NEW YORK | 175 Greenwich St. | 1,079 FT | 80 FLOORS - Page 269

Prezrezc · #**5361** Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 12:08 AM**

It's JMHO, but the closer I look at that next-to-last pic, the more I somehow think they should've more subtly transitioned the vertical striping at that juncture where it meets the horizontal "gills" below the fins.
it just looks a tad abrupt.

chris08876 · #**5362** Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 12:32 AM**

IMO, the angle when your at the memorial facing this tower ( I guess looking East) and the angle looking SW from the Williamsburg Bridge are the best vantage points. Not a fan really of the view from the Village (North West looking South).

kznyc2k · #**5363** Posted **Oct 7, 2017, 5:56 PM**

^^^ it's terminally bland from the north

Prezrezc · #**5364** Posted **Oct 7, 2017, 8:44 PM**

Meh...
They could have done more with the N/S profile, sure; but IMHO whatever guesswork we could add to that would prolly redound to a debate of value engineering versus a "less is more" approach.
IIWII.

mrnyc · #**5365** Posted **Oct 8, 2017, 4:22 PM**

^ you said it. its not that exciting a design from any angle to begin with. functional is the word. nice. not quite bland with the cross bracing, but almost. in other words, this is the new new york, an office building just like anywhere else, except a little nicer quality. its exactly what they wanted.

CastleScott · #**5366** Posted **Oct 8, 2017, 4:46 PM**

Quote:

you said it. its not that exciting a design from any angle to begin with. functional is the word. nice. not quite bland with the cross bracing, but almost. in other words, this is the new new york, an office building just like anywhere else, except a little nicer quality. its exactly what they wanted.

Well said.

Prezrezc · #**5367** Posted **Oct 8, 2017, 5:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnyc

This is the new new york, an office building just like anywhere else, except a little nicer quality. its exactly what they wanted.

True this. Nowadays, it's about 90% resi/multipurpose towers that distinguish themselves from the pack.

The only exception seems to be when a big company wants to set up an HQ or at least a major location here. To wit, Nordstrom's, and pretty soon Amazon and DB.

With those two, it a matter of when...and which developer/(st)architect combo lands the prize.

ILNY · #**5368** Posted **Oct 11, 2017, 4:22 AM**

3 WTC (175 Greenwich St.) by NyConstructionPhoto, on Flickr

Enigmatism415 · #**5369** Posted **Oct 12, 2017, 9:23 PM**

Here's the connection to the mall:

NOPA · #**5370** Posted **Oct 13, 2017, 12:31 AM**

I actually like it from the north side. I like how the vertical lines echo or reference One Liberty Plaza (at least IMO). If anything irs height was cut just a little too much; I'd prefer it to be a noticeable step higher than 4WTC.

NYguy · #**5371** Posted **Oct 13, 2017, 1:41 AM**

It's really too close to tower 4 to be that close in height.

photoLith · #**5372** Posted **Oct 13, 2017, 1:24 PM**

What an extremely bland tower, the original design was leaps and bounds better, but oh well, at least theres loads of other way more exciting supertalls going up in the city.

Got Ham · #**5373** Posted **Oct 13, 2017, 7:07 PM**

For the most part, I really like this tower, and It looks good in person; but, man, I wish they had compensated for the increased light penetrating the top panels; the perceived color change in the facade really makes for a busy crown, while still not effectively hiding the mechanical equipment.

dc_denizen · #**5374** Posted **Oct 13, 2017, 9:57 PM**

already needs a reclad. ugh.

chris08876 · #**5375** Posted **Oct 13, 2017, 11:29 PM**

Yeah I'm not that excited for this one anymore. I don't even think about it. 4 WTC on the other hand is nice. Elegant, classy, and just right.

But I really think its due to its location. Its overshadowed by so much that it doesn't really stand out. If you plopped it outside of the city, anywhere in the U.S., it would dominate for the most part, but its hard to stand out in this city. Not because of height, no, but because there's a kickass design right around the corner at times. The aesthetics and design competition is tight! Kill or be killed or in a towers case, look good or fade away.

jayden · #**5376** Posted **Oct 16, 2017, 12:42 PM**

This tower isn't suppose to stand out. That's the point. It's suppose to compliment 1WTC, the centerpiece tower.

NYguy · #**5377** Posted **Oct 16, 2017, 3:39 PM**

richard pockat

Mr Saturn64 · #**5378** Posted **Oct 16, 2017, 9:48 PM**

I think the biggest issue with the building's north side is that it was designed with Foster's 2WTC in mind. Back then, they probably thought that those two were going up at the same time, and this was just going to be wedged between the other two.

NYguy · #**5379** Posted **Oct 17, 2017, 12:24 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Saturn64

I think the biggest issue with the building's north side is that it was designed with Foster's 2WTC in mind. Back then, they probably thought that those two were going up at the same time, and this was just going to be wedged between the other two.

Don't forget, these buildings were going to be offset in either version. Also, I don't think Tower 2's wall itself is nothing to brag about.

pico44 · #**5380** Posted **Oct 17, 2017, 2:19 AM**

I think it's kinda spiffy!

In a retro postmodern way...

...so uncool it's cool, know what I mean?