HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


    Three World Trade Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #841  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2009, 11:48 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
http://www.globest.com/news/1430_143...sector=newyork

WTC Talks to Continue Through Weekend

Quote:
NEW YORK CITY-Sources tell GlobeSt.com that it was Mayor Michael Bloomberg who initiated a weekend extension of talks between the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Silverstein Properties Inc. regarding construction and planning progress at the World Trade Center site in Lower Manhattan. Negotiators for the developer and the Port Authority missed a Thursday deadline to resolve their differences.

Promising an update on Monday, Bloomberg says in a statement that he spoke Thursday with New York Gov. David Paterson, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine, "and--together with Larry Silverstein and the Port Authority--we agreed to extend the conversation through the weekend. Everyone remains committed to finding a solution."

Sources from SPI and the Port Authority wouldn’t reveal details to GlobeSt.com of exactly what happened during the talks. However, in a statement, Larry Silverstein, chairman and CEO of SPI, says that thanks to great leadership, "we have made significant progress over the past three weeks." He adds, "all stakeholders--public and private--must work together to make good on our repeated vow to rebuild the World Trade Center.

A spokesperson from the Port Authority deferred to the mayor’s statement, adding that more would be revealed on Monday.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #842  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2009, 12:19 AM
uaarkson's Avatar
uaarkson uaarkson is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Back in Flint
Posts: 2,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
At which point we will probably learn what the next target date is for an agreement...(or Silverstein challenges the PA to a death duel on pay per view)


I would pay hundreds to see that.
     
     
  #843  
Old Posted Jun 13, 2009, 12:23 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by uaarkson View Post
I would pay hundreds to see that.
Put it on pay per view, and there's the financing...
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #844  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 6:03 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/ny...1&ref=nyregion

Still No Breakthrough in Ground Zero Talks

By CHARLES V. BAGLI
June 15, 2009

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s effort to break the impasse over the development of office towers on the 16-acre ground zero site limped along Monday, with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and the developer Larry A. Silverstein still at odds.

Officials from New York and New Jersey, as well as the developer and the Port Authority, which owns the World Trade Center site, have been in constant discussions since last Thursday, which had been the mayor’s deadline for a resolution to be passed. But several officials involved in the talks say the two sides continue to snipe at each other’s proposals.

Deputy Mayor Robert C. Lieber tried to put the best face on what is becoming a tedious effort, while seeming to scold both sides.

“While our talks have made headway, we can continue to work through the details to try to arrive at a consensus that all parties can support,” Mr. Lieber said in a statement released by City Hall. “The redevelopment of ground zero is no ordinary real estate project. Rebuilding the site is a civic obligation of the highest order, and the people of our city rightly expect all those responsible for the site to work cooperatively to honor that obligation.”

Mr. Silverstein is to build three office towers on the site. Unable to obtain financing or secure anchor tenants, Mr. Silverstein has demanded that the Port Authority guarantee as much as $3.2 billion in loans.

The authority, which is already building a skyscraper, a transit hub and portions of the Sept. 11 memorial, reluctantly offered to provide help with up to $1.2 billion in financing for the first of the developer’s three towers. The authority does not want to function as a bank for speculative office space, especially at a time when commercial vacancy rates are climbing and the Port Authority’s own revenues have declined.

“We agree that the World Trade Center must be rebuilt to meet the public interest, which is why we will continue in good faith to push for a solution that delivers retail and office space to meet a significantly changed market while protecting public resources and public projects,” Stephen Sigmund, a spokesman for the authority, said in a statement. “In the meantime, the public side of the site will move forward.”

So far, the governors of New York and New Jersey have backed the authority’s position, while Mr. Bloomberg and Sheldon Silver, the New York State Assembly speaker, have largely supported Mr. Silverstein.

Despite the deadlock, hundreds of construction workers labor at the site on the authority’s office tower, the memorial, the transit hub and even Mr. Silverstein’s first tower, which is emerging at street level from the bottom of the construction pit.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #845  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 3:10 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
http://www.nypost.com/seven/06162009...lks_174508.htm

PA BIG MISSES TALKS

June 16, 2009

Despite Mayor Bloomberg's demand that negotiations over rebuilding the World Trade Center continue though last weekend, the chief negotiator for the Port Authority left town to attend a wedding, sources told The Post.

"It's impossible to strike a deal when the lead negotiator for the Port Authority leaves town at a crucial moment in the negotiations," said a source familiar with the talks between the PA and developer Larry Silverstein.

PA spokesman Stephen Sigmund confirmed that the agency's executive director, Chris Ward, left for a trip to California and is expected to return tonight. But Sigmund rejected the suggestion that the trip impacted the talks.

"Low blows won't get a deal done," Sigmund said, adding, "Chris made a commitment to his family that he's keeping, and he's in constant contact with the negotiating parties."
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #846  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 7:37 PM
colemonkee's Avatar
colemonkee colemonkee is online now
Ridin' into the sunset
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 9,100
Ha! I kind of side with the Chris Ward on this one. These negotiations can wait a few days. He probably RSVP'd for that wedding months ago.
__________________
"Then each time Fleetwood would be not so much overcome by remorse as bedazzled at having been shown the secret backlands of wealth, and how sooner or later it depended on some act of murder, seldom limited to once."

Against the Day, Thomas Pynchon
     
     
  #847  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2009, 11:58 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-es...-jon-and-david

Mike vs. Larry vs. Jon and David

By Eliot Brown
June 16, 2009

Just after 6 p.m. on Monday, Mayor Bloomberg’s press office emailed a statement on negotiations surrounding the World Trade Center, where a private developer and the public sector have hit a major obstacle over financing. In May, the various officials involved pledged to try to have a resolution by Thursday, June 11. With no solution then, the mayor asked for a few more days, with the hope of having some sort of plan by Monday.

The result was less than a breakthrough: “We continue to work through the details to try to arrive at a consensus.”

Ever since Larry Silverstein first approached the Port Authority late last year with a request that it back financing on his towers at the World Trade Center, officials at the state and city level have been at a loss for a workable solution. At least as of press time, that continues. Without an agreement, officials on all sides fear that Mr. Silverstein could delay integral components of the site, such as the main access roadway and the PATH hub.

At its core, the unending impasse involves Mayor Bloomberg, who has tried to seize the role of dealmaker here, squaring off against a pair of governors and the bistate Port Authority they control. The mayor and his top aides have sided with Mr. Silverstein on his main demand, that the public sector put up money to help build two of his towers, and they have thus far pointed at the Port Authority to put up the bulk of the $3 billion or so needed.

But the two governors, David Paterson and Jon Corzine—who would likely have to agree in tandem to such an act—have been unwilling to do so to this point, given that it would mean scaling back transportation projects.

In recent days, the multiparty summits have come to an end and city officials, led by Deputy Mayor Bob Lieber, have been shuttling back and forth between the various governmental parties in an attempt to craft a solution and whittle away at the substantial gap, according to multiple officials involved and familiar with discussions.

And for the Bloomberg administration, it seems the governors are the best hope for the bulk of any new money.

Even if Mr. Silverstein wanted to put substantial new equity into the project beyond his insurance proceeds—and he doesn’t—the tenacious landlord has far less capacity to raise money than the government, which is why he’s been looking for this bailout in the first place. In the latest multiparty talks last week, he offered $75 million in new money, according to people involved, though he would take more than that in development fees from the project.

The city has been resistant to plunge into the deal itself (though it offered $100 million last week), as it has taken the position that it is more of an observer, and the other parties have more of a direct stake.

The Port Authority has been unabashedly intransigent on the point of money, as its executive director, Chris Ward, and chairman, Tony Coscia, have insisted they already put up plenty in an earlier offer, which involved financing Mr. Silverstein’s Tower 4. The jump to finance a tenantless second tower the size of the Empire State Building, the agency has said, would necessitate unacceptable transportation-related cuts.

THUS, IF THERE IS any chance the agency will change its position, it would come from the two people who ultimately control the semi-independent authority, and have additional capacity to give on their own: Messrs. Paterson and Corzine.

But both are protective of the Port Authority’s capital plan, as it puts billions of public-works spending into the two states, and in talks thus far, both governors have resisted directing the agency to put up the money for the second tower.

Mr. Paterson’s office has been more receptive to the city’s pleas than the Port Authority staff, according to multiple people involved, but not to the point where new money is on the table. Mr. Corzine has far less political ownership of the project and has previously been critical of any attempt to move more capital money toward the World Trade Center. Mr. Corzine’s spokesman did not respond to multiple requests for comment, and a spokeswoman for Mr. Paterson declined to comment.

The political alignment that has emerged is a different one from the last renegotiation, in 2006, when the city and New Jersey officials at the Port Authority challenged Mr. Silverstein and the governor at the time, George Pataki.

“It was the city and Jersey versus Pataki,” one former official said, an approach that resulted in Mr. Silverstein ultimately agreeing to cede responsibility.

This time around, it’s difficult to see a way out of the deadlock. After weeks, the parties are still nowhere close to having the money needed, according to multiple officials, leading to frustrations all around. This frustration seemed evident in the Bloomberg administration’s statement Monday, attributed to Mr. Lieber, which seemed directed far more at the other parties than at the public or the press.

“The redevelopment of Ground Zero is no ordinary real estate project,” Mr. Lieber said in the statement. “Rebuilding the site is a civic obligation of the highest order, and the people of our City rightly expect all those responsible for the site to work cooperatively to honor that obligation.”
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #848  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 6:21 AM
Acer1 Acer1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 73
Somethings missing

Can anything be done on the federal level? Seems like an Obama representative should be at these meetings.
     
     
  #849  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 1:02 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acer1 View Post
Can anything be done on the federal level? Seems like an Obama representative should be at these meetings.
The federal government has already given money to the rebuilding efforts, mostly going towards the $3 billion PATH terminal, and the nearly as expensive Fulton St transit center. Also, much has been given to banks. I wouldn't expect any more involvement here.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #850  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 5:37 PM
djvandrake's Avatar
djvandrake djvandrake is offline
I'm going slightly mad.
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
The federal government has already given money to the rebuilding efforts, mostly going towards the $3 billion PATH terminal, and the nearly as expensive Fulton St transit center. Also, much has been given to banks. I wouldn't expect any more involvement here.
Very true, I wouldn't expect much more in the way of fiscal help. However, it would be really nice to see a high level federal presence just to let all interested parties know that the rest of us would like to see them get off their dead asses and get this thing built as they all agreed to. Send Joe Biden, they'll all get back to work just to prevent having to go to the talks because Joe will wear them out.
     
     
  #851  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 5:51 PM
philvia's Avatar
philvia philvia is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 452
in the history of this project, i am not sure if they have EVER met a deadline.


yawn.
     
     
  #852  
Old Posted Jun 17, 2009, 11:42 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-es...port-authority

Bloomberg and Silver: Strange Bedfellows in WTC Offensive Against Port Authority

By Eliot Brown
June 17, 2009


Mayor Bloomberg, joining forces with frequent adversary Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, has launched a campaign against the Port Authority in an attempt to force the agency to agree to put up more money at the World Trade Center.

Officials from the city and the bistate Port Authority have been engaged in intense talks as they try to back financing for two office towers at the site, which would be built and owned by private developer Larry Silverstein. The towers have no private tenants, though Mr. Silverstein insists the public sector has a moral and legal responsibility to let him build given its own delays at the site—a point that surely would be debated in court if it goes that far.

Mr. Bloomberg on Wednesday attacked the Port Authority in a statement issued with Mr. Silver, who has previously opposed the mayor on numerous economic development projects including aspects of the World Trade Center debate. This marks the second high-profile issue that the two foes have recently agreed upon—Mr. Silver supported a modified version of mayoral control of the city schools, a pet initiative of Mr. Bloomberg.

On Wednesday, speaking to reporters, Mr. Bloomberg kept up the pointed criticism.

"What’s good for America and good for New York City may be slightly at odds with what’s good for the Port Authority,” he said. “We cannot leave a hole in the ground and the Port Authority just has to come to the party.”

The attack breaks the Bloomberg administration’s position of staying relatively neutral in the trade center debate, along with staying silent. Just last month, Mr. Bloomberg made a point of criticizing any sniping that had been occurring over the issue, cautioning all parties to stay quiet and cordial.

“This is not one party against another,” Bloomberg said at the time. “No matter how anybody tries to pull us apart and get one side to trade against another, we’re not going to fall for that bait. That’s gone on for much too long.”

It is notable that Mr. Bloomberg did not direct his criticism directly at the governors of New York and New Jersey, who control the Port Authority. Rather, it was directed at the agency as an entity itself, perhaps in an effort to isolate it from the governors. After all, he wants Governors Corzine and Paterson to eventually direct the agency to back well over $2 billion in additional financing; agency officials have strenuously resisted financing two towers, saying the money would come at the cost of essential transportation projects.

The approach also reflects a change in alliances. In the last renegotiation at the site, Mr. Bloomberg fought Mr. Silverstein and partnered with New Jersey officials at the Port Authority. Mr. Silver has long been one of the more supportive players toward Mr. Silverstein downtown.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #853  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2009, 1:34 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article...FREE/906179974

Port Authority on hot seat at ground zero

By Theresa Agovino
June 17, 2009


It’s getting ugly.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg blamed The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey again on Wednesday for the logjam between the agency and developer Larry Silverstein over financing construction of two office towers at ground zero.

“We cannot leave a hole in the ground and the Port Authority just has to come to the party,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference.

The mayor added that the city itself may find a way to help end the impasse with some funds of its own. He wasn’t specific, but sources say that during negotiations the city had offered to cover $100 million in Mr. Silverstein’s financing shortfalls so that he could construct two towers. Mr. Silverstein wants the Port to back two of his towers but the agency has only offered support for one, saying it would be irresponsible to use public money to finance a risky, private real estate deal. The city’s offer still doesn’t take enough financial risk off the Port’s back, according to some sources close to the negotiations.

Frustrations are running high, sources say, because the two sides aren’t close to reaching a deal after nearly three weeks of negotiations brokered by the mayor and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.

The mayor and Mr. Silver have been turning the screws on the Port to break the deadlock but it’s still unclear how effective their campaign will be. The agency is controlled by the governors of New York and New Jersey, who sources say agree that the Port should only back one tower.

The mayor acknowledged Wednesday that the Port does have its balance sheet to worry about, and said multiple changes in governors in both states since the attacks have contributed to the problems at ground zero.

On Tuesday, Messrs. Bloomberg and Silver fired the first salvo at the Port. In a statement they announced: “We fundamentally believe that there are opportunities to find mutually agreeable and responsible terms that align the Port Authority’s interests with the city’s and the nation’s and that allow continued progress at ground zero.” Mr. Silverstein’s name wasn’t even mentioned in the release.

Today, the mayor turned up the heat even more by praising Mr. Silverstein at a press conference, while reiterating that what’s good for The Port “may be slightly at odds: with what is good for America and the city.

“I will say Larry Silverstein, while not turning over the keys to his family’s net worth, has come up and has made a lot of progress, (and is) willing to step in,” said the mayor at the press conference.


The developer has a lease which allows it to build three towers at the World Trade Center site, which is owned by the Port Authority.

Mr. Silverstein had been criticized for not having any of his own money in the project. Sources said that during the negotiations he had offered to put up $75 million and said he would assume responsibility for the work at the site, which would save $400 million. However, others point out that he offered no guarantee for the $400 million and that the $75 million represented less than 2% of the buildings’ costs.

In another swipe at the Port, on Tuesday, the New York Post reported that Christopher Ward, the head of the Port Authority, was out of town over the weekend while negotiations continued. It quoted a source saying that it was impossible to strike a deal when the Port’s lead negotiator was absent.

A Port spokesman called the story “silly” and told the Post that “low blows won’t get a deal done.”

In a statement, the Port said, “We agree that the progress at the World Trade Center must continue. We are working with all parties to advance the private development in a realistic way that protects public resources for the people of this region.

Spokespeople for Mr. Silver, New York Gov. David Paterson and New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine didn’t immediately return calls. A spokesman for Mr. Silverstein declined comment.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #854  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2009, 1:58 AM
rich_200's Avatar
rich_200 rich_200 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mexico City
Posts: 4,143
Good for Bloomberg and Silver
     
     
  #855  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2009, 7:05 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-es...ter-costs-rise

Port Authority Chief Fires Back at Mayor; For First Time, Names the Names of Projects Sacrificed to WTC Financing

By Eliot Brown
June 18, 2009


The Port Authority’s executive director swung back Thursday morning against attacks from Mayor Bloomberg, painting a picture of his agency as a cash-poor entity that already must scale back and scrap major projects including a major renovation at LaGuardia airport and a new midtown bus garage.

Earlier this week, the mayor went on the offensive against the Port Authority, attempting to have it back the financing for two private office towers at the World Trade Center. The move is demanded by private developer Larry Silverstein, who says the Port Authority has a responsibility to allow him to build now because of its own delays.

At a breakfast forum in the new Newsweek building, Chris Ward, the agency’s executive director, told the union-backed Business and Labor Coalition of New York that the recession has caused the agency’s infrastructure spending to shrink by billions over the next decade. The implication was clear: Any more money devoted to the World Trade Center than the $12 billion already committed will mean more cuts elsewhere.

“We had $29 billion and now we’re down to effectively a $25.5 billion plan,” he said. “I can tick off to you the things we’re not doing. And you can take that $12 billion I’m describing for downtown, and we get to an understanding of the implications for this region.

“We’re not rebuilding LaGuardia; we’re not doing the new Delta terminal at Kennedy Airport; we’re not expanding Stewart Airport; we are not redoing the Goethals Bridge. We are not doing those. We have no money in our budget right now for the Bayonne Bridge; we are not building an auxiliary bus garage in midtown Manhattan.”

The long list of cuts hadn’t been made public or even approved yet—the Port Authority’s 10-year capital budget isn’t up for a revision until December—so one probably can’t treat Mr. Ward’s word with finality (the governors of New York and New Jersey make the final calls on these matters). But, based on what he said, it seems the Port Authority has cut out of its spending plan almost any expansion or anything new other than the $12 billion toward the World Trade Center and the $3 billion for the new New Jersey Transit tunnel under the Hudson River, a priority for Governor Corzine. The LaGuardia project, for instance, envisioned a redo of the Central Terminal Building at the airport, and, at least until the recession, the agency had $1 billion in its capital budget for it.

With that said, it’s important to note that this comes in the context of a heated negotiation—or battle, as it seems—between the Port Authority and the city over whether or not the agency should back the financing of Mr. Silverstein's towers, which have no private tenants.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #856  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2009, 11:14 PM
Apathanoia Apathanoia is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 24
$12 billion for the WTC, with $3-4.3 billion going towards the Calatrava PATH Station.

How important is it to build the PATH station, anyway? Is it going to handle any more people than what we currently have? Or is this pork?

And why does the PATH hub cost more than any of the towers, given that it is small in comparison?
__________________
Do not misunderestimate the stupidity of our politicians. Or any politician, for that matter.
     
     
  #857  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2009, 12:56 AM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
The PA must not care about their image at this point. They've pretty much lost any and all respect from the city.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
     
     
  #858  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2009, 1:50 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,899
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apathanoia View Post
How important is it to build the PATH station, anyway? Is it going to handle any more people than what we currently have? Or is this pork?

And why does the PATH hub cost more than any of the towers, given that it is small in comparison?
That's where the misconception comes in. They aren't building a "new" station. What is being built is an expanded concourse to connect the retail and office components of the WTC. It was always known that this was an extremely expensive to build for a relatively small station (it's only a fraction of commuters compared to the nearby Fulton St transit center a block away), but everyone accepted that as a grand geture of a rebuilt WTC. It was justified because of all of the new office space being built. It is not, however, justified for a shopping mall some people seem to want to see built at the site.

It's simple really. Rebuild the office space and be done with it. Keep in mind that the PA's concern is that Silverstein won't be able to find tenants down the line, and that would cause problems if they were to back Silverstein's towers. The same towers Silverstein now leases from the PA.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #859  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2009, 2:49 AM
BrownTown BrownTown is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,884
The numbers just seem odd to me how much some of these projects are said to cost. Its almost a self fulfilling prophesy though, because the more time they spend arguing the more time and money is wasted with no real progress.
     
     
  #860  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2009, 7:35 AM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,518
Very interesting piece posted through curbed:

Quote:
Originally Posted by newjerseynewsroom.com

Can the Port Authority legally finance Silverstein’s white elephants?
Monday, 15 June 2009 09:29

BY AVI FRISCH
NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
COMMENTARY

The crashing economy and the end of New York City's building boom have made completion of the World Trade Center project seemingly impossible, unless the Port Authority itself agrees to finance the office towers. So far though, the Port Authority has resisted providing financing for more than one of the buildings, though there is political pressure for them to build more. As has been reported in the New York Times, Sheldon Silver, the Speaker of the New York State Assembly has called for the Port Authority to assist Silverstein Properties, Inc., in building two towers, along with the one tower being built by the Port Authority, while, according to the Times, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine and New York Governor David Paterson "have expressed wariness about pouring additional public funds into the office towers."

The oft-delayed World Trade Center redevelopment has long been mired in delays and setbacks almost from the beginning. Deadlines have been missed and buildings downsized. Arts organizations have been expelled from the redevelopment program and the architecture of the memorial and PATH station have been significantly redesigned to keep escalating costs down. Certainly those difficulties relate to the effort to replace the Twin Towers.

Silverstein Properties, Inc., which held the lease on the World Trade Center before the events of September 11, 2001 has planned to rebuild three towers at the site, other than the building known as 7 World Trade Center which replaced a prior building of the same name.

One item that does not appear to have been discussed is the Port Authority's lack of any legal right to spend money on private development.

Contrary to popular belief and the image held out by the Port Authority, the Port Authority does not have unlimited powers to do as it pleases. Its functions and powers are strictly defined by laws enacted by New Jersey and New York.

The Port Authority was originally created in the 1920's to build a bi-state freight rail connection so that freight from New Jersey would no longer need to be floated across the Hudson to Manhattan and Brooklyn and to generally improve the movement of freight around the region. As many know, the Port Authority expanded into many areas, but never actually accomplished its initial purpose.

Shortly after its creation, the Port Authority was given control over the building of bridges and tunnels across the Hudson and then later gained supremacy over the region's airports. The cash cows that the crossings turned into left the Port Authority with huge toll revenue money, but not many means or places to spend it.

Because the P.A. wanted to avoid having the money siphoned off to transit projects to appease bondholders, the agency began creating special projects that were specifically approved by sponsored legislation. In the 1960's, this led to the Port Authority taking control of the PATH system and the beginning of the original World Trade Center. In subsequent years, the Authority built office buildings, waterfront redevelopments and industrial parks. In general, the Authority got legislative approval for each of the projects it undertook that expanded on its core transportation and mobility mission. This includes the legislation authorizing the World Trade Center.

Redevelopment of the World Trade Center has not been approved by new legislation. In 1962, the Port Authority was granted permission to build the World Trade Center as a way of creating a central location for all of the participants in trade at the port, but that is not what materialized and the buildings turned into standard, if very tall, office towers. In retrospect, the basis on which the Port Authority got permission to build what it wanted was never fulfilled, leading to some doubt as to whether redevelopment of the Trade Center site is encompassed within that original legislation.

It is clear that the Port Authority has the right to rebuild the PATH terminal at the World Trade Center, as the legislature has given the Port Authority dominion over PATH, and authorized the development of facilities for PATH to improve its service, a purpose that is as valid today as ever. Nowhere in the authorizing legislation, however, is the Port Authority given authority to pay for the growth of private development at the World Trade Center or elsewhere.

Even if the Port Authority is itself authorized to rebuild the office towers at the World Trade Center, which is questionable since the purpose given in the statute no longer applies, it has no authority to pay for office buildings built by private developers for a private purpose. The Port Authority Media Relations Office declined to comment for this article explaining that Mayor Bloomberg had ordered a press blackout in regard to all substantive issues relating to these office towers. It is well beyond the Port Authority's role to be the lender of last resort for Silverstein Properties, which did not respond to an emailed request for comment for this column.

As a specially formed entity meant to serve specific purposes, and authorized to borrow funds to do so, the Port Authority is not allowed to spend money on unrelated private projects, as nowhere does the bi-state compact or related statute allow such expenditures. It is important to remember that the New Jersey Constitution has strict limits on borrowing by the State and frowns upon expansive borrowing without voter approval. The New York Constitution has similar limitations on borrowing. A court reviewing these types of expenditures would have to look at the legal powers of the Authority and decide if this is within those powers, and as this would be a challenge to corporate authority, the Port Authority's determination should not be entitled to any deference.

Clearly, the impulse to rebuild the World Trade Center is strong. Emotions certainly run high when thinking about the site - particularly for New York politicians who are ever eager to take a larger share of the Port Authority's funding for New York projects. The political forces should guide the money toward true rebuilding of the region through well planned projects and not waste money on redundant office towers. There are plenty of worthy projects that could be undertaken to ensure that the New York region remains vibrant well into the future, but these office towers are not among them. If the Authority does provide financing, even for one tower, a court challenge to its actions would be appropriate and hopefully successful.

Avi Frisch is a lawyer in Paramus and Manhattan. He can be reached at avi@avifrischlaw.com This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it or at his website, www.avifrischlaw.com.

As compelling an argument as it is, it seems more like an excuse than anything else. If the Port Authority wanted the World Trade Centre rebuilt, it would have no trouble bringing about the legal permission. The PA would be able to argue that they should be allowed to fund the construction of the new WTC as replacing a valued asset that stayed with the PA through a grandfather clause. However this argument seems to appeal more to the 'We don't want to pay for it, here's an extra reason we shouldn't build it that doesn't give us public stigma.'

Is there anyone who knows more about NYC construction law than myself here who has an opinion?
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:40 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.