NEW YORK | 200 Greenwich - 2 WTC | 1,226 FT | 55 FLOORS - Page 136

chris08876 · #**2701** Posted **Sep 12, 2013, 2:09 PM**

The construction process was on the news yesterday. They said this one will wait unit all the other towers including WTC 3 are all 100% filled with tenants for them to begin construction on WTC 2. I'm not sure if this is 100% true but this would mean that it would defiantly be the last one i the complex to be complete.

10023 · #**2702** Posted **Sep 12, 2013, 2:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

Photo from www.wtc.com
(Joe Woolhead)

Quick question - all of this appears to be above ground, so is the lobby to be built above, or is all of this "stuff" surrounded by the lobby (but then, I don't see any elevator banks)?

drumz0rz · #**2703** Posted **Sep 12, 2013, 2:52 PM**

This is the ground floor you're looking at, without most of the exterior walls. Look at this diagram

See the trapezoidal columns in both the diagram and the photograph? It looks like the main lobby desk will be right where that blower with the red stripe currently is. All of the ventilation equipment you see now will go away as well as those corrugated walls. When they resume construction, all that will remain will be the structural steel and concrete. The rest of what you see now is temporary to provide HVAC, power, etc. to the sub-levels.

The utilities you see now, will go where the black areas are in this diagram. Look at the top left exterior support column in the diagram, the one that houses two stairwells. Notice how between the stairs, there are two small rectangular black spaces? Now look at the photo above, and notice how the closest vents to the camera, they both enter the structure in those same rectangular spaces?

The elevator banks will reside within the tower core, which will be inside those black capped walls.

NYguy · #**2704** Posted **Sep 12, 2013, 10:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876

The construction process was on the news yesterday. They said this one will wait unit all the other towers including WTC 3 are all 100% filled with tenants for them to begin construction on WTC 2. I'm not sure if this is 100% true but this would mean that it would defiantly be the last one i the complex to be complete.

No, that is not accurate. This tower won't be built until a tenant is found for it, nothing has changed.

Tectonic · #**2705** Posted **Sep 13, 2013, 2:32 AM**

Therefore a large financial firm or could decide to move here and get this tower moving again. There is always hope for sooner rather than later.

Guiltyspark · #**2706** Posted **Sep 13, 2013, 4:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tectonic

Therefore a large financial firm or could decide to move here and get this tower moving again. There is always hope for sooner rather than later.

We have to be running low on huge financial firms that need space don't we? I really wish they had built this one and 1 first instead of 4 and 1.

MadGnome · #**2707** Posted **Sep 13, 2013, 11:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by chris08876

The construction process was on the news yesterday. They said this one will wait unit all the other towers including WTC 3 are all 100% filled with tenants for them to begin construction on WTC 2. I'm not sure if this is 100% true but this would mean that it would defiantly be the last one i the complex to be complete.

That's ridiculous. The towers will probably never be 100% full. You can't usually find customers that need exactly the space you have remaining. And they're not going to turn away tenants for four years between mostly filling up available space and finishing construction on WTC2. They'll start building as soon as they have commitments for a certain percentage of the tower.

yankeesfan1000 · #**2708** Posted **Sep 13, 2013, 12:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guiltyspark

We have to be running low on huge financial firms that need space don't we? I really wish they had built this one and 1 first instead of 4 and 1.

What major financial firm has recently moved into new space? None, outside of Goldman who built their own building.

Tectonic · #**2709** Posted **Sep 13, 2013, 12:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000

What major financial firm has recently moved into new space? None, outside of Goldman who built their own building.

I was just giving an example of possibilities. Companies always need new space, especially if they want to stay in a city where most of the office space buildings are over 30 years old. I think news on a tenant for this building will be a sudden surprise.

NYguy · #**2710** Posted **Sep 13, 2013, 12:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadGnome

That's ridiculous. The towers will probably never be 100% full. You can't usually find customers that need exactly the space you have remaining. And they're not going to turn away tenants for four years between mostly filling up available space and finishing construction on WTC2. They'll start building as soon as they have commitments for a certain percentage of the tower.

Silverstein would build it today - even without tenants signed - if he had the money to do it. But he needs financing, and that's nearly impossible to get for a tower like this without a major signed tenant. He was hoping for funds from that last lawsuit, but it didn't work out.

Blaze23 · #**2711** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 8:32 PM**

Fingers crossed people!

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20131003/REAL_ESTATE/131009952

Citigroup zeroing in on new HQ site

Quote:

Facing an upcoming lease expiration at its Park Avenue global headquarters, Citigroup Inc. is close to making a major decision on what it will do with the millions of square feet of office space it occupies across the metropolitan region and where it will locate the seat of its global banking operations.

The bank, which employs around 22,000 people in the city, has contemplated what strategy it should pursue for its labyrinthine real estate portfolio for several years. But several sources with direct knowledge of the bank's decision-making said it has boiled down its choices to three locations, and that the bank would make a final decision in the coming months.

Citi, like many large financial institutions, no longer needs the square footage it once did. According to Crain's research, the bank has shed 5,000 employees, almost 20% of its local workforce, since 2005. Many of its jobs have been exported to lower-cost Long Island City, Queens, where Citi owns one building and leases another.

Though the timing for a deal is still not yet set, several sources said the bank's search has now transitioned from an open-ended exploration of the market to negotiations with three landlords.

The bank will choose between the World Trade Center site, an existing twin-building complex it occupies on Greenwich Street in TriBeCa, and the Hudson Yards on the far West Side. A deal would likely include a relocation from 399 Park Ave., where it has had its global headquarters for more than 30 years. That lease, for hundreds of thousands of square feet, is set to expire in 2017. Generally large tenants like Citi plan their space moves at least two years in advance of pending expirations in order to assure an orderly transition.

"We have been looking at ways over the last several years to make more efficient use of our office space in New York, including consolidating locations," a Citi spokeswoman said. "With several leases expiring in the near future, we also have been looking at new space that is coming on the market."

At the World Trade Center site, Citi would anchor—and potentially fully occupy—a more than two-million square-foot office tower known as 2 World Trade Center to be developed by Silverstein Properties. The deal would complete the buildout of the World Trade Center site, where Silverstein Properties has nearly finished with another office building it is constructing there, 4 World Trade Center. It is also close to a major lease with the media firm GroupM that would permit it to build another tower, 3 World Trade Center. One World Trade Center, the biggest tower at the site, is also set to open next year.

Sources said that the Related Cos., the developer of a $15 billion complex of residential, office, retail and public space on top of the rail yards on the far West Side, is also trying to pull Citi into a deal to occupy a tower or multiple properties at its development.

Several sources said that a front-runner in the decision could actually be a property that Citi already occupies: 388 and 390 Greenwich St., a more than 2.5 million-square-foot, twin-building complex it sold to landlord SL Green Realty Corp. in 2007 for nearly $1.6 billion. That deal would include gut renovating the properties and packing them with more staff.

"By renovating their floors there, they can make them much more efficient," a source involved in that deal said.

The large real estate services firm CBRE Grouup is advising and representing Citi in the negotiations.

Over the past few years, Citi has made incremental, rather than sweeping changes to its real estate portfolio in the city. It recent months, it shed a long time office location it had at 666 Fifth Ave. It also shrunk its footprint at 601 Lexington Ave., the slant-roofed tower that once was once named after the bank and was home to thousands of its employees.

SL Green, Silverstein Properties and Related declined to comment

hunser · #**2712** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 8:32 PM**

^ Fingers crossed Citi makes the move.

On the other their hand tower would sit empty for a while but I guess not for long since their HQ is as prime location.

NYguy · #**2713** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 9:01 PM**

Quote:

At the World Trade Center site, Citi would anchor—and potentially fully occupy—a more than two-million square-foot office tower known as 2 World Trade Center to be developed by Silverstein Properties. The deal would complete the buildout of the World Trade Center site, where Silverstein Properties has nearly finished with another office building it is constructing there, 4 World Trade Center. It is also close to a major lease with the media firm GroupM that would permit it to build another tower, 3 World Trade Center.

Why must they tempt me with such things.

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2013/10/03/citigroup-eyes-hq-spots-as-clock-ticks-on-park-ave-lease/

From left: Rendering of 2 World Trade Center, 388 Greenwich Street and 390 Greenwich Street

Quote:

Citi has narrowed down the contenders to three locations: an existing twin-building complex it occupies at 388 and 390 Greenwich Street in Tribeca, 2 World Trade Center and a Hudson Yards locale on the far West Side.

The Greenwich Street site, said to the frontrunner, is a more than 2.5 million-square-foot spread it sold to landlord SL Green Realty in 2007 for nearly $1.6 billion.

NYCLuver · #**2714** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 9:12 PM**

Citi really needs to go from one slanted roofed skyscraper to the new one at 2 WTC so they can still claim they have the tallest slanted roofed skyscraper in the city.

Tectonic · #**2715** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 9:38 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tectonic

I was just giving an example of possibilities. Companies always need new space, especially if they want to stay in a city where most of the office space buildings are over 30 years old. I think news on a tenant for this building will be a sudden surprise.

See? Just like that, Hope. 2 WTC is a great option for their ego. I don't see Citi out in Hudson Yards for some reason. Greenwich Street sounds like the easiest choice.

NYguy · #**2716** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 10:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tectonic

I don't see Citi out in Hudson Yards for some reason. Greenwich Street sounds like the easiest choice.

Let's just hope they choose the right Greenwich Street tower....

With everything else going on, we may as well have this one join the race to the sky on the New York skyline. Imagine the updating we will have to do.

antinimby · #**2717** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 10:03 PM**

Yeah but the mass transportation options at the Tribeca location isn't as good as the WTC.

NYguy · #**2718** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 10:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by antinimby

Yeah but the mass transportation options at the Tribeca location isn't as good as the WTC.

Good point. Ironically, if the lease goes through, this tower could have much more space leased than tower 3, the one we look to as having more progress (tenant wise). Wouldn't it be great if Silverstein were able to announce finalized leases for both buildings at the same time? It would be fun to watch the two go up together, closer to original WTC construction than what we've already seen because the towers are closer than 1 and 4.

JayPro · #**2719** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 10:09 PM**

Of all the no-brainers I've encountered before..........

Tectonic · #**2720** Posted **Oct 3, 2013, 11:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayPro

Of all the no-brainers I've encountered before..........

So right. Citi need to make a better statement than Citibike. Lol. Antinimby, that's a another good point, especially if they are consolidating. It would be a great boost for downtown.