NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS [Archive] - Page 47

Nei!l

Mar 21, 2009, 5:41 PM

Found the interactive but the article is worrying.

A fraction of the full article from the Wall Street Journal
NEW YORK -- The rebuilding of the World Trade Center site, already hobbled by years of delays and infighting, is facing fresh problems as private developer Larry Silverstein asks the government for crucial financial assistance, according to people familiar with the matter.

The result would be that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the government entity that owns the site, would take on more of the risk of the project at a time when the agency already faces budget restraints to pursue its core transportation and infrastructure missions.

The Port Authority, eager to prevent the project from stalling, is considering helping to finance at least one of Mr. Silverstein's planned three office towers, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. Silverstein is requesting financing help on at least two of the three towers. The Port Authority would require concessions from Mr. Silverstein, including possibly giving up some of upside profits should the towers succeed in the long term.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123758929303200145.html

37TimPPG

Mar 21, 2009, 5:54 PM

Found the interactive but the article is worrying.

A fraction of the full article from the Wall Street Journal

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123758929303200145.html

Is it me or does it seem like anytime the project takes two steps forward it takes a step back?

It is great to see all the progress being made. I just hope everything gets completed on time??? When the economy turns around there is going to be quite the demand for all this office space being built at Ground Zero:banana:

pablosan

Mar 21, 2009, 6:03 PM

Great updates.

CHAPINM1

Mar 21, 2009, 10:44 PM

What is the next to happen, since the north core was the last to jump would this mean that the south core will jump next even though it is considerably ahead of the north core or will their be another lengthy wait followed by another jump on the north core before anything else happens?

NYguy

Mar 21, 2009, 11:34 PM

Now this is what I like to see, its like crane city now :)

The contruction process seems to have everyones attention but what about after, ex: How Iconic will it be. Id like to hear some thoughts on that.

There's a thread for that...
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=166333

NYguy

Mar 21, 2009, 11:36 PM

Is it me or does it seem like anytime the project takes two steps forward it takes a step back?

That article isn't talking about a step backwards, it's talking about moving forward, which the PA helping Silverstein with financing will do. It's not affecting the Freedom Tower.

NYguy

Mar 21, 2009, 11:51 PM

A few more from yesterday...

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110465483/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110465490/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110465501/large.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110464978/large.jpg

DaltonSR

Mar 22, 2009, 1:06 AM

37TimPPG

Mar 22, 2009, 1:56 AM

That article isn't talking about a step backwards, it's talking about moving forward, which the PA helping Silverstein with financing will do. It's not affecting the Freedom Tower.

Thanks for clarifying that for me. Good to hear it is full steam ahead:cheers:

Downtown Bolivar

Mar 22, 2009, 3:39 AM

I'm sure this comment has been made before, the the economic climate that the new WTC finds itself itself in is not too much different than the circumstances at the time of construction of the first WTC. It turned out fine in the end and this will too. This is NY--the city is no stranger to adversity.

mac78130

Mar 22, 2009, 4:02 AM

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110464978/large.jpg

Is that the crane for tower 4?

CHAPINM1

Mar 22, 2009, 4:04 AM

Is that the crane for tower 4?

Yes it sure is!!!

NYguy

Mar 22, 2009, 12:07 PM

This is NY--the city is no stranger to adversity.

Everyone seems to forget that, as if there are no more tomorrows.

NYguy

Mar 22, 2009, 1:07 PM

mattnchi (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mattnchi/3373588726/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3562/3373588726_f36044d932_b.jpg

Puzzlecraft

Mar 22, 2009, 4:51 PM

I found some pictures I took in the ground zero area on September 29, 2002, the last time I've visited NYC! I was there for a puzzle cutter's parley and managed to get to ground zero for some pictures. Thanks to this forum I can figure out where most of the pictures were taken from.

http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/temp/20020929_groundzero_1.jpg

http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/temp/20020929_groundzero_2.jpg

http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/temp/20020929_groundzero_3.jpg

http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/temp/20020929_groundzero_4.jpg

http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/temp/20020929_groundzero_5.jpg

http://www.custompuzzlecraft.com/temp/20020929_groundzero_6.jpg

Apathanoia

Mar 24, 2009, 12:13 AM

Is it me or does it seem like anytime the project takes two steps forward it takes a step back?

It is great to see all the progress being made. I just hope everything gets completed on time??? When the economy turns around there is going to be quite the demand for all this office space being built at Ground Zero:banana:

Somehow, I don't know if this huge demand will exist.
Nor do I know if the ecomomy will recover anytime soon...:uhh:

Anyway, why would there be a huge demand during the recovery if there was virtually no demand prior to the "Great Recession"? Besides, won't there be more vacant space to deal with due to companies going under and laying off employees? :goodnight:

Second, is there any idea of what the final security plan is like? I remember the old Fort WTC article (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2008/04/06/2008-04-06_security_plan_for_wtc_means_army_of_cops.html?page=0) that regards the plan as outdated. If that is outdated, then what is the plan today? How can a plan be created that allows decent access through and around the new WTC without making it vulnerable to car bombs? The end result just might have to be a superblock even bigger than the original WTC's...or the other option would be to shorten buildings 2, 3, and 4.
In addition, would such a security plan scare away tenants? They might think it's just not worth the hassles. And like my sig says, how much would the security plan cost annually?

NYguy

Mar 24, 2009, 12:18 AM

Somehow, I don't know if this huge demand will exist.
Nor do I know if the ecomomy will recover anytime soon...:uhh:

I guess it's a good thing none of this office WTC space will become available for another 4-6 years. The Freedom Tower itself has about half of its space to rent until then.

NYguy

Mar 24, 2009, 12:21 AM

mrichman (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrichman/3378438215/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3594/3378438215_78df3f2285_b.jpg

uaarkson

Mar 24, 2009, 1:19 AM

nvm

Duffstuff129

Mar 24, 2009, 1:55 AM

Anyway, why would there be a huge demand during the recovery if there was virtually no demand prior to the "Great Recession"? Besides, won't there be more vacant space to deal with due to companies going under and laying off employees? :goodnight:

There will be plenty of vacant, old space, but the new towers will have glass curtain walls and tons of natural light. That is the kind of environment people want to work in.

There will probably be plenty of old space, but take into account this:
This is 40 Wall Street:

http://www.starofficespace.com/photos/12436/12436a.jpg

http://www.starofficespace.com/photos/12436/12436b.jpg

This is 7WTC:

http://aiany.org/eOCULUS/2006/images/0418/7WTC_interior.jpg

http://www.wtc.com/media/images/d/6_01_7WTCEventSpace.JPG

:previous: Click that.

Where do you want to work? The oppressive, white walled, tiny-windowed, ancient relic, or the new, airy, light, and high celinged building?

Also, the WTC is offering a discount for tenants of something like $5 per square foot.

Needless to say, this is very attractive office space.

They might think it's just not worth the hassles. And like my sig says, how much would the security plan cost annually?

Despite what many people think, tons of people are dying to get into the WTC towers specifically to show the terrorist "HAHA, nice try." In fact some study by the guys who proposed the Twin Towers II found that there are enough people willing to work on the top few floors of the WTC to fill up 20-30 whole buildings.

Many people have accepted the fact that these towers will get attacked, just as the workers in the OWTC did after 1992.

People are willing to take that risk to prove a point.

Hell, I still dream about having the top office of 1, 2, or 3 WTC.

NYguy

Mar 24, 2009, 12:11 PM

There will be plenty of vacant, old space, but the new towers will have glass curtain walls and tons of natural light. That is the kind of environment people want to work in.

There will probably be plenty of old space

Older office space - space that can't be refurbished into Class A (for various reasons) - is being phased out (residential conversions). There will be a demand for the new WTC space for the same reason there will always be new office construction in the city - the vast majority of the stock is aged and aging. Even office space that is relatively new now, won't be 5 to 10 years down the line for companies looking for the best Manhattan has to offer. Cost is always a factor (as is the line between Midtown and Downtown commercial space). This new WTC space will come at a bargain compared to new Midown space that will come online at the same time. Still, there are those who would prefer to stay in (or move to) Midtown, regardless of the cost. But Downtown will always have its market, even as the older buildings are phased out.

NYguy

Mar 24, 2009, 12:24 PM

TwoBrowns Photo File (http://www.flickr.com/photos/twobrowns/3380191735/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3443/3380191735_c51d81f8d4_b.jpg

NYguy

Mar 24, 2009, 12:31 PM

Update from morrongiello (http://www.flickr.com/photos/33965463@N00/3379657893/sizes/l/) shows more progress on the Fulton Street connection...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3602/3379657893_315805906e_b.jpg

NYguy

Mar 25, 2009, 12:30 AM

Another example of a Downtown company possibly moving out, which new WTC space (and its incentives) could avert...
http://www.observer.com/2009/real-estate/depository-trust-seeks-700k-square-feet

Depository Trust Seeks 700K Square Feet

By Dana Rubinstein
March 24, 2009

The stultifyingly named Depository Trust is one of the latest tenants to tantalize the Manhattan real estate market.

The Trust is, essentially, the financial industry’s bookkeeper, founded in response to something actually called “the Paperwork Crisis” of the ’60s and ’70s, during which brokerages were forced to close their doors on Wednesdays to properly organize the millions of stock exchange notes creating crushing towers of paper on their desks...

Now, the Trust is looking for 700,000 square feet, since its lease is up in 2012, according to sources. The office hunt is a cost-cutting measure, according to one well-placed source, who estimated the firm now pays about $50 a square foot. Meanwhile, the Trust has become quite the belle of the real estate market ball. Earlier this month, The New York Times reported that New Jersey is trying to lure the Trust across the river with a 10-year, $74.6 million incentive.

Right now, the Trust is headquartered at the starkly imposing 55 Water Street, the enormous 3.6 million–square–foot tower designed by Emory Roth & Sons, and now owned by the New Water Street Corp.

NYguy

Mar 25, 2009, 12:36 AM

http://www.observer.com/2009/real-estate/freedom-rings-first-lease-world-trade-center-site

Freedom Rings Up! First Lease at World Trade Center Site

By Eliot Brown
March 24, 2009

The first office lease in the rebuilt World Trade Center is expected to be signed on Thursday, according to officials and others familiar with plans, as the China-based Beijing Vantone Real Estate Company has completed negotiations to take about 190,000 square feet of space in the Freedom Tower.

The Port Authority, which is developing the Freedom Tower, is slated to approve the deal at its Thursday board meeting, allowing the lease to be signed, those familiar with discussions said. Vantone, which signed a letter of intent to take space with the Port Authority in June, plans to create something of a portal for Chinese and American companies doing business with each other—dubbed “China Center”—in the 102-story tower that is scheduled for completion in 2013.

Should the lease indeed be signed, it would put an end to years of flirtations with Lower Manhattan and the World Trade Center by Vantone. The firm has nearly had deals at two other downtown locations, Larry Silverstein’s 7 World Trade Center and L&L’s 195 Broadway, both of which fell apart late in the negotiating process.

The deal is for five full floors of the tower and the terms of the deal are said to be similar to what was outlined in June. Those terms called for an approximately 23-year lease with rents that start at around $80 a square foot.

In January, the Port Authority transferred rent incentives once intended for a JPMorgan Chase tower downtown to the Freedom Tower, perhaps a sign that Vantone will benefit from the subsidies, valued at $5 a square foot. The Partnership for New York City has also committed money for the project.

A spokesman for the Port Authority, Stephen Sigmund, said in a statement that the agency is “continuing to work to turn the term sheet into the first signed lease for a private tenant in the building.”

Brokerage Jones Lang LaSalle, led by Peter Riguardi, represents Vantone and advises the Port Authority.

Between the federal, city and state governments, more than 2.3 million square feet has been committed at the four-tower World Trade Center complex, though leases have not yet been signed. That leaves more than 7 million square feet completely unaccounted for, including two entire planned buildings, Mr. Silverstein’s Towers 2 and 3, with no prospective tenants. Mr. Silverstein and the Port Authority are in discussions on how to adjust his lease and allow for him to build some of his towers amid the recession.

QuarterMileSidewalk

Mar 25, 2009, 5:51 AM

^Excellent news! :tup:

NYguy

Mar 25, 2009, 10:28 PM

mbahamonde (http://www.flickr.com/photos/bahamonde/3385336966/sizes/l/in/set-72157612257603653/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3641/3385336966_2712085b50_b.jpg

NYguy

Mar 25, 2009, 10:32 PM

lianebyrnes (http://www.flickr.com/photos/29557403@N06/3384234349/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3111/3384234349_55a62c6de9_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3130/3384234337_c2394b687c_b.jpg

meh_cd

Mar 26, 2009, 12:22 AM

If Tower One ends up looking just a little like Tower Seven I'll be happy. Just look at that glass. I know Tower One won't be using the same facade system that Seven has, but I hope it'll be similar.

Yume-sama

Mar 26, 2009, 4:32 AM

I have to admit to chuckling at the fact a Chinese owned company is the first major tenant in a new iconic American building named the "Freedom Tower".

NYguy

Mar 26, 2009, 4:52 AM

I have to admit to chuckling at the fact a Chinese owned company is the first major tenant in a new iconic American building named the "Freedom Tower".

They were initially going to moving into 7 WTC, but had disagreements with Larry Silverstein. But they chose the WTC for a reason, the main one being that it's an international symbol. It's exactly the type of company that should be there, but it doesn't really matter who fills out the space, so long as it gets filled.

NYguy

Mar 26, 2009, 6:03 AM

chris.stoeger (http://www.flickr.com/photos/36417954@N02/3386530860/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3470/3386530860_3978210c19_b.jpg

Eigenwelt

Mar 26, 2009, 6:31 AM

I'm a fan of spires and I still think this is the worst spire I have ever seen.

Stu

Mar 26, 2009, 12:58 PM

^You Have to wait till it's done to say that. ;)

So that Chinese company is moving in? Good news. I remember reading them being a potential WTC tenant a few years ago here. Or am I crazy?

NYguy

Mar 26, 2009, 3:59 PM

http://panynj.com/AboutthePortAuthority/PressCenter/PressReleases/PressRelease/index.php?id=1215

PORT AUTHORITY TO SIGN FIRST LEASE FOR ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER (THE FREEDOM TOWER)

March 26, 2009

Representatives of the Port Authority and Beijing Vantone Industry Co., Ltd., are expected to sign the first lease for One World Trade Center (the Freedom Tower) following the Board's monthly meeting at 1 p.m. on Thursday, March 26.

The Board meeting and lease signing will be done on the 15th floor of Port Authority headquarters at 225 Park Avenue South in Manhattan. Media wishing to attend should bring proper media credentials.

NYguy

Mar 26, 2009, 8:06 PM

http://panynj.com/AboutthePortAuthority/PressCenter/PressReleases/PressRelease/index.php?id=1216

PORT AUTHORITY AND VANTONE INDUSTRIAL SIGN FIRST LEASE FOR ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER (THE FREEDOM TOWER)
The China Center Will Occupy Nearly 200,000 Square Feet in New York’s Tallest Skyscraper to Encourage and Facilitate Business Between Two Global Finanical Centers

March 26, 2009

Representatives of The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Vantone Industrial Co., Ltd., today signed a lease that will create the China Center, a unique 190,810-square-foot business and cultural facility, to be located on portions of the 64th floor and the entire 65th through 69th floors of One World Trade Center (the Freedom Tower).

Immediately following the lease signing, China Center provided the Port Authority with a $10 million letter of credit.

The lease is for 20 years and nine months, commencing when the building is completed in late 2013. Rents will start at $80 per square foot and escalate in subsequent years. China Center also will have the right to lease up to two additional contiguous floors under the same lease terms, an option that expires at the end of 2009.

...The Port Authority also has commitments for more than a million square feet of leased office space in One World Trade Center from the U.S. General Services Administration and the New York State Office of General Services. Leases for these two public agencies are being finalized. These commitments, coupled with the China Center lease, represent nearly 50 percent of the total office space in the building.

...Key components of the China Center will include an Executive Business Club offering membership opportunities and extensive benefits; a conference center providing flexible, high-tech exhibition and conference facilities for corporate meetings and events; and first-class office space offering a variety of flexible layouts and options designed to enhance business operations and networking opportunities for a variety of small to mid-sized Chinese businesses.

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110645199/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110645226/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110645274/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110645285/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/110645306/original.jpg

NYguy

Mar 26, 2009, 8:58 PM

http://downtownexpress.com/

http://downtownexpress.com/de_309/con.jpg

Downtown Express photo by Lorenzo Ciniglio

CHAPINM1

Mar 26, 2009, 10:10 PM

You see, slowely but surely the towers will fill up! Also, great to see more of an inside look of the future WTC! As the saying goes "if you build it they will come."

NYguy

Mar 26, 2009, 11:47 PM

to see more of an inside look of the future WTC!

I don't think those are actual renderings, but it gives an idea...

NYguy

Mar 26, 2009, 11:52 PM

http://www.observer.com/2009/real-estate/so-much-freedom-tower

So Much for the 'Freedom Tower'

http://www.observer.com/files/full/Silverstein%20Properties.jpg

March 26, 2009

...on Thursday, March 26—the same day that the Port Authority signed the first lease for the building—officials acknowledged that the name has been dropped, at least by the agency.

“As we market the building, we will ensure that the building is presented in the best possible way,” Tony Coscia, chairman of the Port Authority’s board, told reporters after the lease signing ceremony. “1 World Trade Center is its address. It’s the address that we’re using. It’s the one that’s easiest for people to identify with, and frankly, we’ve gotten a very interested and warm reception to it.”

The agency's executive director, Chris Ward, suggested that if Freedom Tower remains as the name, it will be a "popular" name, not one of the owners.

"There are a lot of buildings that have popular names," he said. "If the Freedom Tower is the popular name as people think about this, that will be the choice of the people and how they think of downtown. On the other hand, this is a piece of real estate. It has an address. Legally, it is 1 World Trade Center."

At the press conference, reporters wondered what had become of Pataki’s name.

.....This all does not come as welcome news to Mr. Pataki. In a statement, he attacked the decision to drop the name, saying that 1 World Trade Center and 2 World Trade Center should be retired as addresses.

"The Freedom Tower is not simply another piece of real estate and not just a name for marketing purposes,” he said in the statement. “In design and name it is symbolic of our commitment to rise above the attacks of September 11th. Where One and Two World Trade Center once stood there will be a memorial with two voids to honor the heroes we lost, in my view those addresses should never be used again."

genop

Mar 27, 2009, 12:02 AM

you beat me to it. they also have an article in the post. http://www.nypost.com/seven/03262009/news/regionalnews/port_authority_doing_away_with_freedom_t_161457.htm

CHAPINM1

Mar 27, 2009, 12:07 AM

NYguy

Mar 27, 2009, 12:10 AM

I'm glad the name "Freedom Tower" is being dropped. It was way too weird I thought. Plus, being known and officially named Tower 1 not only brings back the original feeling, but is also sounds the most professional, well at least to me anyway...

It's not that the Freedom Tower name is being dropped, the Port Authority is using the "official" or correct name for the tower. Silverstein has taken the opposite approach, branding his towers 200, 175, and 150 Greenwich Street. But they are still 2, 3, and 4 WTC.

NYguy

Mar 27, 2009, 12:13 AM

haustier (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8579592@N05/3387505385/sizes/o/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3448/3387505385_e19b361f26_o.jpg

MetroFanatic

Mar 27, 2009, 5:36 AM

NYguy

Mar 27, 2009, 6:45 AM

Sorry if this has been posted already. I don't come to this thread much, but Wired Magazine had a short article about the tower in this months issue.
http://www.wired.com/culture/design/magazine/17-03/dp_freedomtower

Hadn't seen it, but nice graphic there...

http://www.wired.com/images/article/magazine/1703/dp_freedomtower_f.jpg

1 The Height
Libeskind's initial master plan stipulated that the skyscraper reach a height of 1,776 feet. That historically symbolic number makes for an extremely tall building—and an unprofitable one, since no tenant would want to be up that high. (It's just too scary.) The solution? Cheat. Reach the prescribed height by stretching out a 450-foot extension.

Of course, a giant bundle of antennas standing more than 1,300 feet off the ground presents its own challenges. Namely, it can't sway more than half a degree, because that would compromise the constant energy levels needed for clear digital TV transmissions. To help keep the spire stable, the architects placed a ring a quarter of the way up the central steel mast. A system of Kevlar cables attached to the ring will anchor the antennas in place. Meanwhile, a shield made of glass-reinforced resin composite panels will protect the spire from the elements.

2 The Base
The initial design, unveiled in late 2003, would have been far too vulnerable to threats like truck bombs. So SOM made two sweeping changes. First it squared up the base, formerly a parallelogram, to move the part of the building closest to the West Side Highway away from the road. It also added a 205-foot cube of protection: An interior layer of concrete provides brute resistance; glass prisms on the outside of the bunker make it look cool. Between the two layers, a quirky-looking grilled screen keeps birds from entering the mechanical systems. Right past the entrance will be a 62-foot-wide wall and blast barrier decorated with art.

3 The Trains
Libeskind positioned the tower over the tracks leading out of the Port Authority commuter train terminus, which raised concerns that rumble from the trains could possibly cause structural disturbance (and shake the chairs of tenants above), and the electromagnetic field generated by the high voltage could harm occupants. The tracks and platforms also interfered with some of the tower's supporting columns.

To minimize train rumblings and EMF exposure, SOM encased the building's steel supports in concrete. It isolated vibration by designing the joints between the concrete walls and steel columns to be flexible—connecting them like shoulder sockets, not like right-angled bookshelves. To keep the support beams out of the train tracks' way, SOM ran the columns diagonally away from the train paths and in one case split a load-bearing column over a single track.

Nomadd22

Mar 27, 2009, 11:39 AM

I've been wondering about the base. In renderings like this, it looks like it has a negative taper to it, but in others it doesn't.
The explanation of why the antennas can't move more than 1/2 degree is nonsense. There's no need for anything like a "constant energy level" for digital signals. Only a minimum one. And swaying wouldn't have any effect on energy level anyhow unless it could sway several million times a second.

NYguy

Mar 27, 2009, 4:54 PM

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iK8_o9_6HlwVqkMlVV_GFEkG7WxQ

Outcry after new Ground Zero tower loses 'Freedom'

NEW YORK (AFP) — The owners of the skyscraper being built at Ground Zero ran into controversy Friday with the decision to strip the building of its patriotic unofficial name "Freedom Tower."

"No more freedom," read the front page of the Daily News, declaring in an editorial that the site's owner, the New York and New Jersey Port Authority, was "erasing history."

"Freedom is out of fashion at Ground Zero," rival tabloid the New York Post said.

Former New York Governor George Pataki, first to coin the name "Freedom Tower," reacted defiantly.

"The Freedom Tower isn't going to be One World Trade Center, it's going to be the Freedom Tower," he said in comments broadcast on NY1 television.

"I think One and Two World Trade Center are sacred names which should never be used again," said Pataki.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/03/27/2009-03-27_taking_license_with_freedom_port_authori.html

Taking license with freedom: Port Authority is imperious in renaming Ground Zero tower

March 27th 2009, 4:00 AM

When you've broken your promises on everything else to do with redeveloping Ground Zero, it's no big deal to discard the name by which the public has come to know the iconic skyscraper at the heart of the plan.

When you've engaged in massive schemes to lie about costs and when you have failed to meet every solemnly pledged construction deadline, tossing a name like Freedom Tower is child's play.

You just do it. Because there's no need to consult the public. Because you're the mighty Port Authority - and you damn well say and do what you please.

So, when your marketing team says it prefers to sell the building to prospective tenants as 1 World Trade Center rather than as the Freedom Tower, you give them the green light.

Apparently, "Freedom" doesn't test-market very well when you're trying to draw tenants from all parts of the globe. Including from Communist China, an arm of which has just leased more than five floors of the building to house a "China Center." This is planned as a locus of Sino-American commerce.

The name Freedom Tower came into popular use on April 24, 2003, when then-Gov. George Pataki and the Port Authority established a timetable for Ground Zero construction.

The Freedom Tower would soar its full 1,776 feet by Sept. 11, 2005, and be ready for tenants by early 2008.

A permanent PATH train station would be open in 2006.

A new Fulton St. subway complex would be done by 2007.

There would be direct rail service from downtown to Long Island and JFK Airport by 2013.

None of that came true. None of that will be done for years, if ever. The Port Authority made a liar out of Pataki on every project it was responsible for. And now the imperious, unaccountable agency has dropped the last vestige of the past, as if erasing history.

It and its new tenant should be quite comfortable with each other.

NYguy

Mar 27, 2009, 5:05 PM

azimut400qon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryanthara/3389363069/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3599/3389363069_99c411cef9_b.jpg

NYguy

Mar 27, 2009, 5:08 PM

Philippe Saez (http://www.flickr.com/photos/saez/3389011538/sizes/o/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3440/3389011538_0ea4400305_o.jpg

QuarterMileSidewalk

Mar 27, 2009, 6:11 PM

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iK8_o9_6HlwVqkMlVV_GFEkG7WxQ

Outcry after new Ground Zero tower loses 'Freedom'

Are these the same people who were calling it "Fear Tower" because of its truck-bomb-proof base?

Pataki was right, though, that the name "World Trade Center" is, in a way, sacred now, but it is also obsolete in the modern economy anyway. (Very few of the companies in the twin towers had anything to do with actual trade, if I recall correctly; most dealt with international finance.)

I really don't mind if they decide to call it "One New World Trade Center," or just "Tower One;" I agree that "Freedom Tower" sounded a little bit awkward and unimaginative, a tad too sentimental. Perhaps the name should more reflect the history of the site: "Memorial Tower," perhaps?

Or, if we insist on keeping "Freedom" in the name, how about something a bit more formal, like, "One Freedom Center" or "One Freedom Park?" Those particular formats could be applied to all the buildings in the site.

tdawg

Mar 27, 2009, 6:14 PM

Good news. Freedom Tower was a stupid name. I am, however, in favor of Gawker's suggestion of "The America is Awesome Tower." ;)

ThisSideofSteinway

Mar 27, 2009, 6:20 PM

Good news. Freedom Tower was a stupid name. I am, however, in favor of Gawker's suggestion of "The America is Awesome Tower." ;)

It's back...

The ‘Freedom Tower’ Name Roars Back

By David W. Dunlap
tower

For more than a year, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey had been quietly backing away from the name “Freedom Tower” for 1 World Trade Center, not so much eliminating the coinage (by Gov. George E. Pataki) as lowering its profile.

Although the authority would not say so, it is easy to imagine that prospective tenants — already worried about moving into a building that will almost certainly occupy some terrorists’ cross hairs — could not have been comforted by a name with such potent political symbolism.

Of course, that symbolism is exactly what appeals to those who favor the name.

So when The Daily News and The New York Post reported on Friday what readers of City Room have known since March 2008, a fresh debate erupted over what to call what will be the tallest building in New York.

Mr. Pataki and a number of relatives of 9/11 victims — who often did not see eye to eye when he was governor — strongly criticized the idea of abandoning the name “Freedom Tower.”

As Mr. Pataki told City Room last year: “It is a little troubling to me that again there is a 1 World Trade Center, because a lot of great people and a lot of true heroes died in 1 World Trade Center. I think that name should be reserved, for those who did die on that horrible day.”

By mid-morning, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg joined the debate during his weekly radio program with John Gambling on WOR-AM. He said:

Well, it’s up to the Port Authority. If it were me and I didn’t have to rent space, I have no idea what the commercial aspects are and we can say, ‘Oh, we shouldn’t worry about that,’ but of course you have to, particularly now. I would like to see it stay the Freedom Tower, but it’s their building and they don’t need me dumping on it. If they could rent the whole thing by changing the name, I guess they’re going to do that and they probably, from a responsible point of view, should.

Mr. Bloomberg added, “If they name this 1 World Trade Center, people will still call it the Freedom Tower.”
On Thursday, the Port Authority placed the words “Freedom Tower” in parentheses rather than after a comma, as it does on its Web site.

Port Authority officials made the same point during a news conference after Thursday’s board meeting. The subject came up in part because a news release about the first commercial lease in the building put the words “Freedom Tower” in parentheses and partly because a post on City Room, followed by an article in The Times, referred to the building as having once been called Freedom Tower.

“Let’s talk about the reality of the real estate market and popular names,” Christopher O. Ward, the executive director of the authority, said at the question-and-answer session. “There are a lot of buildings that have popular names. If the Freedom Tower is the popular name as people think about this, that will be the choice of the people and how they think of downtown. On the other hand, this is a piece of real estate, it has an address; legally it is 1 World Trade Center.”

Anthony R. Coscia, the chairman of the authority, said: “As we market the building, we will ensure that the building is presented in the best possible way. One World Trade Center is its address, it’s the address that we’re using. It’s the one that’s easiest for people to identify with and frankly we’ve gotten a very interested and warm reception to it.”

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/the-freedom-tower-name-roars-back/

If we are going to officially go this route, I move that it be the America (F*&k Yeah!) Tower. :cool:

pj3000

Mar 27, 2009, 7:13 PM

Freedom Tower is about as cheesy and non-NYC as you can get.

I'm very glad to hear of the name change. There is no more fitting testament and tribute to the former towers than reviving the World Trade Center name in a greater form.

NYCLuver

Mar 27, 2009, 7:37 PM

The Freedom Tower name being dropped is great in my opinion. Freedom Tower, really? That was so tacky, I'm surprised the tower wasn't designed with the colors red white and blue.

And the name "World Trade Center" isn't really sacred since there are some towers around the world called World Trade Center now.

Pataki should just shut up, he's one of the reasons for so many delays and government crap. And one of the reasons the NY State economy now is in the shits.

RockMont

Mar 27, 2009, 7:49 PM

Pataki is about as low class a dirt bag as anybody can be.

ethereal_reality

Mar 27, 2009, 8:02 PM

MSNBC is having a vote concerning the name change.

The results so far....

54.1% The change was right. Freedom tower was too provocative a name.

30.4% They should not have changed it. It marks a huge moment in U.S. history.

15.5% It doesn't really matter what it's called.

There are almost 300 comments that are also quite interesting.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/

CoolCzech

Mar 27, 2009, 9:10 PM

The ‘Freedom Tower’ Name Roars Back

By David W. Dunlap
tower

For more than a year, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey had been quietly backing away from the name “Freedom Tower” for 1 World Trade Center, not so much eliminating the coinage (by Gov. George E. Pataki) as lowering its profile.

Although the authority would not say so, it is easy to imagine that prospective tenants — already worried about moving into a building that will almost certainly occupy some terrorists’ cross hairs — could not have been comforted by a name with such potent political symbolism.

What "potent political symbolism"? I thought all the name's critics said it was just trite jingoism?:rolleyes:

CoolCzech

Mar 27, 2009, 9:15 PM

Anyway,

The "official" name was always 1 World Trade Center. Just like the Bank of America tower really isn't "officially" the BofA, but One Bryant Park. This is just so much ado over nothing. A developer could call the Empire State Building "350 Fifth Avenue" all he wanted, but everyone would still call it the Empire State Building. I sincerely doubt that New York City guidebooks will EVER call the Freedom Tower "1 World Trade Center" when they list it as one of the Top Ten Attractions.

genop

Mar 27, 2009, 9:49 PM

another one about it from the post
http://www.nypost.com/seven/03272009/news/regionalnews/this_is_not_the_freedom_tower_161568.htm

By TOM TOPOUSIS

Last updated: 10:40 am
March 27, 2009
Posted: 2:40 am
March 27, 2009

Freedom is out of fashion at Ground Zero.

Once hailed as a beacon of rebirth in the aftermath of Sept. 11, the Freedom Tower has been stripped of its patriotic name -- which has been swapped out for the more marketable "One World Trade Center," Port Authority officials conceded yesterday.

More than seven years after the terror attacks and amid an effort to market the tower to international tenants, sentiment gave way to practicality.

"As we market the building we will ensure that the building is presented in the best possible way," said PA Chairman Anthony Coscia.

"One World Trade Center is its address. It's the address that we're using. It's the one that's easiest for people to identify with, and, frankly, we've gotten a very interested and warm reception to it."

Today, Mayor Bloomberg said on his radio show on WABC, "It's up the Port Authority. If it were me and I didn't have to rent space ... I would like to see it stay the Freedom Tower.

"But it's their building and they don't need me dumping on it. If they could rent the whole thing by changing the name I guess they're going to do that."

Debra Burlingame, whose brother Charles Burlingame was the pilot aboard American Airlines Flight 77 that was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon, said the renaming of the tower is one more example that the nation is forgetting 9/11.

"If we can't say the word freedom out loud, God help us," she said.

"I understand the decision from a marketing point of view. But it saddens me that it's no longer economically viable to declare who we are."

The issue of the name change -- toward which the PA has been shifting for more than a year -- came up at a news conference after the agency signed a lease with its first major tenant.

A Chinese firm, Vantone Industrial Co., will lease six floors. A four-page press release for the lease signing included the name "Freedom Tower" twice -- only in parentheses.

The only other tenants so far are the federal and state governments.

"Freedom Tower" was coined by then-Gov. George Pataki, who oversaw the initial designs for the reconstruction of the World Trade Center and wanted a tower to rise a symbolic 1,776 feet at a time of heightened patriotism.

Pataki yesterday bristled at the name change.

"The Freedom Tower is not simply another piece of real estate and not just a name for marketing purposes. In design and name, it is symbolic of our commitment to rise above the attacks of Sept. 11," he said.

"Where One and Two World Trade Center once stood, there will be a memorial with two voids to honor the heroes we lost. In my view, those addresses should never be used again.

Coscia said the agency is simply referring to the 102-story tower by its legal name.

"It's part of a complex of what we're hopeful will be five buildings that will redefine the landscape of lower Manhattan, so we refer to it by that term," he said.

When pressed during the news conference on whether Freedom Tower will appear anywhere on the building, Coscia replied, "Next," and turned to answer a question from another reporter.

canadate

Mar 27, 2009, 9:56 PM

Well I don't think that "The Freedom Tower" was such a dumb name. I think it's very fitting for the building. I don't care what anyone says "One World Trade Center" or whatever it'll be called will always be The Freedom Tower in my eyes. It seems like a lot of people have forgotten the initial motivation for this project; it's really sad.

genop

Mar 27, 2009, 9:59 PM

CHAPINM1

Mar 27, 2009, 10:10 PM

lets face it the only REAL motivation behind it is money

AND restoring what was there including the skyline!!!

New Skyline

Mar 27, 2009, 10:37 PM

Just checking Every Once in a while... (yes i know, should check more often)

According to http://www.lowermanhattan.info:

"One World trade Center (Freedom Tower's) south Core is more than 130 Feet above grade and rising"

Last updated on March 27, 2009

genop

Mar 27, 2009, 10:44 PM

i found this video on nytimes.com
http://video.nytimes.com/video/2009/03/16/nyregion/1194838579493/the-freedom-tower-rises.html?ref=nyregion

Wheelingman04

Mar 27, 2009, 11:47 PM

Either name is fine with me.

kazpmk

Mar 28, 2009, 2:42 AM

I have to say the name "freedom Tower" always sounded a bit corny to me. And I'm a conservative! lol. I think the memorial and the new office towers themselves in there own right can make the site "patriotic" and show America's triumph over terrorism without the need of a corny name like freedom tower.

aspirehigher

Mar 28, 2009, 4:28 AM

"The Freedom Tower" sucks...

"One World Trade Center" Too wordy.

What if we combined the two?!

Freedom One :tup:

photoLith

Mar 28, 2009, 6:46 AM

Now thats actually pretty sweet. Freedom One, has a nice ring to it.

nickkoto

Mar 28, 2009, 6:55 AM

I would be thrilled if they changed the name from Freedom Tower and I'm glad we're finally starting to tone down the post-9/11 nationalism. It was kind of understandable to a point, but Freedom Tower, the sudden introduction of God Bless America at the 7th inning stretch, entire rows of Wal-Mart with flag paraphenalia, you can't get away from it.

Hell, you still can't even go to Sea World without a "please give a round of applause for the men and women of our armed services" before they let Shamu into the pool. I say this as a veteran of 8 years myself, it's not the place for that. Most of them would rather not hear it on their day off anyway, but it's an international destination for fuck's sake. Why should all of those Japanese and Canadian tourists be inundated with that?

Anyhow, I think if they absolutely have to make some kind of statement with the new towers, they should use the exact same names and build something even more spectacular. Freedom Tower is too reminiscent of "freedom fries." :gaah:

NYguy

Mar 28, 2009, 11:40 AM

Well, this is all a debate over nothing, and it's already gotten tiresome. Of course, those who regularly follow the progress of this building and the other WTC towers (yes, they are all the "World Trade Center") know that this tower is 1 WTC. "Freedom Tower" is just a name that was given to it. Love it, or hate it, but it's no more inappropriate than giving the building a specific height of 1,776 ft to mark the beginning of America's independence. As such, the name is fitting.

But it hardly matters. Nothing was "changed", the Port Authority is just using what the building is designated as - 1 WTC - instead of Freedom to market the building. Larry Silverstein chose to do the opposite, marketing the other WTC towers as 200, 175, and 150 Greenwich Street. That doesn't make it not the World Trade Center. The original World Trade Center was more commonly referred to as the "Twin Towers". No one ever said I'm going to the top of "2 WTC".

NYguy

Mar 28, 2009, 11:45 AM

A little more from an earlier article
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/28/nyregion/28freedom.html?_r=1&ref=nyregion

A Debate at Ground Zero Over Which Name Will Last

By DAVID W. DUNLAP
March 28, 2009

On Thursday, in an announcement that the Vantone Industrial Co. of China had signed on as a tenant, the authority referred to the building as “One World Trade Center (The Freedom Tower).” After The Daily Newsand The New York Post pounced — critically reporting the naming shift on their front pages on Friday — a debate erupted.

The authority was at pains to say that nothing had really changed in the last few months. “We’ve referred to the primary building planned for the site as 1 World Trade Center — its legal name and street address — for almost two years now, as well as using the name the Freedom Tower,” said Stephen Sigmund, the chief of public and government affairs at the authority.

“Many will always refer to it as the Freedom Tower,” he continued, “but as the building moves out of the planning stage and into full construction and leasing (the building is now 10 stories above ground), we believe that, going forward, it is most practical to market the building as 1 World Trade Center.”

NYguy

Mar 28, 2009, 11:55 AM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03282009/news/regionalnews/free_deep_down_inside_161692.htm

'FREE' DEEP DOWN INSIDE
PATRIOTIC NAME ON TOWER BEAM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03282009/photos/freedom_tower.jpg

By JEREMY OLSHAN and KEVIN FASICK
March 28, 2009

Sorry, Port Authority: Freedom is written in steel.

No matter what the agency tries to rename the skyscraper rising from Ground Zero, the words "Freedom Tower" are permanently written into the building's bones. A steel beam painted with the American flag and "Freedom Tower" spelled out in giant letters was used to form the base of the building's frame in December 2006.

Bloomberg said New Yorkers may still end up calling the building the Freedom Tower, just as the original World Trade Center was more often called "the Twin Towers."

"Many will always refer to it as the Freedom Tower," said PA spokesman Stephen Sigmund. Freedom Tower was never the official name of the building, and the words were never going to appear outside or inside the structure, Sigmund said.

But as recently as last May, the agency trademarked the name to license a slew of merchandise.

Will "Freedom Tower" still be used on souvenirs? "That remains to be seen," Sigmund said.

Construction crews working at Ground Zero and tourists visiting the site agreed the name should stand.

"Of course it should be called the Freedom Tower," construction worker Joe Grusel said. "It's supposed to symbolize something."

South Korean tourist S.M. Park agreed.

"Everybody in Korea already knows it as the Freedom Tower," Park, 42, said. "Everybody in the world knows it as the Freedom Tower. That's perfectly marketable."

____________________________

I don't suppose the Port Authority will be using the "Freedom Stone"...;)

NY Times
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/07/27/nyregion/span-of-freedom.jpg
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg was joined by two governors, George E. Pataki of New York and James E. McGreevey of New Jersey, at the 2004 unveiling of the Freedom Tower cornerstone, which has since been put in storage. Mr. Pataki’s successor will have a big say in the project.

Renton

Mar 28, 2009, 12:10 PM

NYguy

Mar 28, 2009, 12:12 PM

Hendrik Hoefer (http://www.flickr.com/photos/schmoell/3390568379/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3557/3390568379_fc0bc477c3_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3596/3391382972_213515dd8e_b.jpg

NYguy

Mar 28, 2009, 12:32 PM

zimexpi (http://www.flickr.com/photos/28397897@N02/3389674703/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3560/3389674703_cc089e6b08_b.jpg

CoolCzech

Mar 28, 2009, 4:34 PM

"Of course it should be called the Freedom Tower," construction worker Joe Grusel said. "It's supposed to symbolize something."

South Korean tourist S.M. Park agreed.

"Everybody in Korea already knows it as the Freedom Tower," Park, 42, said. "Everybody in the world knows it as the Freedom Tower. That's perfectly marketable."

____________________________

Everybody except our wonderful sophisticated "elite," I guess.

Something tells me this decision was made by the same marketing gurus that that thought it would be a good idea to have Superman stand for "Truth, Justice, and All that Stuff" in the last Superman movie that came out last year. I hear that as wonderfully sophisticated and non-corny as that was, the movie sank into oblivion...

It might come as a shocker to the PA, but many out there in the passport-carrying world actually LIKE "Freedom."

CoolCzech

Mar 28, 2009, 4:38 PM

MercurySky

Mar 28, 2009, 5:39 PM

I like 1 World Trade Center better personally. To each their own I guess.

Boquillas

Mar 28, 2009, 5:40 PM

On the one hand, I have a lot of contempt for the patriotic zeal and overbearing nationalism of a name like "Freedom Tower"--not because I dislike freedom-- we know that's not where the name came from. The name is about legitimizing the myopic, straw-man, "terrorists hate freedom" explanation for why our nation was attacked.

On the other hand, say it long enough and it becomes just a name--the content is forgotten. Sears Tower just recalls the building for me-- I don't think of the company (although the new name sucks). People will likely ignore the concept in the name, and just associate it with the building.

Renton

Mar 28, 2009, 6:11 PM

NYonward

Mar 28, 2009, 7:20 PM

Pataki named this tower "Freedom Tower", it was politics disguising itself as patriotism. Changing the name to 1 World Trade Center is righting a wrong in my opinion.

After what has happened with the right-wing's "freedom" spreading over the years since the attacks, and the drubbing they got in the elections...I can't believe anyone still clings on to this name.

Plokoon11

Mar 28, 2009, 7:24 PM

Yeah its official on the headlines for CNN it said developers dropped name Freedom Tower for WTC1.

SD_Phil

Mar 28, 2009, 10:40 PM

^I doubt people will stop calling it the freedom tower though just like people will still call the sears tower the sears tower. 1 world trade center not only isn't as catchy but it also evokes the 9/11 attacks in the minds of many. While 'freedom tower' may not be the best name for it i bet it sticks.

NYguy

Mar 28, 2009, 11:20 PM

Yeah its official on the headlines for CNN it said developers dropped name Freedom Tower for WTC1.

A misreading. They haven't "dropped" the name Freedom Tower, they're using the proper name, which is 1 WTC, to market the building. And that's nothing new, they've been doing it for a couple of years now, it's just only being talked about now.

NYguy

Mar 28, 2009, 11:28 PM

Whatever happened to the Freedom Stone, anyway?? I note that it doesn't actually have the words "Freedom Tower" carved into it - maybe the PA can get over its aversion to the "F-word" and actually use the corner stone?

Keep in mind that the PA wanted nothing to do with the Freedom Tower in the first place. It was "forced" on the agency in an attempt to make it easier for Larry Silverstein to build the other towers.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/07/27/nyregion/span-of-freedom.jpg

Pataki named this tower "Freedom Tower", it was politics disguising itself as patriotism. Changing the name to 1 World Trade Center is righting a wrong in my opinion.

After what has happened with the right-wing's "freedom" spreading over the years since the attacks, and the drubbing they got in the elections...I can't believe anyone still clings on to this name.

And to think, people still insists on calling that statue out in the harbor "Liberty". Go figure.

I know a lot of people forget the origins of this tower, but I'll repeat it. It's nothing political, but the tower was and is planned as a symbol of American independence. If you have a problem with the tower's name, you have a problem with it being 1,776 ft. But when you get one, you get the other. Before Pataki branded it the Freedom Tower, it was the 1776 Building. None of this was by accident, it's very site specific. At least to the people who have not forgotten that this was and still is the site of the 9/11 attacks.

But you can call it by either name, the Freedom Tower or 1 WTC. They're both accurate, so it's quite alright.

NYguy

Mar 28, 2009, 11:35 PM

morrongiello (http://www.flickr.com/photos/33965463@N00/3390424018/sizes/l/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3539/3390424018_7cdf5fba73_b.jpg

JDRCRASH

Mar 29, 2009, 12:32 AM

I still consider it "Freedom Tower".

CHAPINM1

Mar 29, 2009, 12:50 AM

People will definetly be divided because I will only, and only call it either WTC Tower 1 or 1 WTC. The name Freedom Tower just reminds of how much horse shit we all had to sit back and watch during the early years of politicing of what was going to happen with the site.

NYonward

Mar 29, 2009, 12:52 AM

And to think, people still insists on calling that statue out in the harbor "Liberty". Go figure.

I know a lot of people forget the origins of this tower, but I'll repeat it. It's nothing political, but the tower was and is planned as a symbol of American independence. If you have a problem with the tower's name, you have a problem with it being 1,776 ft. But when you get one, you get the other. Before Pataki branded it the Freedom Tower, it was the 1776 Building. None of this was by accident, it's very site specific. At least to the people who have not forgotten that this was and still is the site of the 9/11 attacks.

But you can call it by either name, the Freedom Tower or 1 WTC. They're both accurate, so it's quite alright.

9/11 wasn't about Freedom. Our response ought not be some "Braveheart" cinematic moment. And even bringing in the conversation the Statue of Liberty is completely ridiculous - 1776 feet or not. "Freedom Tower" is entirely political, George Pataki's coinage was his party's narrow view of the attacks and our response.

I know some people like the name, I think it's silly.

NewYorker2009

Mar 29, 2009, 2:03 AM

I have to say the name "Freedom Tower" was awkward. It didn't fit New York. One World Trade Center sounds professional. What would someone working there answer when someone asks them "So where do you work?" "I work in the Freedom Tower." Come on that's ridiculous. One World Trade Center is more appropriate. Just as the PA and Bloomberg said. People can call it whatever they want. The same concept applied to the original World Trade Center where the Towers were addressed as One and Two World Trade Center and people called them the North and South Towers or Twin Towers. Well we do have 7 WTC. So naming it 1 WTC would be a better fit as Silverstein will later name his buildings 2 WTC, 3 WTC, and 4 WTC. Their alternate names would be 200 Greenwich street, 175 Greenwich street, and 150 Greenwich street.