over the graves of 2,700 people?

It takes heroically self-assured stupidity to suggest such a thing.

Imagine, 50 years ago if they could foresee into the future when they were planning the WTC. Imagine if they could see the "fearless" leaders at the PA now, and their attempt to triumph with shopping! They probably would have scrapped the whole thing altogether...:yuck:

[fleonzo]

At this point Silverstein should just go forward with Tower 3 and increase it's height to the same height as Tower 1 or slighlty higher (roof). We don't need to revisit the "Twins" topic again but two different... but supertall towers will do!:tup:

[Dac150]

Strategy wise, he should continue to focus on the push for both two and three, yet consolidated the case for one tower at a time, starting with tower two. Perhaps dividing the fight will buy some time for some tenant demand which can in result better the chances.

The PA at this point is being stubborn in its stance and is driving its case partly from the spite of not wanting to stand down. Tenant demand will only throw their case aside.

The waiting of a few more years to garuntee full completion of the trade center, is in my mind worth it.

[meh_cd]

I like 2 and 3, but if one has to be completed before the other I'm going to have to go with #2 due to the symbolic height and the design. It's the closest we'll get to Twins.

[Aleks]

I heard from a little birdie that terrorists also like blowing up default, Texas suburbs-looking malls too.

God, why would they build this horrible thing? I mean, I'd rather not see anything built on that site for years than this! It's such a disgrace and I'm actually pissed of about it. The building isn't bad looking, but it's not in the right place. Put it in a Texas suburb or something but stay away from the WTC.

[TANGELD_SLC]

As an American, I think the PA's recent power moves are HIGHLY offensive, and are basically a spit in the face of all who died that day.

What a despicable show of arrogance.

[Stu]

As a Canadian, I think the PA are acting like douche nozzles.

[NYguy]

A few more opinions on the matter...

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20090517/SUB/305179983
Whither the World Trade Center?

May 17, 2009


CONSIDERING THE AMOUNT of time it has taken to get to the rebuilding of the World Trade Center to this point, any changes would be ludicrous. We need to prove to the world and to ourselves that we can move on. The very least we should do is complete the plan we have settled upon as quickly as possible.
—Ed Andrews

THE ONLY BUILDINGS that should be on that site are two tall twin towers. That's all New York needs to be there, and the only thing that's right to put there.
—Jennifer Thorpe

THE CURRENT PLANS should be abandoned. Period. Build two new twin towers, taller than the original towers. Dump the memorial, which will cost taxpayers millions to maintain.
—Joe Wright

RUDY GIULIANI said it best some time after the attacks: “This site should become a park” ... dedicated to people around the world who seek peace, music and the arts. We should never consider doing commerce in what is really a cemetery. Could you imagine if they built an office tower over where the USS Arizona sank in Pearl Harbor? Or an IHOP within Auschwitz!
—Michael Anthony Josephs

I THINK THE SITUATION is disgusting, what with the Port Authority not completing their tasks and charging Larry Silverstein rent on empty land. The money he received from the insurance should be spent building and continuing what he has started and is doing well. Instead, he has had to pay millions to the Port Authority for incompe-tency, mismanagement and down-right fraud. Is this organization still run by the Sopranos?
—Pat Ellson

RECESSIONS AND BOOMS are spikes in what should be a slow and steady growth curve. The original WTC realized full occupancy by the early 1980s, when our economy was far smaller than it is even in the depths of this recession. If we were to scale back the World Trade Center, it would always be seen as a tribute to this particular downturn and an homage to the greed that caused it in the first place.
—Martin Kace

[CoolCzech]

The PA at this point is being stubborn in its stance and is driving its case partly from the spite of not wanting to stand down. Tenant demand will only throw their case aside.



I think there is more at play here than PA stubbornness: I think they are in thrall to real estate interests in NYC that do not want to see the WTC rebuilt for fear of the impact it might have on their own bottom lines.

[PhxPavilion]

I like 2 and 3, but if one has to be completed before the other I'm going to have to go with #2 due to the symbolic height and the design. It's the closest we'll get to Twins.

Agreed. At the very least 1 and 2 should be built, if nothing else.

[CoolCzech]

I don't think Silverstein will decide to build 2 before 3 and 4, because then it would be too easy for the PA to claim the WTC has been "rebuilt" and put the kabosh on the rest of the project. Just as important symbolically as what the project looks like as a whole is the total square footage that is recaptured from the attacks of 9/11.

[NYguy]

^ I think Silverstein is leaning more towards getting Tower 2 built first because he can probably get the tenants for a larger Tower 3 (there were already plans drawn up for it) when things pick back up.

I think there is more at play here than PA stubbornness: I think they are in thrall to real estate interests in NYC that do not want to see the WTC rebuilt for fear of the impact it might have on their own bottom lines.

That's an issue now as it was back when the original WTC was built. Back then it was only the Midtown interests to contend with. Now, you have an entirely new dynamic in Jersey City. The longer it takes for Lower Manhattan to absorb the rebuilt office space, the longer it will be for Jersey City to fully recover, and expand its own base. This is why I believe you are seeing more of a border war, with New Jersey leaning more against having so much office space built, with New York officials (besides the aloof Governor Paterson) leaning more towards having the office space rebuilt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/nyregion/09downtown.html?ref=nyregion

Anthony R. Coscia, chairman of the Port Authority, and Gov. Jon S. Corzine of New Jersey have told officials that they are opposed to financing speculative office buildings, especially when the chances of securing tenants are bleak. And the authority’s bridge and tunnel revenues are down sharply, putting a severe strain on its capital budget.

“There are other things Governor Corzine wants from the Port Authority,” Mr. Silver said in a reference to plans for a new train tunnel into Pennsylvania Station. “We’re either going to accommodate each other or stalemate each other.”

[NYguy]

http://www.wtc.com/news/summit-to-address-progress-lag-at-wtc-site

Summit To Address Progress Lag At WTC Site

May 19, 2009
NY1 News


Fed up with slow moving construction at the World Trade Center site, officials and project leaders will sit down Thursday to find a way to keep progress moving.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has invited leaders including Governor David Paterson, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Port Authority officials, and Silverstein Properties to Gracie Mansion for a summit on the rebuilding effort.

Deputy Mayor Bob Lieber will run the meeting. Bloomberg says it's another step in a difficult process.

"There's not easy solutions here and I don't think you can expect us to come out of that with a grand solution," Bloomberg said. "It will probably be just sharing information at the very beginning. This is something that Bob Lieber's been working on, as has everybody else. And the bottom line is that the market is no longer there for a lot of the development we want to see get done, nor is the financing."

The summit came out of a call by Silver earlier this month to speed up the construction.

[NYguy]

Of course, when you want someone to come out against building anything, look no further than that nut case, Steven Yaro. Here's a guy who always has an opinon on something and nothing...why they keep dragging him into everything is beyond me. If there were a king of NIMBYism, he would be it.


http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20090519/FREE/905199976

In letters to Mayor Michael Bloomberg, New York’s Gov. David Paterson and New Jersey’s Gov. Jon Corzine, the groups say they only want the Port to finance one tower. The mayor is hosting Thursday’s meeting to end the logjam.

“With limited funds for redevelopment, the financial resources of the Port Authority should be devoted to restoring the public infrastructure to the site,” said a letter from The Regional Planning Association’s chairman, Peter Herman, and its president, Robert Yaro.

The letter also said that retail development would “better respond to market conditions and generate profits and tax revenues.” The Port has said it wanted to build two multi-story retail pedestals where Mr. Silverstein’s buildings are supposed to rise, and the letter said that option should be fully evaluated.

A separate letter signed by seven groups, including the Regional Planning Association, reiterated that no additional public funds should be used to subsidize office construction. It also said such funds should instead go toward transportation and infrastructure.

The other groups that signed the second letter were: Fiscal Policy Institute, Pratt Center for Community Development, NYPIRG/Straphangers Campaign, Tri-State Transportation Campaign, Transportation Alternatives and the New York Metro Chapter of the American Planning Association.

[NYguy]

“With limited funds for redevelopment, the financial resources of the Port Authority should be devoted to restoring the public infrastructure to the site,” said a letter from The Regional Planning Association’s chairman, Peter Herman, and its president, Robert Yaro.

Exactly what public infrastructures need to be restored, they don't say of course.

[NYguy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/20/nyregion/20wtc.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion

The authority said it would help build Mr. Silverstein’s other two towers in the coming decades once demand for new office space increases, although the developer was free to move ahead at any time with private financing.

Janno Lieber, who oversees the trade center project for Mr. Silverstein, said Tuesday in a statement: “If, as the Port Authority apparently believes, the New York regional economy is permanently dead and buried, it’s hard to see how they can justify huge investments in the World Trade Center PATH hub, new tunnels, and other facilities designed to serve expanded commuter populations.”

Stephen Sigmund, a spokesman for the authority, countered that it made more sense for the authority to “put its limited public resources toward keeping the memorial and the public projects moving forward,” while building the office and retail components when there is demand for new space.

The two sides have not had any substantive talks in more than a month. On May 8, the speaker of the State Assembly, Sheldon Silver, whose district includes downtown, called on the authority to help Mr. Silverstein begin construction on two of his towers. But Mr. Silver also said Mr. Silverstein must invest some of his own money if he is to reap the profits from the buildings.

Mayor Bloomberg immediately endorsed Mr. Silver’s initiative and asked all the parties to meet at Grace Mansion within a week, a move that took Mr. Silverstein, the authority and even Gov. David A. Paterson by surprise. Most of the participants said on Tuesday they were unsure what the meeting would achieve.

Andrew Brent, a spokesman for the mayor, said, “If the stalemate between the Port Authority and Silverstein Properties ends where it’s headed — in litigation or arbitration — everyone loses,” and added, “We are convening the parties on Thursday to arrive at a path toward resolution that maintains progress on the site.”

[NYguy]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124277646578237023.html

By CHRISTINA S.N. LEWIS

New York developer Larry Silverstein appears to have the upper hand as he prepares for yet another high-level negotiation with New York and New Jersey officials on the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site.

Mr. Silverstein, who signed a 99-year-lease for the World Trade Center six weeks before the Sept. 11 terrorist attack, has been sparring ever since with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the government agency that owns the site.

He could plunge the entire site, including the memorial, into further delays by taking the Port Authority to court over construction deadlines the agency has missed.

Any delay is politically unpalatable to the governors who control the agency -- New York's David Paterson and New Jersey's Jon Corzine. They are both running for re-election in the next two years and are under pressure to get things moving.

Mr. Silverstein, who leads a group of investors, wants to proceed with at least two of his planned three towers: Tower 4, which is more fiscally viable because the Port Authority will lease a third of its space, and the riskier Tower 2, a massive Norman Foster-designed skyscraper slated to be taller than the Empire State Building.

Mr. Silverstein argues that while demand for office space is weak now, the market will have turned around by 2013 and 2015, when both towers are completed.

"The Port Authority doesn't yet recognize that two towers is better economically for them and a lot better for New York City and for downtown," said Janno Lieber, who oversees the project for Silverstein Properties.

[djvandrake]

These credit conditions aren't going to persist forever, just as the soft demand for office space is a blip. I recall just a few years ago people were saying all the towers at WTC wouldn't be enough to meet demand.

Point being, it's just a matter of time before private financing will give an experienced hand like Silverstien the capital he needs to move forward with all the towers. Then he can thumb his nose at PA.

[JohnFlint1985]

These credit conditions aren't going to persist forever, just as the soft demand for office space is a blip. I recall just a few years ago people were saying all the towers at WTC wouldn't be enough to meet demand.

Point being, it's just a matter of time before private financing will give an experienced hand like Silverstien the capital he needs to move forward with all the towers. Then he can thumb his nose at PA.

Also look at building 7 WTC. a few years back there were screams about no possibility to fill up the building in no near future and look at it now! I think there is almost no space there left.

[NYguy]

History has shown that these towers will fill up, and NOBODY - even those concerned about too much office space - actually believes Manhattan won't require that much office space to be built. We're talking about over 10 msf of office space lost on a single day. That has to be put back before we start building Manhattan West, Hudson Yards, or even the Hotel Penn and Moynihan towers.

[NYguy]

http://www.1010wins.com/WTC-Developer-Spat-Could-Delay-Ground-Zero-Again/4436381

WTC Developer Spat Could Delay Ground Zero Again

http://imgsrv.1010wins.com/image/DbGraphic/200905/1252233.jpg?1242862415

Wednesday, 20 May 2009
Stan Brooks Reports

NEW YORK (AP) -- The most serious impasse in years between the owner of ground zero and the developer building office towers on half of the site is headed for government intervention.

Larry Silverstein and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey started talks about seven months ago to rewrite Silverstein's lease to build three of five office towers to replace the destroyed World Trade Center.

Silverstein, unable to find private financing for all the towers in a poor real estate market, wants the port to back at least two of them.

The Port Authority said more than a month ago that it would back one tower with about $800 million, provided Silverstein invests more money in building the infrastructure his towers will share with a huge transit hub and Sept. 11 memorial.

Top politicians from two states are meeting Thursday at Mayor Michael Bloomberg's mansion to try to pressure both sides into an agreement and avoid yet more delays in the site's tortuous rebuilding history.

The departure of commercial tenants in downtown Manhattan -- at a time when 10 million square feet of office space is planned at the site -- is the key to any question about timing and financing at the site, a business leader said.

"I don't think it serves anyone well to have a battle on the World Trade Center site. It's in our shared interest and the community's interest, clearly and in the city's interest, to move forward as quickly as possible,'' said Kathryn Wylde, CEO of the Partnership for New York, a downtown business group. "But you can't ignore the market, and right now there isn't one.''

The Port Authority has said publicly for weeks that the uncertain market would make it foolish to build all five planned office towers as planned, saying at least three should be put off until the market rebounds.

On Tuesday several civic groups wrote Bloomberg and the governors of New York and New Jersey, saying the agency would be better off using its money on transit in the region than on a ``speculative office building on the World Trade Center site.''

But a complex 2006 lease -- an amended version of the lease Silverstein originally signed six weeks before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack -- gives Silverstein the right to build three towers or take the agency to court for failing to let him.

Silverstein officials argue they have turned over $2 billion -- in monthly rental payments for the undeveloped space and a share of Sept. 11 insurance money -- to the Port Authority since 2001, and said the agency has failed to rebuild on time anything it is responsible for.

An elaborate, $3.2 billion transit hub sitting in the middle of Silverstein's towers has been under construction for four years, and is five years behind its original schedule. Ground was broken in 2004 for the tallest skyscraper planned at the site, but it was redesigned and moved; it may open in four more years.

"We are not asking the Port Authority for their money. But in order for us to justify letting the port keep the $2 billion they have collected from us ... we are asking for their assistance,'' said Janno Lieber, who heads trade center construction for Silverstein.

The Port Authority has estimated Silverstein's proposal to back his towers would cost the agency well over $4 billion, while Silverstein's estimate is closer to $2 billion, three officials familiar with the negotiations told The Associated Press. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of confidentiality agreements governing the talks.

While the agency and several public officials have backed financing just one Silverstein tower, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver suggested that he would support backing two towers. He called for Thursday's meeting over a week ago, which will include Gov. David Paterson, New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine and Bloomberg. The city doesn't own the trade center site but has agreed to lease nearly half the office space in the Silverstein tower under construction.

Bloomberg last week suggested that the agency would have difficulty negotiating with Silverstein, who ``doesn't have any skin in the game'' because the towers are backed with bonds and Sept. 11 insurance money.

On Wednesday, he said he hoped only to restart talks between two sides that have been stalled for over a month.

``We'll have a few ideas to throw out -- nothing magical about our ideas -- but anything we can do to get them going,'' the mayor said. ``It's in the interest of this city and this country to get development going at the World Trade Center site

[NYguy]

"I don't think it serves anyone well to have a battle on the World Trade Center site. It's in our shared interest and the community's interest, clearly and in the city's interest, to move forward as quickly as possible,'' said Kathryn Wylde, CEO of the Partnership for New York, a downtown business group. "But you can't ignore the market, and right now there isn't one.''

These towers aren't being built for today's market, and what always seems to get lost is the fact that this isn't "new" office supply.

Silverstein officials argue they have turned over $2 billion -- in monthly rental payments for the undeveloped space and a share of Sept. 11 insurance money -- to the Port Authority since 2001, and said the agency has failed to rebuild on time anything it is responsible for.

An elaborate, $3.2 billion transit hub sitting in the middle of Silverstein's towers has been under construction for four years, and is five years behind its original schedule. Ground was broken in 2004 for the tallest skyscraper planned at the site, but it was redesigned and moved; it may open in four more years.

"We are not asking the Port Authority for their money. But in order for us to justify letting the port keep the $2 billion they have collected from us ... we are asking for their assistance,'' said Janno Lieber, who heads trade center construction for Silverstein.

Again, in these hard times, if the PA is as concerned as they would have us believe, then that $3.2 billion transit hub is a luxury we cannot afford. It's not adding anything but nicely designed mall space between towers 2 and 3 (or the stumps of those towers if the PA has anything to say about it). The PATH station itself will remain where it is. Ironically, there's easier access to the station now than there will be when the new hub is completed.

[NYguy]

This is so tiresome already. Who knows who will do or say what next....

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/nyregion/21zero.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is busily dampening expectations that his summit meeting on Thursday will produce a sudden resolution to the latest impasse at ground zero between the Port Authority and the developer Larry A. Silverstein over the construction of office towers.

Protocol holds that politicians do not publicly announce a high-profile engagement until after the outcome is assured. But two weeks ago, Mr. Bloomberg surprised everyone, including Port Authority officials, Mr. Silverstein and especially Gov. David A. Paterson, when he called for the meeting at Gracie Mansion.

On Wednesday, Mr. Bloomberg warned reporters that “there will not be a grand announcement at the end of tomorrow afternoon that the days of wine and roses are here again.” Given the “limited contact” between the Port Authority and Mr. Silverstein, he said that the city would simply like to serve as “a catalyst and provide a forum for them to get together.”

Officials involved in the negotiations say that Deputy Mayor Robert C. Lieber has spent as much time trying to calm the warring parties as he has trying to come up with an acceptable compromise. The best outcome of the Gracie Mansion summit, many say, may be an agreement to meet again.

[NYguy]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05212009/postopinion/editorials/the_ground_zero_summit_170324.htm

EDITORIAL

THE GROUND ZERO SUMMIT

May 21, 2009

The eagles, so to speak, gather.

Mayor Bloomberg today hosts As sembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Gov. Paterson, New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, Port Authority CEO Chris Ward and developer Larry Silverstein at Gracie Mansion in an effort to restart the once-again-stalled rebuilding of Ground Zero.

Long gone is the prospect of an expeditious recovery from the effects of the Islamist attacks of 9/11. All that remains is humiliation, radiating from the world's most famous hole in the ground.

Now the task is returning Lower Manhattan to some semblance of normalcy -- with buildings adequate to the city's long-term needs at affordable prices.

The latest tie-up takes the form of a dispute between Silverstein and the PA.

Silverstein says he needs the authority's help, given the current economy, in financing the three towers he's meant to be building on site.

But the PA -- the joint New York-New Jersey venture responsible for regional transportation needs -- says it simply can't afford that; it's offering to help with just one, while reducing the others to unsightly "stumps."

Not good enough.

Indeed, it's hard not to sympathize with Silverstein: Years of public-sector delay in building the site's underlying infrastructure is the principal reason he couldn't secure financing and start building when the market was still flush.

And the fact is, New Jersey never misses a meal when it comes to Port Authority funding -- an inequity exacerbated by Paterson's astonishing, and continuing, abdication of responsibility for governing New York.

This leaves Bloomberg and Silver.

Mike is late to the game, having deferred to former Gov. George Pataki and the Port Authority early on after 9/11.

Silver, too, hasn't played an up-front role -- until now.

It was the speaker's challenge to the PA this month that sparked today's Gracie Mansion sitdown: "Seven years and eight months after the [9/11] attacks," he said, "I am fed up with the stalling and exasperated with the current state of the World Trade Center project."

And he made it unambiguously clear what will happen if the PA's default-to-New Jersey bias isn't quickly corrected.

"There are other things Corzine wants from the Port Authority. We're either going to accommodate each other or stalemate each other," said Silver -- who is well-situated to stalemate the authority 'til he decides otherwise.

So Corzine and Ward need to come to today's meeting prepared to shake loose the resources needed to proceed.

This shouldn't be taken as an endorsement of Silverstein's position. Times have changed, there's a recession on -- so Bloomberg and Silver need to make him come to terms with that.

Yes, that should be Paterson's role.

But he's out to lunch -- so who else but Mike and Shelly?

Go get 'em, guys.

[NYguy]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05212009/news/regionalnews/new_glimpse_of_wtc_low_rise_compromise_170311.htm

NEW GLIMPSE OF WTC LOW-RISE COMPROMISE

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05212009/photos/world_trade_center.jpg
SHORT AND SWEET: Artists' renderings show plans for six-story retail buildings at 2 World Trade Center (above) and 3 World Trade Center (below).

By TOM TOPOUSIS
May 21, 2009

Here's the first look at a scaled-down World Trade Center -- with retail shops replacing two of the site's towers, under a new design the Port Authority will present at a summit today with Mayor Bloomberg and the governors of New York and New Jersey.

The gleaming glass and steel retail podiums would rise six stories above street level at World Trade Center sites where Larry Silverstein wants to build two enormous office towers, one of which would soar nearly as high as the Empire State Building.

Fearful that Silverstein won't be able to finance construction of the towers during a recession, PA officials are pushing for a temporary plan to create retail podiums between Church and Greenwich streets to fill the space and restore the streetscape.

Renderings of the proposal have been quietly circulating among some downtown officials and were obtained by The Post yesterday.

The retail podiums would anchor as much as 600,000 square feet of shopping space that would extend below street level into every WTC building and through the massive Calatrava transit hub.

By building podiums in place of towers, PA officials expect to increase the amount of retail space from the currently planned 500,000 square feet -- roughly what existed in the World Trade Center before 9/11.

Silverstein has opposed building two podiums, and has asked the PA to act as a backstop in his bid to finance two of his three WTC towers. He recently offered to delay construction of his third tower.

PA officials have not budged, and have agreed to back him on only one tower, WTC 4, at the corner of Liberty and Greenwich streets.

The Ground Zero developer has insisted that by the time he completes two towers between 2013 and 2015, the economy will have turned around and the demand for high-end office space will have returned.

In a bid to end the stalemate, Bloomberg will be convening a meeting at Gracie Mansion today with Gov. Paterson, New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, Port Authority officials, Silverstein and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.

[NYguy]

The PLAYERS...

http://www.observer.com/2009/real-estate/stalemate-city-primer-world-trade-center-imbroglio

Larry Silverstein, developer of Towers 2, 3 and 4

Be it a personal longing, his many years (he’s 78), or a capitalistic desire, Mr. Silverstein and his deputy Janno Lieber have insisted that they will settle for no less than two towers built right now. His offer to the Port Authority has him using all his insurance money, but nothing beyond that, a position that will surely be tested in the summit. Given the delays and public and political commitment to the site’s rebuilding, the crux of Mr. Silverstein’s position is that the public sector has a responsibility to see those towers built, and in this economy, that means the Port Authority must help finance them. He seems ready and willing to test that position in court should the stalemate continue.

Mayor Bloomberg

....From an economic development standpoint, the added office space helps keep rents lower and increase New York’s competitiveness—not a very popular position among competing landlords or anyone who would have to put up money and risk default. In terms of possible financial commitments to help build the towers, the Port Authority asked that the city increase its rent in Tower 4 from $59 a foot to $65, though for now, the rent is still $59. The city also collects Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOTs) on the site, which, at least based on a 2003 agreement, are worth about $55 million a year. Forgive that over 20 years, and that’s over $1 billion, though it’s hard to think the mayor’s budget office would allow that to go down without a fight.

Governor Paterson

The governor, along with his Port Authority executive director, Chris Ward, has been resistant to committing additional state funds for the project, which, if they came from anywhere, would come from the Port Authority. He’s been relatively mum on this impasse so far, though Mr. Ward has strenuously denied that the Port Authority has enough money to back financing on two towers at the site, even if it wanted to. (It doesn’t). Instead, Mr. Ward has offered to back financing on one building, Tower 4, along with asking a number of other concessions from Mr. Silverstein....Already, the capital plan, based on projections from a better economic era, has taken a hit from declining toll revenue and airport traffic. It also seems to have eaten up $2 billion that was slated to go toward an unspecified New York-based transportation project.

NJ Governor Jon Corzine

Along with Governor Paterson, Mr. Corzine has final say over any major action at the Port Authority, an agency that is, by mission, devoted to regional transportation and port issues between the two states. Like Mr. Paterson, officials on the New Jersey side of the river including the Port Authority’s chairman, Anthony Coscia, have been opposed to putting more money into the World Trade Center project for the purpose of speculative office towers. Given that some of the Port Authority’s spending is split, more or less, dollar for dollar between New York and New Jersey, it’s hard to see how Mr. Corzine would be happy with the agency devoting even more of its 10-year capital plan to the Manhattan-based World Trade Center. He is a big fan of the planned new rail tunnel under the Hudson River, to which the Port Authority has committed $3 billion in its capital plan.

Sheldon Silver, New York Assembly Speaker

The constant advocate for downtown, Mr. Silver called for this summit two weeks ago, saying he was “fed up” with the delays. He pushed the debate toward two towers, calling for all the parties to put in money to make it happen. With that said, he, unlike everyone else at the table, has no direct say in the matter, only a bully pulpit.

[CHAPINM1]

This is a Goddamn joke! Seriously... :( Well, on the bright side if there is a delay, hopefully their may be a possible tenent bidding for each resulting in height increase in tower 2 or 3 or even both whenever they are to be built.

[ls1z28chris]

If they build those two stumps, I give them no more than a decade before they're burned down by a pissed off Manhattan resident. :yes:

[rich_200]

I rather have Tower 2 and 3 delayed than having the retail building built, because if they do I don't think these two skyscrapers will ever see the day light.

[NewYorker2009]

If they build those two stumps, I give them no more than a decade before they're burned down by a pissed off Manhattan resident. :yes:

Indeed. Infact I wouldn't be surprised if Al-Qaeda terrorists laugh at the stumps and at this country because they managed to destroy the greatest landmark in the world and along with that they wiped out nearly 12 million square feet of office space. Two Towers would make the site look empty and that stupid Transit Hub they say could cost almost $4 billion if it is delayed any further because it's 5 years behind schedule. I say scrap the Hub and build the Towers but the PA is about transportation and the Hub is top priority for them and ofcourse there is 1 WTC.

[Aleks]

I feel the same way Rich. I'm really pissed now. I rarely get pissed about these kinds of things. I didn't even miss the Chicago Spire. But this? I think that the WTC should be built. And Silverstein should take people who oppose his plans to court.

[CHAPINM1]

I feel the same way Rich. I'm really pissed now. I rarely get pissed about these kinds of things. I didn't even miss the Chicago Spire. But this? I think that the WTC should be built. And Silverstein should take people who oppose his plans.

I think that it will in time, but this is still bullshit if you ask me...

[NYguy]

I rather have Tower 2 and 3 delayed than having the retail building built, because if they do I don't think these two skyscrapers will ever see the day light.

And THAT, I think is the biggest problem. It's hard enough to get anything built in New York, even when cost is no problem. But I guarantee you that if those above ground "mall-podiums" open, those towers will never see the light of day. I can already hear the whining about stores closing, or more construction coming after years of construction. And 10 years from now, who knows if Silverstein will even be around to insists these towers get built. I won't fault New Jersey officials if they fail to get this rebuilding done. The blame will lie with New York officials alone. They have no excuse.

They need to get this rebuilding done, and the sooner the better. No need to have Lower Manhattan, and the WTC site in particular become a permanent construction zone.

[NYguy]

http://www.observer.com/2009/real-estate/no-agreements-yet-break-wtc-impasse

World Trade Center Summit to End Impasse Produces... Roadmap and Another Summit

http://www.observer.com/files/full/87900555_0.jpg
Mayor Bloomberg on Thursday at Gracie Mansion, with Speaker Silver, left.

By Eliot Brown
May 21, 2009

It was too much of a nice day Thursday to spend hours inside, negotiating complex real estate deals. So, as expected, the political summit designed to break a stalemate at the World Trade Center was brief (about an hour long), and did not end with any large detailed plan or path forward.

Rather, the attendees—developer Larry Silverstein, Mayor Bloomberg, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine, Governor Paterson and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver; and Port Authority executive director Chris Ward and Port Authority chairman Anthony Coscia, among others—agreed to devise a “roadmap,” in the words of Mr. Bloomberg, with the principals agreeing to meet again around June 11.

The public remarks following the meeting were brief. The mayor, flanked by Messrs. Paterson and Silver as well as Deputy Mayor Bob Lieber outside Gracie Mansion, outlined the vague path forward as a small legion of staffers and Mr. Silverstein watched from the mansion’s porch.

“We want to create a roadmap that would create progress at the site,” Mr. Bloomberg said. That will “require a realignment of incentives, which will take time to negotiate. It’ll require us to find ways to safeguard public resources.”

The discussions will be led on a staff level until the next principals’ meeting, though all are expected to continually meet, at least for now.

One of the most central questions is how many office towers to build in addition to the Freedom Tower—one or two—and that did not appear to be resolved (though the mayor did seem to echo Mr. Silverstein’s position, saying the parties need to “begin building for tomorrow’s real estate market. … The financial and real estate markets will come back.”)

If the answer to that question is two towers, the issue of financing jumps to the fore, as the Port Authority claims it simply does not have the capacity to pay for a second tower without decimating what it says is an already bare bones capital plan.

[NYguy]

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_317/theupanddowns.html

The ups and downs of the W.T.C. talks to come

http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_317/downtup.jpg
Governors Paterson and Corzine are expected to put more of their weight toward Chris Ward, far left,
on the Port Authority side of the “seesaw,” but Mayor Bloomberg and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver
are already leaning more toward World Trade Center developer Larry Silverstein.

By Josh Rogers
May 22 - 28, 2009


Thinking of the World Trade Center impasse as a seesaw might be a good guide to predicting how a negotiated agreement will end up.

On opposite sides of the seesaw are two equally weighted adversaries — W.T.C. developer Larry Silverstein and the Port Authority, run by executive director Chris Ward. Both sides have offered some insights into their positions in interviews over the last few weeks, but the final outcome is more likely to be determined by the balance of power.

Each needs heavy friends to get more control and the balancing will begin Thursday afternoon, May 21 at a meeting at Gracie Mansion.

Perhaps the two heaviest weights involved based on their current political standing — Mayor Mike Bloomberg and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver — uncharacteristically are working together, standing in roughly the same seesaw spot with most of their weight on the Silverstein side but with a lighter foot helping the Port. Silver called for a meeting of all of the parties two weeks ago and Bloomberg immediately praised Silver’s ideas while inviting everyone to Gracie Mansion.

The two other players, Governors David Paterson and Jon Corzine, share control of the P.A., and are highly unlikely to put more of their weight on Silverstein’s side.

New York governors traditionally select the Port executive director and Paterson brought Ward in last year to figure out a realistic timeline to build most of the components of the World Trade Center (the Performing Arts Center and Tower 5 are only long-term hopes). For Paterson to move squarely to Silverstein’s side now, he would also have to acknowledge in effect that he thinks he made a mistake in putting Ward in charge.

The New Jersey contingent of the Port has long resisted efforts to devote more resources to the W.T.C., favoring projects that benefit the Garden State more directly like a new commuter rail tunnel to Midtown. Corzine almost certainly will stay closer to the Port than Silverstein. His spokesperson declined to comment Wednesday.

The Port, which is building One W.T.C., has offered to help Silverstein get $800 million in loans to finish Tower 4 at the southeast corner of the site, which together would add about 5 million square feet of office space to the market in about five years. Those who have come down on the Port’s side of the issue have pointed out that Silverstein Properties recouped most of its investment in the W.T.C. six years ago and assert the Port shouldn’t subsidize a private developer in order to build an office building completely on spec.

In an interview a few weeks ago, Ward said the Port would only help Silverstein build 4 W.T.C.

“We have to find a way to bridge this gap, but it can’t be a second tower,” he said prior to Silver’s calling for a summit.

He proposes building retail structures or podiums at Towers 2 and 3 (which neither side is trying to build now) that would allow stores to open at the site long before those towers would be built on top.

On the other side, Janno Lieber, president of Silverstein’s World Trade Center Properties, said before the downturn, there were credible, long-term preditcions that the city would need 60 million square feet of office space, and even if those are overly optimistic by 20 or 30 million, there will still not be nearly enough to meet the demand. He said there will be practically no new green office space in 2013 when Lieber expects Tower 4 to open or in 2015 when Tower 2 could be finished with Port help.

“The idea that there won’t be any market [then], doesn’t make any sense based on history,” Lieber told Downtown Express.

In a prepared statement, he said the financial help would be a “backstop” to secure loans which the developer would repay.

Lieber said “the huge issue” is the infrastructure that Silverstein Properties needs to finish building the towers — a Vehicle Security Center and Greenwich Street itself, which will have office doorways to Towers 2 and 4.

“Where is the infrastructure,” Lieber asked. “Will the infrastructure be there in time for us to finish that building (Tower 4), open it and operate it…The schedule has fallen apart yet again.”

The security center, which will be built by the Port, will be needed in a year or two to run delivery trucks onto the construction site under the building in order to fit out the offices, which will be important to attracting commercial tenants. Construction on the V.S.C. is stalled because of the long-delayed demolition of the former Deutsche Bank Building, which is owned by the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. Candace McAdams, a Port spokesperson, said “we are in the process of developing workarounds to ensure the V.S.C. stays on track.”

The next piece to building Greenwich Street is constructing an underpinning structure to support the No. 1 train, which runs through the site. The Port recently completed the design for the underpinning but the Metropolitan Transportation Authority needs to sign off on it and it is still reviewing the plans.

Outside of the Port, there appears to be increasing skepticism that the retail podium idea could be implemented easily.

McAdams, the Port spokesperson, said they are “developing contingencies” for retail construction designs.

But Seth Pinsky, a key Bloomberg official who sided with the Port three years ago during the last major W.T.C. impasse, said it would be difficult to design the podiums, assuming officials committed to leaving the store structures alone for enough years to attract desirable tenants.

“But even then, I think you’re going to find lower rents, and it’s an engineering challenge to develop something like that,” Pinsky, now president of the city’s Economic Development Corp., told Downtown Express. “It can’t be all upside for Larry Silverstein and all downside for the Port, but we also don’t want to see something that’s bad from the perspective of planning in Lower Manhattan.”

Pinsky prepared a 2006 report for the mayor outlining the financial problems Silverstein would have trying to rebuild five towers at roughly the same time. The problems led to the Port and Silverstein renegotiating their 99-year lease for the W.T.C. Under the 2006 agreement, Silverstein relinquished control of the least viable towers, the Freedom Tower (now called One W.T.C.) and Tower 5. Silverstein also agreed to transfer a proportional amount of his insurance money and tax-free Liberty Bonds to the Port so it could build two of the towers.

The city and the Port committed to leasing 600,000 square feet each in Tower 4. One factor that may be troubling the P.A. is that at the same time Silverstein is asking the Port to take on more risk, he is also not willing to exercise his lease option with the city because he is expecting to get tenants to pay a lot more than the $59 per square foot rent he agreed to three years ago.

Many civic groups and local residents following the recent developments have expressed wariness for using public money to support a private developer, which could tip the seesaw a little more the Port’s way.

With little if any negotiations over the last two weeks, there is no expectation that a final deal could be reached in a meeting scheduled to last only an hour. The best that could be hoped for Thursday is a framework in which negotiations can proceed, two of the parties to the summit said.

And with Bloomberg and Silver allied and with their support among their respective constituencies high, they should be able to get the seesaw to balance close to where they want it — a commitment to build Towers 2 and 4 as Silverstein wants, but with the developer putting more at risk. Paterson and Corzine may be able to ease the Port’s risk more than the mayor and Silver would want, but they’ll be hard-pressed to put Tower 2 on hold if that’s their plan.


With reporting by Julie Shapiro

[NYguy]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05222009/photos/building_a_blueprint.jpg

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05222009/photos/building_a_blueprint.jpg


http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2009/05/22/2009-05-22_bloombergs_plan_for_feuding_wtc_parties_impose_a_news_blackout_fight_behind_clos.html

Bloomberg's plan for feuding WTC parties? Impose a news blackout, fight behind closed doors

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/05/22/alg_bloomberg-paterson.jpg

BY Douglas Feiden
May 22nd 2009

The powwow called by Mayor Bloomberg to hash out differences between the Port Authority and developer Larry Silverstein over Ground Zero resulted in a plan - button up.

All involved at Thursday's Gracie Mansion summit agreed to impose a news blackout, thrash out differences behind closed doors and meet again June 11 with a framework for a deal.

"Further delay at the World Trade Center is simply not acceptable," the mayor said. "It's intolerable to leave this hole in the ground."

PA Executive Director Chris Ward cautioned that he didn't expect a "fully baked deal" by next month's sitdown, but both he and Silverstein tried to stay positive.

[CoolCzech]

Talks, talks, talks. They've been talking since 2001.

How 'bout shutting up and getting down to REBUILDING?

[CoolCzech]

Why is this nation allowing some faceless, grey little small-minded NOBODY like some bureaucratic mole named Ward to decide what the skyline of New York City - America's Face to the World - will look like?

It's just bizarre.

[NYguy]

It's just bizarre.

Just hold on. Things continue to get more surreal...

posted on curbed.com

Larry Tickles the Ivories

So how did yesterday's big let's-fix-this-World-Trade-Center-thing summit at Gracie Mansion go? The Post reports: "The summit invitees, including Silverstein, Gov. Paterson, New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and PA officials, agreed to order their aides to come up with an agreement by the next summit on June 11." So...mission accomplished? A better summary was tweeted by Downtown Express: "WTC parties to meet again 6/11. Amicable meeting w/o mch negotiations. Source: Silverstein briefly entertained the group by playing piano." Please tell us he did a rendition of TLC's "No Scrubs" but changed the lyrics to "No Stumps."

[ls1z28chris]

A preliminary pre-meeting planning meeting.

[NYguy]

A preliminary pre-meeting planning meeting.

That just buys them more time to get this resolved in the 3 weeks or so until then. But if nothing gets resolved by then, things will really get ugly. And they haven't been very pretty so far.

[nygirl1]

This is insulting.

[Zerton]

I had a feeling even before the recession about these towers.

[NYguy]

I had a feeling even before the recession about these towers.

The recession is a problem, but the talk that the towers shouldn't be built for a decade or so is the real problem. Even if Silverstein had the money to pay for construction out of his own pockets, there are those who are insisting that there is no demand for new office space today. As if Silverstein will suddenly clap his hands, and these new towers will spring up, ready for business tomorrow.

[NYguy]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/8520213

World Trade Center developer Larry Silverstein will probably be pressed to make more concessions to get the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to guarantee bank loans for two of the three office towers he wants to build where the twin towers stood until the deadly attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

"Private development should be fundamentally backed by private capital," Bloomberg told reporters after hosting a meeting at Gracie Mansion for Silverstein, Democratic Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, as well as the Port Authority and the Democratic governors of New York and New Jersey who run it.

After years of delays due to battles with insurers and clashes over designs and security, the Port Authority missed a deadline for preparing the site for Silverstein. The recession has curbed banks' willingness to lend money for new buildings that lack tenants, as Silverstein's towers largely do.
As a result, the site remains what the mayor, an independent, called "a hole in the ground."

Yet failing to rebuild it could cause the city to miss the next economic boom due to a lack of office space, Bloomberg warned.

[Dac150]

It's a real hideous display. I understand there is much money on the line here, and with the economy what it is currently people don't want to let go. However, this is pure and simply an investment for a boom that can potentially be less than a decade away.

[NYguy]

this is pure and simply an investment for a boom that can potentially be less than a decade away.

Forget about a boom in 10 years, there is virtually no new office space being built in Manhattan now. Sure there are plenty of proposals, and large ones, but none are as ready to rise as these towers are. In less than two years, you will see movement, regardless of whatever happens here.

The problem here is that these towers were planned as spec, and now some people are just having a change of heart. But given the lengthy construction time, Silverstein knows that these towers need to get underway as planned. He just has to get financing in order. For all the talk of government/private financing, this complex has always been a government project. Besides that, I think the government has to share some of the responsibility of responding to the 9/11 attacks by getting this complex rebuilt once and for all.

[aaron38]

Yet failing to rebuild it could cause the city to miss the next economic boom due to a lack of office space, Bloomberg warned.

It's not just the lack of space. To get out of this recession we're going to need innovative startups hiring people, and they can't afford to piss away money on exorbitant rent. Some vacant office space will keep the rents down and allow companies to spend their resources growing their business, not making someone else rich. Or the start-ups will flee the city for an auto-dependent suburb to suffer later when gas goes back to $5 a gallon.

Now developers and banks have every right to make a profit, but to wait years on construction so someone can pocket an extra couple percent simply harms the overall economy and delays recovery.

[NYguy]

Now developers and banks have every right to make a profit, but to wait years on construction so someone can pocket an extra couple percent simply harms the overall economy and delays recovery.

Bloomberg has to walk very carefully here, because he knows his own plan for developing Manhattan's west side hinges on the development of the millions of square feet of office space now planned there. It's why the city is the force behind the 7 train extension, not the MTA. But it's not just Bloomberg. All of the players in New York real estate know that the demand for new office space will reappear as quickly as it now seems to have vanished. That's always the case in Manhattan. Some very important decisions will have to be made in the next year or so in regards to large leases. The problem at the WTC site is that construction has to start moving now because everything is twisted together. They really can't afford to wait, even for just another year. This is an issue that has to be resolved yesterday.

[Zerton]

Apart from all this office space crap (of course it will eventually get filled) this is truly embarrassing on the national level. Can you imagine China leaving a pit in the ground at the site of such a disaster so many years on.

I always hold back mentioning how slow this construction is because I know all that does is annoy people but seriously this shouldn't have been so difficult.

[Dac150]

this shouldn't have been so difficult.

Well it has been, and there's no sense in trying to make sense something that lacks sense at this point. All we can hope for is some rational tides to turn in the coming weeks with these meetings.

There are too many voices involved, too much politics, that's the real crime in all of this.

In the words of Phil Collins: "Too many people, with too many problems, and not much love to go around. Can't you see this is the land of confusion."

[NYguy]

There are too many voices involved, too much politics, that's the real crime in all of this.

That's exactly right. All they had to do was make a plan and stick with it. All of this back and forth is tiresome at best.

[djvandrake]

How much is Bloomberg worth these days? $4 billion? $6 Billion?

He would be the hero in all of this if he'd tell the Port Authority "You step up for tower 2, and I'll handle tower 3" Not a small sum mind you but one he could handle with his fortune. What else is he going to do with it? Really? Problem solved and gets New Yorkers back to work. NOW.

Just a thought.