HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


    One World Trade Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #301  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2007, 1:33 PM
Ghost's Avatar
Ghost Ghost is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Finland
Posts: 251
So, LMDC's webcam seems to be down...

Anyway, wasn't there supposed to be some new crane installed by end of february?
     
     
  #302  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2007, 2:41 PM
Realthang Realthang is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
So, LMDC's webcam seems to be down...
They apparently have been removed. There is no camera left that is pointing directly to the freedom tower construction site anymore. The HD Earthcam has had its software upgraded recently but the pictures still haven't been updated since Sept 11th last year.
     
     
  #303  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2007, 12:41 AM
Daquan13 Daquan13 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: East Boston, MA. USA
Posts: 7,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
So, LMDC's webcam seems to be down...

Anyway, wasn't there supposed to be some new crane installed by end of february?


Two of them, supposedly.

Looks like Ground Zero is being rebuilt by the Slowskys (the 2 turtles in the Comcast commercial).
     
     
  #304  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2007, 12:43 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 52,198
NY Sun

Durst and Malkin Could Lose Big If Tower Is Built

By DAVID LOMBINO
March 2, 2007


The pair of major landlords waging a campaign against the Freedom Tower have been arguing publicly against the project without disclosing that they personally could lose millions of dollars a year if it is built.

Last week, developers Douglas Durst and Anthony Malkin put their names at the bottom of full-page advertisements in several New York City newspapers by a group they are co-chairmen of called The Continuing Committee for a Reasonable World Trade Center. The advertisements said the project was ill conceived, too expensive, and poorly planned.

The ads were released just after the Spitzer administration indicated it would move forward with the project, and before the Port Authority approved several key construction contacts. They went into detail about the tower's architecture, its security vulnerabilities, its rent roll, its height, its name — just about everything except for the fact that the project includes plans for television and radio broadcast antennae that would replace those on the old twin towers, and compete with those on buildings owned by Messrs. Malkin and Durst.

Mr. Malkin controls the Empire State Building and Mr. Durst owns the Condé Nast Building at 4 Times Square
, both of which are now the most desirable locations in the city for the location of television and radio broadcast facilities and their antennae.

Following the destruction of the World Trade Center, the Empire State Building antenna, at about 1,454 feet tall, became the primary antenna for the area's major television stations. The Conde Nast building antenna, at about 1,141 feet tall, became a favorite backup.

The Port Authority, which owns the Freedom Tower, is currently in negotiations with the Metropolitan TV Alliance, a conglomerate of local television broadcasters. The MTVA has committed to using the proposed 256-foot broadcast antenna on top of the Freedom Tower. Sources close to the negotiations say the contract is nearly complete and would net about $10 million a year in annual rent to the Port Authority. A 20 to 30 year contact worth hundreds of millions of dollars would contribute to the financial viability of the Freedom Tower, they say.

A source close to the negotiations between the Port Authority and the MTVA said the new antenna, reaching higher than all competing antenna facilities, at 1,776 feet tall, would be the highest point in the region, offering broadcasters the clearest level of service. Other antennae, like the facilities on Messrs. Durst or Malkin's buildings, could still be used to create a signal redundancy, but would probably command lower rents.

In a telephone interview, Mr. Malkin said he does not view the Freedom Tower's antenna as a "competitive threat." He said his public involvement is not financially motivated.

"Whatever revenues we have are locked in. They are long-term contracts. I will likely be retired or retiring before it become an issue," Mr. Malkin said. "When the World Trade Center was in place and functioning, our broadcast facility was full. If we are not the number one facility, we are the number two. Broadcasters will have to use our facility."

A former top real estate official at the Port Authority who negotiated the last deal between broadcasters and the former World Trade Center, James Connors, now works for Mr. Malkin.

A spokesman for the Durst Organization, Jordan Barowitz, said that antenna revenue was not behind Mr. Durst's public campaign. He said Mr. Durst would like to see the Freedom Tower rebuilt, but redesigned and delayed. Mr. Barowitz said revenue from antennae accounts for less than .5% of the Durst Organization's total revenue.

Both Messrs. Durst and Malkin have said they were continuing a family tradition. In the 1960s, Mr. Durst's father, Seymour Durst, and Mr. Malkin's grandfather, Lawrence Wien, formed the Committee for a Reasonable World Trade Center to protest the original twin towers.

A spokesman for the Port Authority, John McCarthy, declined to comment because the antenna agreement is being negotiated.

A spokesman for the MTVA, Pat Smith, would not comment on the status of the negotiations, but he said new antenna facilities are necessary. He said the broadcasters are committed to a Freedom Tower facility.

"There are still millions of people in the metropolitan area who do not have cable, or who have additional televisions in the house without cable. They are not getting a fully adequate signal. It would also facilitate the transition to digital television," Mr. Smith said.

Before committing to the Freedom Tower antenna, MTVA had considered other sites in New York and New Jersey, including the possibility of a free-standing antenna not connected to any existing building.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.

Last edited by NYguy; Mar 3, 2007 at 12:50 PM.
     
     
  #305  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2007, 1:03 PM
Daquan13 Daquan13 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: East Boston, MA. USA
Posts: 7,746
Oh, please. My heart bleeds for them!

Let's see now; we've waited for God knows how long - five years for a major tower to start being built on the land and those two goons want it put off or put on hold because THEY don't think it should be built right now?

Why won't these two knuckleheads go crawl back under the rock from which they came?! They make me sick!!

Neither Silverstein, the PA, city or state officials, Gov. Spitzer, nor the LMDC is gong to back out from building the tower now. Deals were reached, agreed upon and the tower IS moving forward.

Guess they're just going to have lose big bucks because the tower WILL be built, and it WILL meet the construction timetable planned.

Last edited by Daquan13; Mar 6, 2007 at 2:12 PM.
     
     
  #306  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2007, 6:47 PM
kznyc2k's Avatar
kznyc2k kznyc2k is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Back to Boston
Posts: 1,865
thanks D.
     
     
  #307  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2007, 11:08 PM
LWR's Avatar
LWR LWR is offline
Waiting for what's next..
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF: on top of a hill behind UCSF
Posts: 170
No wonder...

I suppose if construction has stopped, I wouldn't want to have a never-changing web cam capturing nothing either (perhaps that's why it's no longer operational (?).
__________________
Show me a 12 foot fence and I'll show you a 14 foot ladder.
     
     
  #308  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2007, 1:30 AM
Daquan13 Daquan13 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: East Boston, MA. USA
Posts: 7,746
kznyc2k;

Haha!!

I'm just stating the facts. That those two anti-Freedom Tower jerks need to stop this foolishness. You seem to have a problem with me on that. Or maybe you think I might be saying it too often.

But I'm sorry, my thoughts are my thoughts, and I really could give a crap less about how broken up they feel about the tower being built against their moronic suggestions that it should wait.

There's always going to be some maniac, or in this case two of them, who thinks that to rebuild Ground Zero now starting with the Freedom Tower, is not practical. If the officials catered and pandered to everyone who comes along and whines & complains about any part of Ground Zero's work, then I guess it would NEVER be rebuilt.

LWR, I don't think that the rebuild will be stopped. At least not in the present time. Just two sore-losing big shot landlords who have been taking extremely heavy doses of run-your-mouth pills and coming out fighting and taking cheap shots at the Freedom Tower's importance.

Last edited by Daquan13; Mar 3, 2007 at 12:57 PM.
     
     
  #309  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2007, 12:50 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 52,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by LWR View Post
I suppose if construction has stopped, I wouldn't want to have a never-changing web cam capturing nothing either (perhaps that's why it's no longer operational (?).
That webcam was operational long before any construction actually began. Why would they stop it now if work had stopped???

(By the way, work hasn't stopped.)
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #310  
Old Posted Mar 3, 2007, 4:12 PM
NYonward's Avatar
NYonward NYonward is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,236
NY Observer

Demand Looks Good for Downtown Towers …
… but when the buildings open up, so will competition from the midtown market.




By: Tom Acitelli
Date: 3/5/2007
Page: 30


It’s looking good these days for downtown Manhattan to become one of the great commercial real-estate success stories of the next several years.

Right now, the downtown office-vacancy rate is about 10.7 percent, according to brokerage Jones Lang LaSalle. That rate’s lower than it was a year ago, at 10.8 percent—and much lower than the dangerous highs of nearly 13 percent in the months immediately following the terrorist attacks.

Since then, a lot of business, big and small, has returned. Half of the top 10 Manhattan office leases in 2006 were inked downtown, including the two biggest: 600,000 square feet in the Freedom Tower for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection service, and 589,978 feet in 7 World Trade Center for Moody’s Investors Service.

Governors Eliot Spitzer and Jon Corzine both endorsed the Freedom Tower last week, and the board of the Port Authority O.K.’d $500 million in construction contracts for the 2.6-million-square-foot skyscraper. Along with the Freedom Tower, new office buildings will spill at least 10.8 million square feet of space onto the downtown market by the end of 2012, according to Jones Lang LaSalle.

But whether the tenants will still be there then depends on a few factors.

Today, downtown presents a cheaper alternative to midtown. So, for one thing, rents in lower Manhattan will have to continue to undercut those in midtown, the present-day prince of the office submarkets. By the end of 2006, the average rent downtown was $38.62 a square foot, according to the brokerage Cushman & Wakefield; in midtown, it was $58.92 a square foot, and $100-per-foot leases weren’t unusual; the bulk of the 41 such leases signed last year were in midtown.

Downtown is an even bigger discount for larger companies looking for blocks of higher-quality space, which is harder to find in midtown and midtown south.

The midtown vacancy rate was 6.4 percent by the end of 2006, according to Cushman & Wakefield, and the midtown south rate even lower, at 5.6 percent. Larger blocks of space—those of at least 100,000 contiguous feet—are also harder to come by in midtown and midtown south: Only 10 remain. And, with the New York Times headquarters and One Bryant Park as the only higher-quality office buildings slated to open in both submarkets in the next two years, such blocks should only dwindle in number.

So, a tighter, more expensive midtown and midtown south could drive companies downtown, into the gaping arms of brand-new skyscrapers like the Freedom Tower.

Once there, the companies would find the Fulton Street Transit Center, linking 12 downtown subway lines to the new World Trade Center transit hub. And a growing amount of rentals and condos—gems like the Cipriani Club Residences at 55 Wall Street and 20 Pine Street, where Giorgio Armani’s interior-design firm sculpted the insides—are sprouting around the sites of these hubs, helping turn downtown into a 24/7 enclave.

In other words, meet the new and improved downtown Manhattan!

But suppose that the economy doesn’t hold? Or that 2006 turns out to be the peak year for Wall Street bonuses for many years to come? Suppose that the city’s unemployment rate, now around 4 percent, starts to inch back upward?

The success of Manhattan’s office market has always been closely tied to the ability of the local economy to create and maintain jobs. A lot of office-based jobs means a lot of demand for offices. Take a healthy economy away—one spurred locally by the financial-services sector—and the office-leasing market tends to turn very ill.

In the summer of 2001, downtown’s vacancy rate was barely 6 percent. A healthy local economy buoyed the submarket, and the original World Trade Center, which was filled with tenants by the late 1990’s, gleamed as a symbol of its health. Will the Freedom Tower do the same a few years from now? It’s likely, but ….


LAST WEEK, THE LAB CONTENDED THAT too few homes are being built to keep pace with New York City’s population growth. The city added, between 2000 and 2005, more than 205,000 residents, according to census estimates; and, from 2000 through 2006, about 159,000 permits were approved for privately owned housing units.

That leaves a difference of about 40,000 people without homes to rent or to buy, assuming a one-to-one ratio between homes and residents. As readers pointed out, however, the average New York City household has more than one person; it has 2.59 persons, according to 2000 census data.

Still, the city faces a housing deficit, despite the Bloomberg administration’s efforts to erase it by encouraging new development through subsidies and rezoning.

That’s because, when measuring New York’s housing supply, you start with a negative number—a deficit—left by previous administrations and by a private sector that, until fairly recently, wasn’t too keen on building homes in much of the city.

The Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy at New York University estimated in 2005 that the difference between the demand for housing and the supply was about 100,000 units. (The Manhattan Institute put the deficit at 111,000 in 2002.)

So, subtract 100,000 from the 159,000 home-building permits. Multiply the resulting number—59,000—by 2.59 residents, and you get 152,810 residents that could be housed in these roughly 59,000 new units, assuming that all get built (though at least 10 percent won’t).

The city added over 205,000 residents from 2000 to 2005. Subtract from this 152,810, and you have about 52,190 new residents more than there are new homes available. (These calculations don’t account for variables that could drive the deficit even wider, such as existing units becoming obsolete or the 2006 growth population.) While this deficit leads to a low apartment-vacancy rate and to vicious competition for condos and co-ops, it’s still a relatively low one.

An official in the city’s Department of Housing and Preservation pointed out to The Lab that “between 1990 and 2000, only 78,607 housing units were created … Between 2002 and 2005, the city’s population grew by nearly 14,000 households, but 42,372 new units have been added, thereby shrinking the housing gap.”

That gap, though, remains.
     
     
  #311  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2007, 6:23 PM
Realthang Realthang is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
That webcam was operational long before any construction actually began. Why would they stop it now if work had stopped???

(By the way, work hasn't stopped.)
LDMC took down the cams because the traffic they were receiving was too low to justify the cost.
     
     
  #312  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2007, 6:58 PM
antinimby antinimby is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: In syndication
Posts: 2,098
Well that's kind of shortsighted since traffic will surely pick up once the construction goes into full gear.
     
     
  #313  
Old Posted Mar 4, 2007, 8:22 PM
DUBAI2015's Avatar
DUBAI2015 DUBAI2015 is offline
Yippie Ka Yay!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Medford Oregon, US of A
Posts: 514
Can anybody get some up-close pictures of the site since the webcam broke?
__________________
Game Show question: Why do women rub their eyes when they first wake up?

Contestant's answer: Because they have no balls to scratch?
     
     
  #314  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2007, 5:14 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 52,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Realthang View Post
LDMC took down the cams because the traffic they were receiving was too low to justify the cost.
LMDC is closing up shop anyway. But its not as if the public demanded a webcam. Most people aren't like us, watching every inch of progress. But once the tower reaches that 1,000 ft mark - especially with the other towers fast on its tail - people will start looking up again.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #315  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2007, 7:26 PM
NYRY85 NYRY85 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 291
we'll get that old feel to the city like when we had the twins.

1,000 footers at the WTC again will make the city feel complete.
     
     
  #316  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2007, 7:30 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
^^I agree
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
     
     
  #317  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2007, 7:43 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 52,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRY85 View Post
we'll get that old feel to the city like when we had the twins.

1,000 footers at the WTC again will make the city feel complete.
Not only complete, but it will feel larger. Where before there was a "mere" two 1,000 footers, there will now be 3. Joined by a near 1,000 footer, and a near 900 footer. (Oh, and the new Goldman and residential towers that will surround the site).
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #318  
Old Posted Mar 5, 2007, 10:59 PM
TAFisher123's Avatar
TAFisher123 TAFisher123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
Well that's kind of shortsighted since traffic will surely pick up once the construction goes into full gear.
prob a security risk if you think about it
     
     
  #319  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2007, 1:57 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 52,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFisher123 View Post
prob a security risk if you think about it
But what isn't these days? Even if they hid the entire building behind a giant curtain until construction was finished, it'll still be there when it's done.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #320  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2007, 7:21 PM
NYRY85 NYRY85 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 291
the city just had a badass feel to it when the twins were there. it completed NYC. they were fuckin NYC. now that theyre gone even if you didnt know they were gone, the city still wouldnt feel "complete."
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

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



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:38 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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