HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction

    

Three World Trade Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram
New York Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #921  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 1:02 PM
Cro Burnham's Avatar
Cro Burnham Cro Burnham is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Big Dirty Philly
Posts: 1,346
At this point, is construction actually taking place at this site?
__________________
GOP: Grumpy Old People
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #922  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 1:09 PM
AustinSkyscrapers's Avatar
AustinSkyscrapers AustinSkyscrapers is offline
Going Up ___///|||
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Austin, Texas~Live Music Capital of the World
Posts: 672
From what I know just a lot of digging. Wikipedia states that it has already started but don't take it, Wikipedia is free editing.
__________________
-------------------------------------
Austin, SkyscraperPage Forum, Me!
-------------------------------------
A Note:
New Tallest In Austin
"Curiosity killed the cat"

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #923  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 1:11 PM
Cro Burnham's Avatar
Cro Burnham Cro Burnham is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Big Dirty Philly
Posts: 1,346
Shouldn't it go in proposals then?
__________________
GOP: Grumpy Old People
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #924  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 2:57 PM
Duffstuff129's Avatar
Duffstuff129 Duffstuff129 is offline
Charismatic Stallion
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham View Post
Shouldn't it go in proposals then?
After reading the articles, have to agree with you here... It sounds like this one is practically already on hold indefinitely. For a retail stump.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #925  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 3:54 PM
hunser's Avatar
hunser hunser is offline
Gotham City
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: New York City / Wien
Posts: 2,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffstuff129 View Post
After reading the articles, have to agree with you here... It sounds like this one is practically already on hold indefinitely. For a retail stump.
omg, a retail stump. what a shame for the great city of new york ! everyone responsible for this mess should be punished (a big fine or even prison)
__________________
In Mathematics We Trust
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #926  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 3:56 PM
fleonzo fleonzo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Most people are skeptical of it. It's even more unlikely when you consider Silverstein himself is getting up in years. But Larry Silverstein was behind at least one of the delays of this tower - remember he did put it on hold for six months hoping to get a commitment from Merrill Lynch for a larger, taller tower. There were plans drawn up, though we've never seen them, and I'm convinced Silverstein thinks he can eventually get that larger tower built.
By "larger tower" you mean Tower 2 (the one in these plans) or do you mean a new and different tower we haven't seen? And if so what would we be looking at? Something bigger than WTC1?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #927  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 4:20 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,386
He's doing the right thing by standing his ground and not giving in to the PA's offer.
__________________
New York, New York- A city so nice they named it twice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #928  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 4:23 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleonzo View Post
By "larger tower" you mean Tower 2 (the one in these plans) or do you mean a new and different tower we haven't seen? And if so what would we be looking at? Something bigger than WTC1?
There were plans to make Tower 3 taller if he was able to land Merrill Lynch as the anchor tenant. They would move from their current HQ in 4 WFC to a new one at 3 WTC. However, we all know how that ended up.
__________________
New York, New York- A city so nice they named it twice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #929  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 4:54 PM
fleonzo fleonzo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dac150 View Post
There were plans to make Tower 3 taller if he was able to land Merrill Lynch as the anchor tenant. They would move from their current HQ in 4 WFC to a new one at 3 WTC. However, we all know how that ended up.
True...but if Tower 3 becomes a temp stump does that mean Tower 2's design would change if they go to arbitration?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #930  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 6:47 PM
J.M.'s Avatar
J.M. J.M. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 175
I remember seeing in a picture (I cant seem to find it) that the proposed stumps 1. was one whole stump and 2. even molded in with the Path Station. Id like to see Tower 2 and 3 get and glass stump that molds into the path (not like we gotta see the hidious Path Station completly). Just a thought.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #931  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 8:56 PM
MercurySky's Avatar
MercurySky MercurySky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 335
How could they build anything nice in a retail podium if they will probably have to destroy it when the buildings go up? Are the bases going to be the actual bases of the buildings or something more temporary?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #932  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2009, 10:05 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleonzo View Post
True...but if Tower 3 becomes a temp stump does that mean Tower 2's design would change if they go to arbitration?
I would think not, I believe if Larry can get his way he wants to build both towers as planned prior to this debate, however I can't say for sure.
__________________
New York, New York- A city so nice they named it twice.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #933  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2009, 1:34 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is online now
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 27,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dac150 View Post
There were plans to make Tower 3 taller if he was able to land Merrill Lynch as the anchor tenant. They would move from their current HQ in 4 WFC to a new one at 3 WTC. However, we all know how that ended up.
Right, Tower 3 would have been larger and taller - Silverstein was competing with the larger Hotel Pennslvania tower that was being planned. That one also has been scaled back to between 1,100 and 1,200 ft.
__________________
Love NEW YORK?

Visit New York's icon. See the City of shores. Walk the Streets of Manhattan.
The evolving skyline, NY Skyscrapers & Construction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #934  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2009, 1:45 PM
pattali's Avatar
pattali pattali is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: French Riviera
Posts: 251
Bad news , yesterday I see that the crawler crane in front of Century21 shop has been removed, this crane was for site 3 purpose ...

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/attach...1&d=1247330826
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #935  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2009, 1:49 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is online now
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 27,632
^ They weren't working on Tower 3.


Some reference to the larger tower...





Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/23/ny...on&oref=slogin

Merrill Lynch Weighs Putting Headquarters at Ground Zero

By CHARLES V. BAGLI
May 23, 2008


Merrill Lynch is negotiating a deal to build a 70-story headquarters at ground zero, a plan that would make it the first financial firm to return to the 16-acre former World Trade Center site since the terrorist attack destroyed the complex in 2001.

A major step toward a deal was taken Thursday, when the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey voted to change the construction schedule for the towers at ground zero, enabling the developer Larry A. Silverstein to continue talks with Merrill Lynch about the building.

Officials of the Port Authority, the state and the city are optimistic about a Merrill deal, which the officials and the developer hope will spark other corporations’ interest in moving to the site. But the company is also looking for a sizable government subsidy, officials say, which could prompt some stormy bargaining sessions.

Merrill is considering a move to what would be a 3 million square foot skyscraper at the northwest corner of Cortlandt and Church Streets. A tower that size would allow Merrill to consolidate 10,000 employees now at 2 and 4 World Financial Center and 222 Broadway. Merrill would prefer to own the building, rather than lease it from Mr. Silverstein, who would nevertheless build it.

Merrill Lynch’s lease at the World Financial Center, across West Street from ground zero, expires in 2013.

Mr. Silverstein’s development agreement with the Port Authority required him to complete the two office towers along Church Street by the end of 2011. The Port Authority moved the completion date for Tower 3 to June 2012, to allow him time to redesign the foundation for the proposed Merrill tower, which is larger than the building originally planned there. The deadline for Tower 4 was extended to April 2012.

“The six-month schedule adjustment approved today by the Port Authority clearly makes sense," said Janno Lieber, who oversees the trade center project for Silverstein Properties. "Merrill Lynch is downtown’s largest private-sector employer. This extension gives us the time to design and construct a modified building foundation that could accommodate Merrill’s specialized requirements."

Last fall, Merrill was in serious negotiations to move its headquarters from its longtime downtown home to the Penn Station area, where Vornado Realty Trust offered to build a skyscraper on the site of the Pennsylvania Hotel.

But the company abandoned the move after suffering billions of dollars of losses in the subprime mortgage crisis. It appeared that Merrill’s fallback plan was to remain as a tenant at the World Financial Center.

But in recent weeks, Merrill began talking in earnest with Mr. Silverstein about a new tower. There are a number of tax breaks and other incentives available at the trade center site. But Merrill wants a more generous deal, similar to the one given to Goldman Sachs — a deal that state and city officials have vowed never to repeat.
A little more...

Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
http://www.reuters.com/article/domes...17096020080522

Merrill restarts talks to move to WTC site: WSJ

Thu May 22, 2008

Merrill Lynch & Co has restarted talks to move its headquarters to a planned skyscraper at the World Trade Center site, the Wall Street Journal said on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter.

The board of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the agency that owns the site, is expected to discuss the matter Thursday and could vote to authorize a pause in the construction process to allow Merrill's design needs to be accommodated, the newspaper said.
__________________
Love NEW YORK?

Visit New York's icon. See the City of shores. Walk the Streets of Manhattan.
The evolving skyline, NY Skyscrapers & Construction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #936  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2009, 1:59 PM
drumz0rz drumz0rz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 304
As much as I hate the idea of them building a mall stump of a skyscraper, and how bad of an idea that sounds, they really need to do something. This whole redevelopment has taken waaay to long as is. I don't want to see a nice finished 1 WTC, a nice finished 2 WTC, nice finished museum / footprints, with trees and paths, and then a big fenced off hole in the ground where 3 WTC should be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #937  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2009, 2:23 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is online now
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 27,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by drumz0rz View Post
As much as I hate the idea of them building a mall stump of a skyscraper, and how bad of an idea that sounds, they really need to do something. This whole redevelopment has taken waaay to long as is. I don't want to see a nice finished 1 WTC, a nice finished 2 WTC, nice finished museum / footprints, with trees and paths, and then a big fenced off hole in the ground where 3 WTC should be.
It won't be a hole in the ground. They have to get it built to street level regardless of whatever rises above. Putting a shopping mall there would only mean it's there to stay, because in the few years it would actually take to get that built, the market would have recovered enough to get the tower built. No one is going to commit to that amount of retail space for a couple of years.
__________________
Love NEW YORK?

Visit New York's icon. See the City of shores. Walk the Streets of Manhattan.
The evolving skyline, NY Skyscrapers & Construction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #938  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2009, 4:58 PM
Cro Burnham's Avatar
Cro Burnham Cro Burnham is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Big Dirty Philly
Posts: 1,346
So . . . can somebody remind us why this thread doesn't belong in the "Proposals" section?
__________________
GOP: Grumpy Old People
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #939  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2009, 5:26 PM
drumz0rz drumz0rz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 304
Because it was approved, and excavation had begun.


I just don't understand this shopping mall idea. Like someone mentioned before. It's going to be very interesting to figure out how they incorporate a corporate lobby through that. Also, would they build this mall with the infrastructure for the future tower that'll sit above it? It all seems like a waste.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #940  
Old Posted Jul 16, 2009, 5:41 PM
Aleks's Avatar
Aleks Aleks is offline
cookies, skittles & milk
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham View Post
So . . . can somebody remind us why this thread doesn't belong in the "Proposals" section?
You're right. I'm moving this to the Proposals section.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
Site preparation or merely just digging the foundation doesn't count as contruction starting, since digging a hole is just that, digging a hole. And plus any construction taking place within a foundation that pertains only to the excavation doesn't count either, since that's not construction for the actual building itself.


A tall building is considered to be ‘under construction’ when site clearing has been completed and foundation / piling work has begun.
__________________
...the greatness of victor is equally proportionate to the skill and obduracy of foe...
-Kostof-
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:18 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.