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

[Kurtz]

my personal opinion, but i would disagree with a shorter tower, a shorter tower would be a total different tower; even with exactly same design.

[JayPro]

A lot of times towers with certain complicated designs are meant to be of a certain exact height just by virtue of the design used.
Otherwise awkwardness would rule the day.
This is a fine example of my observation, and not, as you might think, because of the unusual juxtaposition of the diamonds owing to the tower's subtle abstract-hex shape.
The exact *angle*, or (if you will) "slice" through the building that yields the slopes that the diamonds sit on, simply will not work visually for any skyscraper under 800'...perhaps strictly speaking.
That said, try to imagine the angularities of WTC1's eight sides with the building at half the height. Awkward, right? The sheer size alone of 200G's Diamond Roof given the same treatment is just that, too.
Awkward. And more difficult to pull off, I'd wager.

Now...The *real* difficulty of pulling off the exact geometric complexities in this tower's design would lie IMO in precisely how much *less* square-footage there could've been to work on. More ft^2 simply (c/w)ould've made the existing architectural nuances all the more fascinating to detect.

[Kurtz]

I think that purpose of 2 wtc is a pyramidal complex of the look of the whole new wtc. so a classic with a modern, the most modern curtain wall the last generation finest glass.
Now the purpose of the 2 tower is not a B series version of the one wtc, but a tower that have his strong personality, give the same impression of power and beauty and at same time a pyramidal look at the complex due his look.
Now a shorter 2 wtc what is worth?
In my opinion the ways are two: or to build the 2 wtc with respect of entire original project or build a shorter tower with a different look and purpose.

[NYguy]

Will they follow Conde Nast downtown?


http://nypost.com/2014/03/03/skadden...ble-2020-move/

Skadden asking about possible 2020 move

By Steve Cuozzo
March 3, 2014

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, which shares the Durst Organization’s game-changing 4 Times Square with Condé Nast, has its eye on newer pastures when its lease expires in 2020.

It sounds like a long way off — but planning takes that long when a company is weighing a move to new towers that won’t be finished for several years.

Skadden Arps, we’re told, has sent out a request for proposals for around 450,000 square feet to Larry Silverstein and Brookfield Properties, among others.

Silverstein, of course, is developing three World Trade Center towers, including the completed 4 WTC, which is still seeking its first private-sector tenant.

Brookfield is itching to start building at Manhattan West, its five-acre site between Ninth and Tenth avenues in the West 30s.

An exit by Skadden Arps would mark a turning of the page in its neighborhood’s commercial history.

Although 4 Times Square is often called the “Condé Nast building,” it’s been as much the “Skadden Arps building” since Douglas Durst in 1999 opened the tower, which first established the “new Times Square” as a prime office district.

Of course, Skadden Arps, which also has space at 1440 Broadway, might well be using the RFP to wrest more favorable renewal terms from Durst.

The powerful corporate law firm will soon be 4 Times Square’s only office tenant, once Condé Nast moves to the Port Authority’s and Durst’s 1 WTC early next year.

Asked to comment on Skadden’s RFP, Durst rep Jordan Barowitz said, “They are doing their due diligence, and if they are interested in new construction they have to begin that process now.”

Reps for both Brookfield and Silverstein declined to comment.

Skadden Arps’ broker, Jones Lang LaSalle New York president Peter Riguardi, was traveling and could not be reached by press time.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by NYguy

k31thw

O. O'Daniel

[NYguy]

O. O'Daniel

[Perklol]

Originally Posted by NYguy

Will they follow Conde Nast downtown?


http://nypost.com/2014/03/03/skadden...ble-2020-move/

Skadden asking about possible 2020 move

By Steve Cuozzo
March 3, 2014

I would prefer if they stay at 4 Times Square. It's a fairly new building with unparalleled subway access.

[NYguy]

A pefect view of the tower alignment...


jzaindustries

[chris08876]

^^^^^

As night falls in that pic, I keep wondering how awsome it would be to b.a.s.e. jump. Its not like anyone will notice if I walk in .

The top of WTC2 is just jaw dropping. So mechanical, mysterious, and alien like. I love it.

[ChiTownWonder]

why does the top look so weird? i don't really like how they look uneven. but whatever

[WonderlandPark]

Why the heck is this considered U/C its capped and on hold???

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by WonderlandPark

Why the heck is this considered U/C its capped and on hold???

I would most definitely considerate "on hold" because its not rising any higher until a tenant signs. However, when it's sealed off, and no workers are actively working on site, its officially on hold.

[WonderlandPark]

Whenever this gets a new post or two I kinda get my hopes up, and its the same picture of the rendering or the same site that nothing has happened on. Of all the towers in WTC this is the one I most wanted to see built...but it should be moved out of this category. At least #3 looks to be moving again.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by WonderlandPark

Whenever this gets a new post or two I kinda get my hopes up, and its the same picture of the rendering or the same site that nothing has happened on.

I'm sure your last couple of posts bumping the thread up for no reason didn't have that effect.

[Guiltyspark]

Originally Posted by ChiTownWonder

why does the top look so weird? i don't really like how they look uneven. but whatever

The shape of the diamonds at the top of the building are a result of the shape of the footprint. This is actually what makes this building so unique compared to others with a sloped pinnacle.

[car2004]

Originally Posted by NYguy

A pefect view of the tower alignment...


jzaindustries

This is an absolutely beautiful photograph. Barry Lyndon (1975), a film by Stanley Kubrick, quickly came to mind; the symmetrically of it all.

Thank you.
-CDM

[JayPro]

Might I also be so bold as to include my own slight indignation when I see a post made several *months* ago bumped with a well-meaning (My emphasis), but TBH unimportant comment on aesthetics, when what most of us really hope for in this regard is actual news on the project...Any news at all...

...preferably good news; but that's somewhat of another argument for another thread.

[weidncol]

Here's some possible amazing news!

http://nypost.com/2014/08/11/jpmorga...-and-delaware/

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by weidncol

Here's some possible amazing news!

http://nypost.com/2014/08/11/jpmorga...-and-delaware/

This may foreshadow something great. Hopefully they make the right decision.

[JayPro]

JPM's best decision would be a no-brainer on a par with a lobotomized jellyfish made at knifepoint to watch a 72-hour Three's Company marathon........