NEW YORK | 200 Greenwich - 2 WTC | 1,270 FT | 80 FLOORS | ON HOLD - Page 162

chris08876 · #**3221** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:50 PM**

^^^^

Only reason I watch fox.

Atlanta3000 · #**3222** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

A decent attempt. But I think you will fall short for the ridiculousness award...

Guilty as charged!

JR Ewing · #**3223** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by The New York Lion

Nordstrom is 1,550! I do believe 3 lost its spires, though.

Coming up: 50 Hudson, Tishman's spire, 80 South, 360 10th, 335 Madison, et al!

So many future supertalls.

You are the man, JR!

The Age of Ramses! I love it!

jsr · #**3224** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:52 PM**

Oh well, at least it will be easy to make in LEGO.

The New York Lion · #**3225** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:54 PM**

We waited for Godot, and Godot came!

chris08876 · #**3226** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:56 PM**

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Between SSP and SSC comments, this is just a funny day.

Atlanta3000 · #**3227** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR Ewing

I hereby declare JR Ewing an Enemy Combatant to the United States of America - to which he shall be sent to Gitmo to be waterboarded until a time I deem unnecessary or a time when I grow bored of his calls for help or Jesus.

jbermingham123 · #**3228** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlanta3000

Dude - your are totally on the money. If this has to be the final design for WTC 2, why not flip it around to be more befitting of the site? At the end of the day, the cost of redoing the foundation is probably minuscule to the overall cost of the project.

Hahaha thanks man

This brings up another question though.. How much would it cost to just shift the reinforcements of the existing foundation? It would be interesting to know what is possible here

Matt · #**3229** Posted **Jun 9, 2015, 11:59 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR Ewing

H

This tower is stunning. This is much taller than and a million times better than Salesforce, Wilshire Grand, and Wanda Chicago, yet SF, LA, and Chi are creaming over those towers.

If this tower was proposed for London -- at half the height -- it would already have some dopey nickname.

Only in the greatest city in the world could someone find fault with this masterpiece. If one of those horrible Dubai-style towers (but for the Burj) were rising here, I'd be upset, but this thing is stunning.

Exactly, New York City has higher standards when it comes to architecture. This is why this Duplo block nightmare is not cutting it with so many people. Absolutely no effort went into this design, tragically exacerbated by the fact this is one of the most important redevelopment projects in the world.

Hudson11 · #**3230** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by winlinmac001

I Love It.

looks much less ridiculous without those northern cantilevers. Those are my biggest gripe. I don't know what they were thinking when it comes to that. I can stand the flat apex, but those cantilevers create a leaning effect to make the building look flimsy, whereas the other towers exude a strong presence - which is necessary for a tower at this site. It actually looks like HALF of 1 WTC. They might as well have just demolished what is already standing and built a twin if they wanted to praise 1 WTC's design like that. Half of it looks weak.

winlinmac001 · #**3231** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:01 AM**

Apparently, it took six months to plan this design, according to,

http://www.wired.com/2015/06/bjarke-...d-trade-center

Oh well, the views from Jersey will be great, the views from Queens & Brooklyn will get mixed perception.

winlinmac001 · #**3232** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:03 AM**

The other towers exude a strong presence They could have gone with a singular slender building. The outdoor gardens look environmentally friendly though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hudson11

looks much less ridiculous without those northern cantilevers. Those are my biggest gripe.

I don't know what they were thinking when it comes to that. I can stand the flat apex, but those cantilevers make the building look weak, whereas the other towers exude a strong presence.

Revered · #**3233** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:03 AM**

I-I think I'm going to be sick.

It's just... terrible.

winlinmac001 · #**3234** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:04 AM**

ROFL. Perhaps a 2AM Broadcast will do, LOL

Quote:

Originally Posted by The New York Lion

I can't wait to watch Megyn and Kimberly ring in the new year from their new offices at Two World Trade Center!!!!

winlinmac001 · #**3235** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:08 AM**

I forgot what I was going to say...

Quote:

Originally Posted by The New York Lion

We waited for Godot, and Godot came!

dendenden · #**3236** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR Ewing

H

3 WTC did not lose its spires.

This tower is stunning. This is much taller than and a million times better than Salesforce, Wilshire Grand, and Wanda Chicago, yet SF, LA, and Chi are creaming over those towers.

Houston, Dallas, Atl., Charlotte, Denver, and Austin are creaming over lame 20 story boxes. Cinci, Phoenix, New Orleans, etc would be jubilant if a 20 story box were proposed for their cities.

If this tower was proposed for London -- at half the height -- it would already have some dopey nickname.

Only in the greatest city in the world could someone find fault with this masterpiece. If one of those horrible Dubai-style towers (but for the Burj) were rising here, I'd be upset, but this thing is stunning.

1. Nordstrom 1,500'+
2. Steinway 1,430'
3. One Vandy 1,415'
4. 432 Park 1,398'
5. Time Warner 1,280'
6. Park Lane 1,250'
7. Verre 1,050'
8. Girasole 1,050'
9. 35 HY 1,050'

This is the Age of Ramses, lads!

Absolutely right! Denver just broke ground on a 600 foot building that is a duplicate of a building already completed in Calgary, and the skyscraper geeks here are wetting themselves! NYC is spoiled as F***!

http://denverinfill.com/blog/2015/06...-update-2.html

RonV · #**3237** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:14 AM**

In my opinion they should just build a twin, or at least a very closely complimentary tower to 1wtc. Same basic outline but different subtle design features, etc etc. It just won't look right without a tower of equal or very closely equal height to 1wtc. Why not just build a 1362 feet tower about the same height and shape as 1wtc? It would fill in the space nicely, & be a lovely, interesting visual tribute to the Twins. 1wtc just looks lonely there.

jbermingham123 · #**3238** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:17 AM**

^^^^ Yessss i like this train of thought. What if they gave the back corner of this building a shorter copy of 1WTC's antenna-spire?

Just-In-Cali · #**3239** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:19 AM**

I am actually at a loss. This site has been so value engineered already, I didnt think it could get worse. Sadly it has. Kudos if you like the design, but honestly I'm over the whole WTC site and am more interested in the rest of Manhattan's development. The only good aspect of the site is the memorial, the rest is a banal set of glass boxes that took too long to build and cost too much money for what you get.

winlinmac001 · #**3240** Posted **Jun 10, 2015, 12:24 AM**

When did they update this page to accommodate the revised design?

http://3wtc.com/#