SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Proposals (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=361)
-   -   NEW YORK | 5 World Trade Center | 920 FT | FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=164003)

Seni Dec 29, 2010 9:11 PM

Quote:

Last week, the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church announced a suit against the Port Authority over the agency's refusal to rebuild the chapel in its original location at 130 Liberty Street. But it could be too late, as agency and its contractors at Ground Zero appear to have designed the church right off the site.

The chapel was destroyed on 9/11, and the Port Authority would rather it was rebuilt on a neighboring lot, at 155 Cedar Street." - Matt Chaban
Quote:

The archdiocese insists on having a new church at 130 Liberty St., where the old Deutsche Bank building is being demolished. The PA wants it at the original church site -- 155 Cedar St., 100 yards to the southwest." - Steve Cuozzo
Quote:

The church came close to finalizing a deal with the Port Authority in July 2008. But after nine months of haggling over details, the Authority abruptly broke off negotiations, saying it had to start excavating the site for its Underground Vehicle Security Center—currently under construction beneath the land where the church once stood—or risk falling further behind in developing the site." - Matt Dunning
There seems to be a bit of confusion or contradiction in the text here, or maybe I'm just dense. Is the church trying to get their same location back with simply an updated building more suitable for the time (which might seem pretty reasonable) or were they attempting to strike a deal for a new location and (potentially) got burned / burned themselves? We're talking a football field worth of distance between these two sites, so one would think it's substantial enough to have clarified.

NYguy Dec 30, 2010 2:00 PM

It's not that hard to understand. The Port Authority decided to rebuild the church at the original location rather than move it over to the tower 5 site because talks broke down.

Quote:

PA spokesman John Kelly said, "Designs are complete and contracts have been awarded [for the VSC] that assume a church structure on the original site, 155 Cedar St."
That's the plan for now. The church is considering legal action to stop it because they have demands beyond just getting the church rebuilt. It's going to be a completly new building, so it will obviously be of this time.

http://tribecatrib.com/images/storie...rch-bldg-w.jpg

STR Dec 30, 2010 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150 (Post 5107287)
Unbelievable, yet believable at the same time. The space that church occupied as shown above is exactly what should be granted this go around.

Sticking the church in the middle of the park is not the best option for anyone involved. It means either sticking it on top, or cutting a hole in the side of it.
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/3...201010r170.jpg

Dac150 Dec 30, 2010 11:45 PM

^^^Whatever the solution is, it should not come at the expense of sacrificing potential for more substantial development on the 130 Liberty site to occur. A compromise needs to be met in order to allow for development to occur along with the church; not one in place of the other.

STR Dec 31, 2010 12:25 AM

Tower 5 is not planned to encroach into any of the disputed land. Even if they wanted to expand 5WTC's footprint beyond current plans, you could still fit both on the corner, as there's still 30' to work with.

It's win-win for everyone, which is why the PA pursued it for so long. St. Nicks did indeed screw everyone, and the PA should have eminent domained their asses and stick them with the corner lot. Give them the land, build the infrastructure below ground, let them sink or swim on their own for above ground parts.

SkyscrapersOfNewYork Dec 31, 2010 12:43 AM

why dont they just put the church in WTC 5....

NYguy Dec 31, 2010 1:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STR (Post 5109495)
Tower 5 is not planned to encroach into any of the disputed land. Even if they wanted to expand 5WTC's footprint beyond current plans, you could still fit both on the corner, as there's still 30' to work with.

It's win-win for everyone, which is why the PA pursued it for so long. St. Nicks did indeed screw everyone, and the PA should have eminent domained their asses and stick them with the corner lot. Give them the land, build the infrastructure below ground, let them sink or swim on their own for above ground parts.

The church didn't like the idea of having that tower over it, and you couldn't blame them for that. They should have been left in the original location from the beginning. There was really no need for a park there, it will be above grade anyway. Sure, everyone had the best intentions in the beginning, but you see where that sometimes leaves us.

Roadcruiser1 Dec 31, 2010 1:35 AM

That's kind of true there. Would you like it if a massive skyscraper was right in front of your house, and blocking sunlight from entering your home. Also don't forget that a section of the building is right above your house too.

STR Dec 31, 2010 1:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 5109549)
The church didn't like the idea of having that tower over it, and you couldn't blame them for that.

The cantilever was the one thing the church didn't complain about.

NYguy Dec 31, 2010 1:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STR (Post 5109564)
The cantilever was the one thing the church didn't complain about.

There was talk of it, though the church never came out officially against that plan (unlike almost everyone else). I don't have those reports in front of me, but I'll take this one as accurate.

Quote:

The archdiocese didn't complain about that plan, which was later dropped. But it did object to any future cantilever in March 2009, when it also upped the ante on other issues that the PA thought had been resolved.

NYguy Jan 8, 2011 12:29 AM

in.formed

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5284/...421ab3e4_b.jpg

Lecom Jan 8, 2011 12:46 AM

Nice snow graffitti they got there. Though the demo workers' on-site beer-drinking, cig-smoking, standpipe-ignoring days may be over, seems like they're still keeping it classy.

Obey Jan 8, 2011 2:21 AM

LOL, I'm glad this is taken seriously and professionally handled. But still funny.

STR Jan 8, 2011 2:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy (Post 5109568)
There was talk of it, though the church never came out officially against that plan (unlike almost everyone else). I don't have those reports in front of me, but I'll take this one as accurate.

Well, the cantilever seems to have died with JPM's plans for 5WTC. It was dumb idea, you could fit a 190x190 foot office building on the site with room for the enlarged church on Liberty. 190^2 would be a perfectly sized office plan. It doesn't have trading floors, but there's already 440,000 sqft of such space already in 2 & 3 WTC.

I've got a placeholder hidden in my NYC model. When I'm done with the latest version of 1WTC, I'll post some images. I set it at 800ft tall, as according to some documents I have dating from the JPM/KPF design, the PA set a maximum envelope at that level. It's a big building, far bigger than its predecessor. Think 7WTC, but a bit wider on the N/S faces and shorter on the EW faces and a bit taller overall.

STR Jan 9, 2011 1:06 PM

There we go. 5WTC maximum envelope. GRSF would be somewhere between 1.5 and 1.8 million sqft with about 50 stories. Height 800 feet, floorplate is 190x180, which is probably a bit bigger than whatever gets built, but more than doable without requiring anyone to dig up the VSC again.

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/259/n97i.jpg

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/8867/n99f.jpg

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/2546/n98k.jpg

OneWorldTradeCenter Jan 9, 2011 3:15 PM

:previous: Great images!!

patriotizzy Jan 9, 2011 7:37 PM

^^^ Please no. I hope something better than that gets built, if it happens. No offense STR!

STR Jan 9, 2011 8:23 PM

Uhh...it's a basic massing model. It took 4 minutes to make. It's only meant to show the possible size of the building.

Acer1 Jan 9, 2011 8:47 PM

Toxic tower damaged on 9/11 finally coming down

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110109/...us_toxic_tower

By KAREN MATTHEWS, Associated Press Karen Matthews, Associated Press – 34 mins ago

NEW YORK – The contaminated bank tower stood shrouded in black netting for years over ground zero, filled with toxic dust and the remains of 9/11 victims. It stayed where it was, not coming down even as the towers at the World Trade Center site slowly began to rise.

Nearly a decade after the trade center's south tower fell into it, the building with a sad history of legal and regulatory fights, multiple accidents and a blaze that killed two firefighters will finally be gone. The demise of the 41-story former Deutsche Bank building, just south of ground zero, is at least as welcome to its neighbors as the construction of new trade center towers.

NYguy Jan 13, 2011 3:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STR (Post 5119230)
There we go. 5WTC maximum envelope. GRSF would be somewhere between 1.5 and 1.8 million sqft with about 50 stories. Height 800 feet, floorplate is 190x180, which is probably a bit bigger than whatever gets built, but more than doable without requiring anyone to dig up the VSC again.

Propose this tower anywhere else in Manhattan, and it's a decent sized addition. It gets lost in the excitement of rebuilding, but we'll have to see what eventually goes here.


http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...er=rss&emc=rss

Ten Years After 9/11, Deutsche Bank Tower Vanishes

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...e1-blog480.jpg


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/...e3-blog480.jpg


By DAVID W. DUNLAP
January 12, 2010

Quote:

The 41-story former Deutsche Bank building opposite the World Trade Center site is now the one-story former Deutsche Bank building.

Within a month, it should be down to zero; the last and largest of the 9/11 structural remnants to be cleared away, almost a full decade after it was seriously damaged in the attack and six years after the first of many promised completion dates.

The deconstruction project has spanned the administration of four governors, resulted in the death of two firefighters, cost nearly $160 million, riveted neighbors with fear of asbestos or other contaminants, revealed partial human remains from 9/11, darkened surrounding streets with tunnel-like sidewalk sheds and delayed progress on the overall redevelopment of the trade center, just across Liberty Street.

Now, sky has replaced the looming monolith.

“We like this view,” Avi Schick, the chairman of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, said on Tuesday as he stood outdoors in what used to be the ground floor of the building at 130 Liberty Street. He could see the 1 World Trade Center and 4 World Trade Center towers rising to the north, with the memorial museum pavilion between them. “This view was a long time coming.”

The corporation acquired 130 Liberty Street in 2004 for the purpose of tearing it down. One delay followed another. The first deconstruction contractor came and went. Much of 2006 was spent trying to satisfy environmental regulators that potential contaminants would be safely removed. Deconstruction began in earnest but was halted at the 26th floor by a deadly fire in August 2007. The corporation and its construction manager, Bovis Lend Lease, are battling over claims amounting to tens of millions of dollars, but the project resumed in 2009.

The end of 130 Liberty Street is now in sight. The “roof” of the remaining structure is what was the floor slab of the second floor. There may not be much of that by the time you read this post. The concrete was being steadily broken up Tuesday morning by a remote-controlled demolition robot known by its trade name, Brokk. (Shades of “This Island Earth.”)

Steel beams were being cut apart from supporting columns with acetylene torches, then lifted away by crane. Soon, what little framework remains will be dismantled with a powerful mechanical shears. “It cuts steel like butter,” said Rick Livingston, the project manager for the corporation.

There is little on site that looks as if it was once part of a big office building, except two Detroit Diesel emergency generators and counterweights in the empty elevator shafts. The subterranean vault is open to view.

Much of what is left of the building is being pulverized into rubble and used as solid fill in the basement, which would otherwise tend to rise — believe it or not — because of the tremendous pressure exerted around it by the groundwater. Like the trade center, 130 Liberty Street was built on landfill.

The building will never disappear entirely, because its foundation walls and steel columns will remain, hidden below street level. They might even be used in some way to support whatever structure goes there next.

And what will that be? Julie Menin, the chairwoman of the Lower Manhattan community board and a board member of the development corporation, has been among those championing the idea of moving the proposed performing arts center to 130 Liberty Street from a site just east of 1 World Trade Center.

Neither Mr. Schick nor David Emil, the president of the development corporation, ruled out the possibility. In fact, Mr. Emil said the cost of building on the Liberty Street site — with existing foundations — would be significantly less than on the planned site, which is over PATH tracks and other subterranean infrastructure.

Preliminary diagrams showing how theaters, rehearsal halls and classrooms might be combined with a 35-story apartment building were drawn up in 2009 by Studio Daniel Libeskind, which devised the original trade center redevelopment plan.


“What the community desperately wants is to see this site activated as soon as possible,” Mr. Schick said. “The best and highest use would be some amenity that helps draw more people downtown while simultaneously improving the experience of those who already live and work here.”

The Port Authority will take over the site after deconstruction is complete, and use it as a staging area for the vehicle security center being built beneath the trade center. As to future development, the authority said in a statement: “Whether it is office, retail, hotel, residential or some mix of those uses, that development should be market driven to ensure its highest and best use.”

January 11, 2011

http://www.bluemelon.com/photo/18573/1080775.jpg


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:13 AM.

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