NEW YORK | 175 Greenwich St. | 1,079 FT | 80 FLOORS

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Chapelo

It was originally planned to have a roof height of 1,175 feet, going to 1,240 ft to the spires. Later, the building was shortened to 1,079 feet, with a spire height of 1170 feet, and the X-Bracing was removed.

I liked it more when it was taller; it resembled the South Tower, and had the same domineering presence on the skyline.

At no point did it resemble the South Tower, but orignal plans were for a height of 1,255 ft (1,155 ft without the spires). Currently it's at 1,170 ft and 1,080 ft.

[NYguy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/ny...-building.html

With New Lease, Viacom Commits to Times Sq.

By CHARLES V. BAGLI
April 25, 2012

With Viacom now out of the market, developers are focusing on media and technology companies like Time Warner, rather than financial companies, as a possible anchor tenant for a new office tower they are all eager to build, whether it is in Midtown, downtown or on the Far West Side of Manhattan.

Last year, Jeffrey L. Bewkes, the chief executive of Time Warner, expressed his desire to consolidate the company’s operations, which include HBO, Time Inc., Warner Brothers and CNN, in new quarters by 2017. He described the company’s current headquarters at the Time Warner Center as “indulgent” and said he hoped to save tens of millions of dollars by moving to a new, less-expensive space. Earlier this month, Time Warner’s real estate broker, Studley, asked roughly a dozen developers to submit preliminary proposals for from one million to three million square feet of office space.

The developer Larry Silverstein submitted information about the towers he is building at the World Trade Center, while Brookfield proposed either the World Financial Center downtown, or, better yet, the company’s large development site across Ninth Avenue from the Farley Post Office.

Alloy Development, in a partnership with Boston Properties, threw its West Side site, between 35th and 36th Streets, into the mix. And separately, Boston Properties, in partnership with Related Companies and Extell Development, offered an office site on Eighth Avenue at 45th Street. Extell also submitted plans for a tower on 11th Avenue, opposite the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center.

Related, which built the Time Warner Center, has also proposed building a new headquarters for Time Warner at the southwest corner of 33rd Street and 10th Avenue, as part of its 26-acre Hudson Yards project. Related has told city officials that it plans to start work on a new headquarters for Coach in October on a site nearby.

[10023]

If I were a Viacom employee, I'd be disappointed today.

[dar124]

Originally Posted by 10023

If I were a Viacom employee, I'd be disappointed today.

Agreed!!

[Dac150]

Not entirely shocked by this - Times Square is a very fitting location for this company and I can understand why they would want to retain a presence there. However, I thought 4 Times Square would pop up as a wild card if they chose to stay there.

Oh well . . .my eyes are now set on Time Warner.

[blacktrojan3921]

Why would Time Warner want to move out of the Time Warner Center?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by blacktrojan3921

Why would Time Warner want to move out of the Time Warner Center?

Above:

Last year, Jeffrey L. Bewkes, the chief executive of Time Warner, expressed his desire to consolidate the company’s operations, which include HBO, Time Inc., Warner Brothers and CNN, in new quarters by 2017.

They would like to be under as few roofs as possible, and save money in the process as well.

[Ed007Toronto]

Smme great updates

[MrSlippery519]

Looks like they are rising again...really hope this gets a tenant before it's capped. I can live with #2 not rising now

[NYguy]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...02304050304577
374281031930856.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

A Deal for Time Warner


6,500: Number of employees Time Warner has in the New York region


April 30, 2012
Laura Kusisto

At first, Tom Santiago hesitated when he was approached by Time Warner Inc. last year about overseeing its New York search for a possible new headquarters. At the time Mr. Santiago was head of real estate at Citigroup and figured that the company that owns such flashy businesses as Home Box Office and produces movies like Harry Potter would be "looking for a larger than life" type, he says. "They assured me, 'That's exactly what we don't want,'" says Mr. Santiago, an avid fisherman who also spends his off-hours as a mentor to city high school students.

Mr. Santiago took the job and now he's the man behind one of the most closely watched Manhattan office space searches in years. He must help Time Warner decide what to do with its office portfolio in New York, where it owns space in Columbus Circle and leases space at 1100 and 1271 Sixth Ave. It totals some 4 million square feet (equal to about 1½ Empire State Buildings).

Needless to say, Mr. Santiago is very popular with Manhattan landlords and developers these days. Getting the nod from Time Warner, for example, would virtually guarantee that Related Cos. or Brookfield Office Properties Inc. would be able to move forward with massive new projects on Manhattan's west side. Or it would super-charge Larry Silverstein's developments at the World Trade Center.

Or Time Warner could simply decide to remain in its current headquarters at Columbus Circle. The company is being assisted in its search by a team of brokers at Studley Inc. led by Mitchell Steir, the company's chief executive, and Michael Colacino. The move could also prove contentious, because it involves moving some 6,500 full-time employees, maybe some to New Jersey and Connecticut to cut costs. Also, Time Warner divisions as Time Life and HBO have traditionally been in separate buildings and some at those units might like it to stay that way.

Late Friday afternoon, Time Warner sent out requests for proposals to virtually all of the city's largest developers including Sherwood Equities Inc., Brookfield Office Properties Inc., Extell Development, Related Cos., Boston Properties Inc., Rockefeller Group, Vornado Realty Trust, Alloy Development and Silverstein Properties. The company plans to make a decision by the end of the year.

http://mycrains.crainsnewyork.com/bl...0%99s-giga-op/

Time Warner’s giga-op

April 30, 2012
by Erik Ipsen

One of the contestants in that game got a well-timed boost on Monday morning with the papers trumpeting the news on their front pages that this will be the day that New York City gets a new holder for the title of tallest building. When they bolt a new column in place up on the 100th floor of 1 World Trade Center, its top end will loom 1,271 feet above ground level, according to The New York Times. The owners of the erstwhile No. 1 tower, the Empire State Building, graciously sent their congratulations. “We’ve watched you grow, and now we salute you,” was the message sent from up on West 34th Street and Fifth Avenue. That building is now 21 feet shorter than 1 WTC, and it’ll be 226 feet shorter by next year, when the antenna atop the building is finished.

With Condé Nast slated to be the anchor tenant in that spire and with downtown clearly on the rebound—and destined to garner a lot of favorable publicity in coming months—the prospects for that old fox Larry Silverstein landing Time Warner are getting better by the day. He has one tower down at the Trade Center site that he was prepared to cap at a mere seven stories that he’d love to hang Time Warner’s name on—in big red lights if the company would like. And he could likely deliver the goods faster and cheaper than his rivals.

[Tectonic]

As much I would like to see the WTC completed I think Related's West Side Project might be the best choice of large projects.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Tectonic

As much I would like to see the WTC completed I think Related's West Side Project might be the best choice of large projects.

I don't know about that. I've always felt Related had the upper hand for their previous relationship at Time Warner Center, while Silverstein had the upper hand because his towers are already in the ground. But Related seems to want to step down from the "flashier" headquarters like Time Warner Center, and Related's project is just Time Warner Center on steroids. I think one of the other west side towers have a strong shot, where TW could consolidate some offices into one tower, while shifting some positions to the suburbs. Silverstein's towers are tempting, but still flashy buildings, and I don't know what TW would do with the massive trading floors, besides studios maybe. If it comes to Silverstein, timing may play a role in it.

[babybackribs2314]

Yesterday & full update: http://newyorkyimby.blogspot.com/201...greenwich.html

[10023]

Originally Posted by Dac150

Not entirely shocked by this - Times Square is a very fitting location for this company and I can understand why they would want to retain a presence there.

Fine, but as an employee there's absolutely no worse place to work than Times Square.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by 10023

Fine, but as an employee there's absolutely no worse place to work than Times Square.

Some would disagree, but we're getting off topic here.

[Onn]

I keep coming into this thread every time there's a new post praying a deal's been made. Someone has to make a deal for this one already! Construction is so close, yet seemingly so far away!

[marshall]

If I were betting, I'd say 2 and 3wtc will get built, fairly close to their intended designs, because of the attractiveness of the sight, and what is sure to be a major hub. Here is the analogy I draw: 1wtc represents the old twin towers, which will be completed first (not counting of course 7wtc) but 1wtc is the first major high profile building on the site to be built. 2wtc and 3wtc represent the old, often forgotten two-story buildings that hugged the bases of the old twin towers, which weren't finished until the late 70s or even into the 1980s, almost 10 years after the twin towers were built. So I'd say by 2016 or 2020 2wtc and 3wtc will be pretty much built in their intended forms, maybe give or take a bit..

[Fishman92]

Originally Posted by marshall

the site to be built. 2wtc and 3wtc represent the old, often forgotten two-story buildings that hugged the bases of the old twin towers, which

2 Story buildings?
No. (9 story i think).

[Roadcruiser1]

The Marriott Hotel was 22 stories....

[Davidsam52]

Originally Posted by Fishman92

2 Story buildings?
No. (9 story i think).

Yes the old buildings 4, 5, & 6 were 9 stories. #6 might have been marginally salvagable had the rest of the site not been so utterly obliterated.