NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS

[Ghost]

Note that that one of the cranes appear to be slightly higher than the other, signifying that half of the core is 'Movin' On Up', Weezy!
No, it's not higher. It's just illusion you see there... Half of the core sure is, but cranes don't have to raise for a long time...

Lets hope the HD cam will work again soon. It's just amazing way to watch the constuction.

[borgo100]

Photos from wtcrising.com (12/18/07)

http://www.wtcrising.com/images/FE/chain217siteType8/site187/client/photoGallery/189/concrete%20pour%204_big.jpg


Get BACK TO WORK! :P

[Daquan13]

Looks like the ones in front are holding cups of Joe to keep warm.

Note the bathtub wall behind them. I didn't know that they put waterproofing material on it.

[Aleks]

Isn't part of the World Trace Center site on landfill? I always saw pictures and documentaries about how the outer edges of Manhattan Island are landfill and the land isn't stabilized well or something. Is that true?

If it is then the soft soild could have something to do. Just a guess.

[Daquan13]

Not sure about that, but the WFC across West Street IS on landfill taken from
the site where the original WTC was built.

[Lecom]

Original island vs landfills leading up to pre-BPC days

http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/nycolonial/thumbnails/nycolonial1.gif

[http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/nycolonial/thumbnails/nycolonial1.gif]

So technically yes, the WTC is on the site of a landfill, though very old abd probably relatively solid by now, as opposed to the new BPC landfill (not shown on the map above).

[CoolCzech]

The great danger immediately after the collapse of the WTC Twins was the possibility the "bathtub" that secured the reclaimed land they were built on would collapse, effectively flooding the entire 16 acre district... and perhaps taking away a good chunk of Battery Park City, with it.

[STR]

Isn't part of the World Trace Center site on landfill? I always saw pictures and documentaries about how the outer edges of Manhattan Island are landfill and the land isn't stabilized well or something. Is that true?

If it is then the soft soild could have something to do. Just a guess.

The part west of Greenwich was fill, but the World Trade Center was built on the bedrock 70 feet below the surface. The bathtub has a bedrock floor.

[Daquan13]

The great danger immediately after the collapse of the WTC Twins was the possibility the "bathtub" that secured the reclaimed land they were built on would collapse, effectively flooding the entire 16 acre district... and perhaps taking away a good chunk of Battery Park City, with it.



Yeah, so glad that they almost immediately repaired the damaged section of that wall! But the PATH tunnel got flooded back then.

[Ghost]

More steel has arrived!
http://i14.tinypic.com/8g705n4.jpg

[37TimPPG]

More steel has arrived!
http://i14.tinypic.com/8g705n4.jpg


YAY!!!!!!!!!!!! MORE STEEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

[Daquan13]

So am I to understand that the entire underground portion with those steel columns and girders are to be encased in concrete?

I'm waiting to see the girders put in place. That would RELLY signify that the base is rising to street level. Let's paaaaarrrrrtttttyyyyy!!!:upload_71700:

[Realthang]

If you look at the right (north) core, you'll notice they have been pouring concrete since before 6:30 this morning and will continue to do so until late this evening.

Four columns on the east wall and one column on the south wall were extended to street level. Expect to see one more column on the west wall extended tomorrow.

[Daquan13]

Yeah, I see the pipe from the concrete pump extending down into the core.

So just like the Twins did, that section of the PATH tracks will once again be covered - this time by the Freedom Tower.

Hard to see the ones facing Vesey Street if they're there because of the old columns that were left still standing from the old garage and sticking out.

[37TimPPG]

If you look at the right (north) core, you'll notice they have been pouring concrete since before 6:30 this morning and will continue to do so until late this evening.

Four columns on the east wall and one column on the south wall were extended to street level. Expect to see one more column on the west wall extended tomorrow.

This is a VERY exciting time! Things are really moving along now! Just think what this will look like in 6 months time.
:cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:

[aaron38]

Are the vertical steel columns the outer perimeter of the tower?

[Jay in Cowtown]

Photo by kyle priddle (http://flickr.com/photos/kpriddle/)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2132/2126425036_59033b51fd.jpg?v=0


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2132/2126425036_59033b51fd_b.jpg

I was in New York last September and watched a movie in a theater right beside this building... was wondering then and still wondering today the name of it and how tall is it going to be? thx.

[Lecom]

What a fucking lame name for the building.

[Daquan13]

Are the vertical steel columns the outer perimeter of the tower?



Yes they are.

[CoolCzech]

I was in New York last September and watched a movie in a theater right beside this building... was wondering then and still wondering today the name of it and how tall is it going to be? thx.

You mean the building that is already half finished? The Goldman Sachs, over 700 feet - almost exactly equal to the World Financial Tower next to it.

[CoolCzech]

What a fucking lame name for the building.

You mean "Goldman Sachs"? Agreed; they could have come up with something inspiring and imaginative, like "The Liberty Building," or something like that...:)

[Jay in Cowtown]

You mean the building that is already half finished? The Goldman Sachs, over 700 feet - almost exactly equal to the World Financial Tower next to it.

thank you.

[Daquan13]

I think it will match WFC's tallest tower and 7 WTC in height.

[Plompy Lfeata]

i was thinking, it should be a 1776 roof height and a 2001 spire. it makes more sense, it also makes a much larger building, and a building 1 foot taller than the tallest going up in chicago.

[CoolCzech]

The simple fact of the matter is, NYC will probably never again have a world's tallest because the moment is announced one - as indeed it did when it said the FT would 1,776 feet tall - someone somewhere in the world would seek a name for themselves by announcing they would build even taller. It's sort of the way young kids in the Wild West sought to make a name for themselves by looking to take down a famous gunfighter...

[Daquan13]

I wish that it would have been the WTB!

Yeah, you're right though. And they most certainly stole New York's thunder!!
It has been trounced twice!

[Knightwing]

The simple fact of the matter is, NYC will probably never again have a world's tallest because the moment is announced one - as indeed it did when it said the FT would 1,776 feet tall - someone somewhere in the world would seek a name for themselves by announcing they would build even taller. It's sort of the way young kids in the Wild West sought to make a name for themselves by looking to take down a famous gunfighter...

Yea, chicago probably will never have WTB again either. I doubt that it'll come back to North America in light of the Middle East and Asia's recent height hunger...

[cactus22minus1]

The simple fact of the matter is, NYC will probably never again have a world's tallest because the moment is announced one - as indeed it did when it said the FT would 1,776 feet tall - someone somewhere in the world would seek a name for themselves by announcing they would build even taller. It's sort of the way young kids in the Wild West sought to make a name for themselves by looking to take down a famous gunfighter...


Oh come on... New York wasn't seriously attempting to build the WTB... if they were really trying they would have put up a better effort than to build the same height as the twins with a bigger stick on top. I don't say this to discredit NYC, because honestly I care much more about the design(incidentally, I don't care for that either but that's beside the point) than the numbers. In the end it's all about money which this project proves. The stick was for the symbolism(1776) and the height of the actual building was a bare minimum(at least the same as) to preserve image while not overextending in an early fear-based market.

[M.K.]

^^^^^ I do not think NYC is competing to have the WTB anymore. They only want to have the twins in some way replaced in equal symbolism and dimensions but with a plus of twins memories in some way. It is way they are not caring much to be the fastest ones to have a Supertall built. If the Budget is Ok, just replace someday the WTC with a spire on top is allright, they thought.

[CoolCzech]

The stick was for the symbolism(1776) and the height of the actual building was a bare minimum(at least the same as) to preserve image while not overextending in an early fear-based market.


How soon people forget that for the first year or so after the attack, it wasn't clear that ANYTHING would be built at Ground Zero.

The fact remains, when it was proposed the FT would have been taller than any other building in the world. I'm not sure exactly who you think "they" are, but in America buildings are built based on 2 parts commercial demand, and (rarely) 1 part symbolism. So yeah, you're sort of right: it is "all about the money;" money is what built New York - not a bunch of politicians deciding to put up pointlessly tall buildings for the sake of their own agenda. Is there something wrong with that?

Other cities deliberately choose to build a supertall, often, in order to compete with New York, to declare that "they have arrived." New York doesn't need to "compete" with anyone; it's the goal line for everyone else. As the late, great Senator Moynihan from New York once said, "We are a model for others."

By the way, "the stick" is more massive than the outlandishly exagerated upper reaches of the BD... your silly characterization is off base.

[Daquan13]

Yeah, New York has been trounced twice by Chicago - once with Sears and now with the CS.

[2-TOWERS]

i wish F/T/ had the height of UNION SQ. 118 FLOORS 1608 FEET TO THE ROOF, ANYWAY we have an elagent design between all the buildings going up

[Daquan13]

i wish F/T/ had the height of UNION SQ. 118 FLOORS 1608 FEET TO THE ROOF, ANYWAY we have an elagent design between all the buildings going up



And at least it's not that uglybug birdcage design that we almost ended up with!!

[cactus22minus1]

CoolCzech, I'm not sure why you replied with my same sentiments as an argument- cause I agree with what you're saying for the most part(except the stick part, which looks much less a part of the building than the steel and facade continuance of the BD). To answer your question- No, there's nothing wrong with building according to need. That was my point. This was originally more of a salvage attempt disguised as a grand symbolic gesture. Years later they have realized the demand still exists- as you pointed out.

Hindsight is 20/20... I would think the FT would have been a larger project if they knew what they know now.

[CoolCzech]

Cactus, with all do excuse... aren't you being a little coy when you express bewilderment at my reaction to your post? The massive mast atop the FT is a mere "stick"? A roof as high as the original WTC towers is a "bare minimum?!" I think I can be excused for assuming you meant to criticize the FT quite strongly. Perhaps the FT is not a masterpiece, but I can think of only one true supertall that is - the ESB. The FT doesn't deserve to be so casually, nay, contemptuously, dismissed.

Would the tower be even taller today if they could have seen a few years ahead? I'm not so sure. Large businesses don't seem particularly interested in occupying supertall towers anymore; judging by NYC's current building boom, it may well be that no business tower taller than the FT will ever be built in The City. Left to their own devices, free of public pressure to "recapture the skyline," or a need to "make a statement," they seem to settle on roof heights of around 1,000 or so feet. If the Chicago Spire and the BD are any indication, it seems that extreme height has become a luxury housing commodity, a selling point for expensive condos. But as a practical matter - building height is effectively capped at 2,000 feet in the USA, anyway. Not to mention, Libeskind chose 1,776 feet for a specific reason that the addition of a mere 224 extra feet would have nullified.

[NYguy]

Oh come on... New York wasn't seriously attempting to build the WTB...

That's correct. The goal was to mark the height of 1,776 ft with a spire (meant to invoke the Statue of Liberty's upraised torch) and America's declaration of independence, hence the name "Freedom Tower". It just so happened that there was no taller skyscraper at the time, which would have made it world's tallest.

As an office building, it will be taller than most. In fact, the tallest towers of today are mostly residential with hotel space - not requiring the large (expensive) floors of commercial tenants.

[NYguy]

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01032008/business/faltering_tower_456087.htm

FALTERING TOWER
SLOW GO ON ANTENNA, RENTS

http://www.nypost.com/img/cols/stevecuozzo.jpg


January 3, 2008 -- IT'S good news the Port Authority finished most of the bathtub job at ground zero on time, and that Larry Silverstein will be able to start construction on towers 3 and 4 within a few weeks.

But the 1,776-foot tall Freedom Tower has been largely forgotten in the news blitz. The PA wants us to believe the project is sailing along.

But, the tower's crowning broadcast antenna seems lost in the clouds, with the PA nowhere near a deal on lease terms with TV stations which will transmit from it.

And neither of the ballyhooed office leases with government agencies for 1 million square feet of the project's 2.6 million feet, announced way back in June 2006, has yet been completed.

The good news is that the PA, which owns the $2.9 billion Freedom Tower, and architects Skidmore Owings & Merrill agree on what the antenna will look like. The shaft will constitute the project's top 408 feet.

That design, shown up-close on this page, looks a lot like the one first unveiled in the summer of 2005, when architect David Childs had to redesign the building because of security concerns.

It was suggested at the time that the final antenna design would be more "sculptural" than the original image, and later sketches and models sported various curlicued motifs.

But Childs says those ideas, which exposed the actual antenna to the air, were impractical. "A broadcast antenna is a very technical piece of equipment - it's like designing a hospital operating room," Childs said.

The more open designs would cause "rain to turn to ice, which would break and fall," and also make the antenna impossible to maintain at such a height.

So it was back to the original notion, which called for a top-to-bottom hood enclosing the actual broadcast spire.

The current design, done in consultation with sculptor Ken Snelson, shrouds the antenna in a synthetic material called Ray-dome - "very hard and permanent, but invisible to the broadcast rays that pierce through it," Childs said.

But PA Executive Director Anthony Shorris, asked where negotiations stood with the Metropolitan Broadcast Alliance, a consortium of 13 TV stations, said, "I don't have any news."

In fact, the talks are really bogged down, both over how much rent the stations are willing to pay the PA and by disagreements among the broadcasters themselves.

The negotiations "are complicated because the stations are competitors," Shorris said. "I don't want to diminish how complicated."

Pat Smith, a rep for the TV consortium, said only, "The members remain committed to broadcasting from the top of the Freedom Tower."

Meanwhile, Shorris said a lease for 600,000 square feet with the Federal General Service Administration "is not done. We're still negotiating the long-term escalations over the later years of the lease."

And while a deal with the state Office of General Services for 400,000 feet is signed, "it needs to get final approval in Albany," Shorris said. Meanwhile, the PA has imposed a gag order on Cushman & Wakefield heavy-hitter Tara Stacom and her colleagues who are marketing the rest of the office space.

The PA says steel will begin rising above street level by June. But with construction and material costs escalating almost by the hour, it's unclear whether the job can be completed over five years within budget with out employing "value engineering" to cheapen the materials and detailing.

[NYguy]

wtcrising.com

http://www.wtcrising.com/images/FE/chain217siteType8/site187/client/photoGallery/189/wtc%20site%20model_big.jpg

[Daquan13]

Is that the one that they are staying with - the one that was introduced in June '05?

[NYguy]

Image from the New York Post article...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/91172572/original.jpg

[djvandrake]

But with construction and material costs escalating almost by the hour, it's unclear whether the job can be completed over five years within budget with out employing "value engineering" to cheapen the materials and detailing.


:gaah: :rant: :ahhh: :help:

Crap. Let's hope it doesn't come to that. I would really hope the PA would have secured some long term purchases already for materials, but then again if they operate like most government agencies, we're screwed.

[RockMont]

:gaah: :rant: :ahhh: :help:

Crap. Let's hope it doesn't come to that. I would really hope the PA would have secured some long term purchases already for materials, but then again if they operate like most government agencies, we're screwed.



This project needs to be treated with special priority, regardless of cost overruns.

[Nowhereman1280]

Perhaps the FT is not a masterpiece, but I can think of only one true supertall that is - the ESB. The FT doesn't deserve to be so casually, nay, contemptuously, dismissed.


You aren't thinking very hard then...

I agree Freedom Tower isn't a masterpiece, but doesn't deserve this random BS people keeping harping about. But, not to get too off topic, I would hardly say that ESB is a "masterpiece" its boring, ill proportioned, and plain compared to its contemporaries such as Chrysler (which is like 6.5e^24 times better) and is only average along with Trump and 70 Pine/American Intl.

[Daquan13]

You aren't thinking very hard then...

I agree Freedom Tower isn't a masterpiece, but doesn't deserve this random BS people keeping harping about. But, not to get too off topic, I would hardly say that ESB is a "masterpiece" its boring, ill proportioned, and plain compared to its contemporaries such as Chrysler (which is like 6.5e^24 times better) and is only average along with Trump and 70 Pine/American Intl.



The Empire State Building also has one another thing going for itself though. No other building can say this. And that is, as you all know, it held the title of the WTB for over 40 years.

Buildings built since its debut still have yet to wear that crown. Oh, we DO have one WTB, but the ESB is from the old school. It has stood the test of time, as did the shorter Chrysler and Woolworth Bldgs.. Even today, it remains timeless.

And sadly, it has even outlasted its 1st competitor, the Twins. But at least it will be 2nd to the Freedom Tower as it was with the Twins.

[NYguy]

I would hardly say that ESB is
a "masterpiece" its boring, ill proportioned, and plain compared to its
contemporaries such as Chrysler (which is like 6.5e^24 times better) and is
only average along with Trump and 70 Pine/American Intl.

The Empire State Building is the masterpiece as far as skyscrapers go.
It's what all tallest aspire to be. It's the one skyscraper with the name that
conjurs up images of a magnificent spire to the skies worldwide. Ill
proportioned? The ESB's proportions are what make it what it is. Look at all
the tallest the followed it. The Sears Tower? We like it, but hardly
noteworthy. The Twin Towers? Thankfully there were two, or the Port
Authority would have been run out of town. The Petronas? Next. T101?
Not even close. In fact, the Burj Dubai owes a lot to the Empire State
(which follows a form of earlier New York skyscrapers). Sure, the
Chrysler may have a better looking spire. But the ESB is legendary.


Substitute any other tower in these photos, and it still can't be beat.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/90489202/original.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/51666077/large.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/90489208/large.jpg

[NYguy]

I'm starting to like the final spire design. It's a little bulky in the middle, but that
would just add greater impact. Not bad as far as spire designs go. Could have been
a lot worse (remember Libeskind's asymetrical spire).

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/91204045/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/91204051/large.jpg

[CGII]

You aren't thinking very hard then...

I agree Freedom Tower isn't a masterpiece, but doesn't deserve this random BS people keeping harping about. But, not to get too off topic, I would hardly say that ESB is a "masterpiece" its boring, ill proportioned, and plain compared to its contemporaries such as Chrysler (which is like 6.5e^24 times better) and is only average along with Trump and 70 Pine/American Intl.

First, the Chrysler was built before the ESB, making the ESB the contemporary.

Second, as individual buildings, I still love the Chrysler more than any on Earth, but nobody, nobody can deny the unmistakeable and unstoppably powerful presence the ESB holds over New York. The ESB is the best possible design imaginable for its location, I wouldn't have it any other way.

[Dr. Taco]

^^ so, not that i care extremely much, but, even though it serves as an antenna, since they made it look like art, it still gets to add 400ft to the building height?

[liat91]

I'm starting to like the final spire design. It's a little bulky in the middle, but that
would just add greater impact. Not bad as far as spire designs go. Could have been
a lot worse (remember Libeskind's asymetrical spire).

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/91204045/medium.jpg


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/91204051/large.jpg

Now if you could walk up that thing(stairs or whatever) I would feel alot better about it being counted towards the buildings overall height.

[pattali]

A lot of activity on the site and really a pain to take some photos ...

http://mathias.attali.free.fr/bldg/P1000256.jpg

http://mathias.attali.free.fr/bldg/P1000261.jpg

http://mathias.attali.free.fr/bldg/P1000268.jpg

[Alliance]

Woah...so the tiny bubbles have replaced the pleated sheet on the crown of WTC1?

[aaron38]

Yeah I don't know if that's any better, the base of the crown still feels clunky.

Is there anything in the crown, does it serve a function? It just looks like it's too flat against the roof for anyone on the ground to be able to see it, and I'm not sure what the point is exactly.

[Dr. Taco]

^ the "bubbles" look like an amazing array of parabolic antennae to me...

[CoolCzech]

You aren't thinking very hard then...

I agree Freedom Tower isn't a masterpiece, but doesn't deserve this random BS people keeping harping about. But, not to get too off topic, I would hardly say that ESB is a "masterpiece" its boring, ill proportioned, and plain compared to its contemporaries such as Chrysler (which is like 6.5e^24 times better) and is only average along with Trump and 70 Pine/American Intl.


Well, I suppose everyone has an opinion... but I find the proportions of the ESB, to echo one noted architectural critic, "sublime." In fact, I'd say it's PERFECTLY proportioned, in an almost ancient Greek sort of way.

[CoolCzech]

Image from the New York Post article...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/91172572/original.jpg

This rendering makes the spire look almost like a giant spiral, a mini-Chicago Spire...

[CoolCzech]

^^ so, not that i care extremely much, but, even though it serves as an antenna, since they made it look like art, it still gets to add 400ft to the building height?


I would think so... even before anyone thought of antennas for the FT, Libeskind decreed that it would have a decorative & symbolic spire...

[CoolCzech]

Yeah I don't know if that's any better, the base of the crown still feels clunky.

Is there anything in the crown, does it serve a function? It just looks like it's too flat against the roof for anyone on the ground to be able to see it, and I'm not sure what the point is exactly.

See my previous post.

[CoolCzech]

Now if you could walk up that thing(stairs or whatever) I would feel alot better about it being counted towards the buildings overall height.

I would bet money that there will be some sort of way inside the mast to climb up to service the antennas. Maybe a circular staircase, like the ESB has in it's upper "floors", perhaps?

[jayden]

*Sighs* Some people will never be satisfied with this tower....

[Urban Sky]

*Sighs* Some people will never be satisfied with this tower....

when i think back to the original design and cringe, i find myself being okay with anything that is going on today. :rolleyes:

[pablosan]

I think that it is a nice looking tower. Only time will tell what it really does for the skyline.

[CoolCzech]

Westfield to Pay $625 M. to Develop WTC Retail
by Eliot Brown | January 4, 2008 |

The Port Authority has finalized a deal with the mall-operating giant Westfield Group to develop and operate the 488,000 square feet of retail planned for the World Trade Center site. The group, now in a joint venture with the Port Authority, will control retail both above ground and below; both in transit-related concourses and in Larry Silverstein’s three towers.

The total cost of developing the retail is estimated to cost $1.45 billion, with Westfield paying $625 million, according to the Port Authority.

The Times’ Charlie Bagli had details on the deal last month.

Press release below:





Port Authority TO PARTNER WITH WESTFIELD

TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE MAJOR WTC RETAIL COMPLEX

First New Retail Development in Downtown Since 9/11

Will Reconnect WTC Site to Lower Manhattan’s Neighborhoods

The Port Authority and The Westfield Group - the world’s largest retail property owner by equity market capitalization - have agreed to jointly develop and operate 488,000 square feet of world-class quality retail at the World Trade Center site, the first new retail development to be built in lower Manhattan since 9/11.

The new World Trade Center retail, which will reconnect the site to neighborhoods in the downtown area, will bring a vibrant street-level environment for local residents, workers and tourists. The retail facilities will feature a full array of eateries, ranging from full-service restaurants to casual dining, and local, national and international specialty shops.

New York Governor Eliot Spitzer said, “This agreement will provide the business and residential communities in lower Manhattan with a major economic boost and create a further incentive to relocate downtown. This retail program will integrate the World Trade Center site with the rest of the city’s streetscape, creating a linkage that will allow for a bustling, active street life in the neighborhood.”

New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said, “I have said all along that retail development at the World Trade Center must include street-level shopping to welcome residents, visitors and workers in an area, and reflects the fact that lower Manhattan is a vibrant 24-hour community. I am pleased that the plans announced today by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey include this vital support for our neighborhood.”

Port Authority Chairman Anthony R. Coscia said, “This public-private partnership with Westfield will allow us to create a new, vibrant shopping and dining atmosphere at the World Trade Center site, while generating new revenue that can be reinvested in the region’s transportation system. This project will provide a major boost to the local economy, and will enhance the quality of life for those who live, work or visit downtown. It will provide them with a vibrant urban shopping experience, with about 50 percent of the retail above ground.”

Port Authority Executive Director Anthony E. Shorris said, “With its immediate connection to the community in lower Manhattan, the retail at the World Trade Center is one of the development’s most visible and important elements. Westfield brings the expertise and resources the project needs to make good on its promise. This is the third major public-private venture the Port Authority has brought on line this year - another showcase for the good we can do when we work together.”

Westfield Group Co-Managing Director Peter Lowy said, “It’s a thrill for Westfield to be back. We are excited to have the opportunity to reinvest in this great city and be involved with the redevelopment of this historic site. With the Port Authority, we look forward to putting our global experience and commitment to work creating a world-class, iconic shopping destination for all who live, work and visit here.”

New York City Council Member Alan J. Gerson said, “The World Trade Center calls for a unique, premiere retail presence, which serves the needs of the community while providing a worldwide attraction and accentuating the special nature of the site. Bustling retail activity will also demonstrate our determination to carry on our work and business, undeterred by our enemies. This partnership with The Westfield Group is a great first step toward realizing these goals.”

Manhattan Community Board 1 Chairperson Julie Menin said, “Retail is one of the key components that will help activate the street and realize the vision of a 24/7 community. We are thrilled that the Port Authority is bringing on Westfield as a partner to truly create the active street retail that lower Manhattan - the fastest-growing residential neighborhood in the city - deserves.”

The Port Authority will provide approximately $825 million and Westfield will provide approximately $625 million toward the $1.45 billion retail project.

Prior to September 11, 2001, Westfield had net leased the World Trade Center retail components, which consisted of 427,000 square feet of space, one of the highest-grossing shopping areas in the nation.

In December 2003, to accelerate the rebuilding at the World Trade Center site, the Port Authority acquired the retail net lease from Westfield.

The World Trade Center retail is just one of several projects on the site that are either in construction or progressing through the planning stages. There are currently more than 600 construction workers and 100 pieces of heavy equipment on the site, and nearly every corner of the 16 acres is now under construction.

Major construction on 1 World Trade Center, the Freedom Tower began during the middle of 2006, after a milestone master redevelopment agreement that outlined new roles and responsibilities for the rebuilding. The tower’s footings and foundations are nearly complete, and steel will begin to rise above street level during the first part of 2008.

Construction of the foundations for the World Trade Center Transportation Hub and Memorial also are underway. Major steel beams for both projects are scheduled to be erected during the upcoming year.

http://www.observer.com/2008/westfield-pay-625-m-develop-wtc-retail

[kevininlb]

hi. as way of an apology, i'm an infrequent snooper from phoenix.

anyone care to tell me what the two buildings under construction are (posted by nyguy)?

appreciate it.

[Chi649]

This rendering makes the spire look almost like a giant spiral, a mini-Chicago Spire...I was thinking the same thing CoolCzech.

I like both designs of the spire but I think I prefer the smoother one better. Either way, it will look nice. So is it a fair assessment to say that there is a lot of anticipation for FT to start rising into the sky? If I can't wait, I can't imagine how NY'ers must feel. Here's to the rise of the Freedom Tower this year :cheers:

[CoolCzech]

Believe me, Chi649: the first time I saw the lower Manhattan skyline after the attacks of 9/11, I came close to tears. Who could have predicted back then that we had to wait until 2008 before the rebuild would even be brought back to street level?

It will be SO sweet to drive across the Whitestone, and see magnificent towers rising there once more...

http://www.archimagazine.com/arogers7.jpg
archimagazine.com

I love how balanced this overall skyline will seem: the FT will be taller than the Twins, yet seem more in harmony with the other towers because of Libeskind's ascending spiral concept.

[CoolCzech]

By the way, if anyone wondered what it would look like if the FT was designed to the same height and shape as the BD:

http://www.3pointd.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/WTC1.jpg
3pointd.com

At the risk of being accused of bias, I just don't know about that idea... too much is just too much...

[Daquan13]

Great idea for the FT, but no, New York will NEVER allow it to happen.

That would be almost TWICE the height of the Freedom Tower, wouldn't it?

[gttx]

That would be almost TWICE the height of the Freedom Tower, wouldn't it?

It would also be ugly.

[Daquan13]

It would also be ugly.



Yeah, I don't particularly think too highly of it. To me, it looks like several piles of match sticks tied together and stacked vertically with one of them sticking out high in the sky!

[37TimPPG]

It would also be ugly.

BD would look so out of place in lower Manhattan. Plus, FDNY would probably scream to the heavens to not get it built!:whip:

[Lecom]

Redesign of the WTC gave us an opportunity to rebuild the complex at the old, grand scale while harmoniously integrating it into the skyline. The BD, as much as I actually like it, would flush that scheme down the toilet.

[Daquan13]

To coin the phase; Build it tall and they will come. But I don't think anyone would be coming to that one! Especially not the 09-11 families.

Not only that. Terrorists would be trying to think of a million ways to knock it down!! A couple of well-placed planes, and it's all over.

[BradMacD]

Looking good, been lurking here for a while :D

The anticipation for this glass monster (a good type of monster :P) to shoot up to where the twins soared. :D

[CGII]

If it was really desired the architects could've made something as tall as BD, but it's silly to say a building designed specifically for a completely different location and landscape could just be transplanted to another. First and foremost, that's why BD would never work in NY, or why ESB would never work in Chicago, or why the Chicago Spire wouldn't work in Los Angeles.

[CoolCzech]

I tend to agree about the BD not fitting New York, somewhat less so the CS not fitting LA, but really don't see why the ESB wouldn't fit in Chicago: it's not like Chicago doesn't have relatively tall art deco towers of its own.

[jsr]

I tend to agree about the BD not fitting New York, somewhat less so the CS not fitting LA, but really don't see why the ESB wouldn't fit in Chicago: it's not like Chicago doesn't have relatively tall art deco towers of its own.

The massing styles are pretty distinct though, owing to very different setback laws between the two cities. The ESB doesn't look like a 1930's Chicago building IMO. OTOH, I wish Chicago had setback laws similar to NYC back then. Oh, what might have been for the Windy City....

Sorry this might be staying a bit off topic.

[MikeS]

Can anyone please tell me why the green epoxy coated rebar is used in certain areas of the foundation and not in others? Thanks in advance.

[fleonzo]

By the way, if anyone wondered what it would look like if the FT was designed to the same height and shape as the BD:

http://www.3pointd.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/WTC1.jpg
3pointd.com

At the risk of being accused of bias, I just don't know about that idea... too much is just too much...

CoolCzech...is there a way you could draw that graphic design with most of the current proposals (WTC, Hudson yards, Brooklyn,etc..) so we can see what the NYC skyline would like in 5yrs? That would be a thread onto itself!

[CoolCzech]

I'm sure there is, but I didn't do the drawing - go to 3pointd.com.

[CGII]

I tend to agree about the BD not fitting New York, somewhat less so the CS not fitting LA, but really don't see why the ESB wouldn't fit in Chicago: it's not like Chicago doesn't have relatively tall art deco towers of its own.

Well, for one thing, even though Chicago's downtown was remarkably canyoned in the 1920s and 1930s, it never really developed into the supertall sensation that New York did. NY produced 40 Wall, 70 Pine, Farmer's Insurance, the ESB, the Chrysler, Rockefeller... Chicago produced the Palmolive, Board of Trade, Civic Opera, Roosevelt Tower... all very tall towers, but none of the crazy high supertalls NY was producing. Chicago didn't get one until the John Hancock. The tallest building in Chicago at the time was about as tall as the Singer Building.
New York's zoning for skyscrapers at the time was that the full height of the building cannot occupy more than 25% of the entire site, to allow sunlight to reach the sidewalks, which invariably pushed skyscrapers up so developers could get the most rent from their land. Chicago never did, which is why Chicago's old skyscrapers are simply massive and straight up.

Here, compare the diagrams:
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?3468920
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?3469129

As well, the style disparity between NY and Chicago would've prevented an ESB styled tower. I'm sure you know already about the great war between the styles (Chicago eventually won, more or less), with Chicago representing the Sullivan style school of selective ornamentation and with NY representing the Beaux Arts school of ornamentation everywhere. Even though the ESB seems pretty bland for a NY skyscraper, it is very ornate for a Chicago one.

Chicago Board of Trade (tallest in Chi in 1931)
http://www.galen-frysinger.ws/us/Chicago038.jpg

And the ESB (tallest in NY in 1931)
http://www.thcphotography.com/photos/empire_state_building_2_FULL.jpg

And I suppose the CS could kind of work in LA, but there's no doubt in my mind the most appropriate place for it to be on the planet is Chicago, where it continues the statements made by the Mies-era Chicago school that emphasizes the structural elements of a building and innovation without adding unecessary elements (such as twisting the floorplate a few degrees each advance up or alternating balcony plates each floor).

[harryc]

Can anyone please tell me why the green epoxy coated rebar is used in certain areas of the foundation and not in others? Thanks in advance.

In Chicago it is vinyl coated (from GE), used in parking and roadways where salt is expected.

http://lh4.google.com/harry.r.carmichael/R4eBlZmXkZI/AAAAAAAAU2Q/sabhfblOvGs/P1180194.JPG?imgmax=720

http://lh6.google.com/harry.r.carmichael/R4eBx5mXkaI/AAAAAAAAU2c/iVa1SK_WhZc/P1180194-1.JPG?imgmax=640

[Phil McAvity]

This is the only building i've ever known whose height makes a political statement.

[CoolCzech]

Not really, Phil... you really don't think China's government is "making a political statement" by the supertall building it encourages in Shanghai, for example?

The FT is fairly unique in attaching significance to the exact height figure, that is true, though.

[TAK]

Hi Everyone,

Interesting article in the times about excavation of the eastern bathtub area:

http://nytimes.com/2008/01/13/nyregion/13rebuild.html

Also, some nice 360 degree panoramic shots inside the bathtub, together with audio, check them out:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/01/11/nyregion/20080113_BATHTUB.html#/content=80ft

Hope you guys enjoy, Ciao

[KingKrunch]

Thank you TAK, nice article and panoramas :)

[Ghost]

It's rising!

http://i7.tinypic.com/6wxvskk.jpg
(earthcam)

[RockMont]

I like the looks of that. It is starting to rise. That's encouraging.

[Chitown]

I like the looks of that. It is starting to rise. That's encouraging.
Finally. When it's all said and done, this thing's going to be in the Guinness Book of World Records under "slowest construction."

[Deepstar]

It's nice to see thios one finally going upwards. I'm hoping that when i'm in NYC this summer it will have made some height.

[Daquan13]

It's rising!

http://i7.tinypic.com/6wxvskk.jpg
(earthcam)



Yeah, I think that the core has to rise to the height of those steel beams before any of the girders and be fastened between the core and the columns.

But it will be great to see when it does!!:worship:

[You Need A Thneed]

[QUOTE=harryc;3275012]In Chicago it is vinyl coated (from GE), used in parking and roadways where salt is expected.

It's definately epoxy coated rebar, not vinyl coated.

And a follow-up to the original question: It's used where water will be in contact with the concrete and especially in bridges where salt is used so that it keeps the rebar from rusting. When rebar rusts, that's when concrete structures fall apart.

Concrete has excellent compressive strength, but isn't very good for shear strength or tensile strength. when you add rebar, the rebar adds the shear and the tensile strength. If the rebar rusts, that added tensile and shear strength is compromised.

[RockMont]

Finally. When it's all said and done, this thing's going to be in the Guinness Book of World Records under "slowest construction."



That's because it's such a massive project.

[2-TOWERS]

It Looks Like It Has A Double Core...

[pablosan]

Great to see it rising.

[johnandahalf]

Finally. When it's all said and done, this thing's going to be in the Guinness Book of World Records under "slowest construction."

...or ugliest :(

ô¿ô

[CoolCzech]

...or ugliest :(

ô¿ô

Must be a Twin Tower fan...

[Chi649]

...or ugliest :(

ô¿ôwhat's so ugly about it :shrug:

[johnandahalf]

Must be a Twin Tower fan...

Absolutely not!

what's so ugly about it :shrug:

As an extraordinarily tall guy (hence the name), I can tell you that tall does not necessarily equal pretty.

The design is unimaginative and blocky, and looks like an oversized paperweight or one of those obelisks that Pier One sells. It's a basic geometric shape without character.

If their goal was to develop as "vanilla" a design as possible, they've succeeded. Personally, I would think they'd want a remarkable design, not something plain and unoffensive. This building doesn't say "We're back!", it says "We're sorry...please don't hit us again."

ô¿ô

[Surrealplaces]

I like this tower, it'd going to be nice to see it hit the skyline.

[Daquan13]

Can't see the white (painted) part of those other two or three steel columns
anymore, as they've been permenantly burried now in the comcrete.