Posted Apr 21, 2012, 10:21 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 485
|
|
I don't doubt the validity either. Also remember that the cantilever was apparently only a necessity if they wanted to go back to using the entire footprint of the building. It's tough to tell given the limited view, but it looks as though this design is following the shape of the former waterview much more closely, whereas the destefano design used the cantilever so that they could essentially undo the transfer floor and go back to full floor plates. At least that was my understanding, but I am no engineer. I believe this to be the design. I'm bummed but this design was probably far more economical.
|