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

[Zerton]

Foster's design had a distinctive tapered roof because it was intended to let sunlight into the memorial / Oculus at 9am every September 11th -
Per wiki: "The tower incorporates WTC master planner Daniel Libeskind's 'wedge of light' concept, and will cast no shadow on the memorial park on September 11."

So hopefully the new design maintains that distinctive feature. A silver lining to Libeskind's restrictive "spiral plan".

Interesting how BIG's design did not comply with that original concept.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by NYguy

But we don't have to fantasize about the two, we have FOSTER and BIG designed towers rising head to head on the west side right now, with all of the modern amenities.

And I would argue that both of those qualify as boring boxes. Hopefully this site gets better than that.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Zerton

Foster's design had a distinctive tapered roof because it was intended to let sunlight into the memorial / Oculus at 9am every September 11th -
Per wiki: "The tower incorporates WTC master planner Daniel Libeskind's 'wedge of light' concept, and will cast no shadow on the memorial park on September 11."

So hopefully the new design maintains that distinctive feature. A silver lining to Libeskind's restrictive "spiral plan".

Interesting how BIG's design did not comply with that original concept.

Gives me little faith that they will comply with it this time around either.

[kalabaw]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Might of just been a miscommunication with the substance of the article (the YIMBY one) and the Post article. Hence why word play and the right words can make a difference to avoid discrepancies.

"Design" should of been "Redesign" based on the Post source, The rest is just a backdrop into prior history.

What we do know, is that the tower will see change to accommodate the anticipated trends and needs. How it will look, and the changes, both internal/external, that is the suspense.

Sorry to derail the conversation... but the words I edited above are not correct. I understand what is being conveyed, but as Americans and proud speakers of the English language, shouldn't you be speaking and writing properly?

On to the topic -- I'm happy the design by BIG is scrapped. That was just an uninspired stack of boxes. I hope Foster will produce something good for this site.

[ClarkeRyan]

Personally I think they should of focused on filling up fosters old tower from the very start instead of building 3 and four first. Its the most iconic building from the entire sight plan. Im glad that BIG and they're terrible box design is out of the picture, but its worrying to here that their taking fosters design back to the drawing bored. It was perfect the way it is.

[aquablue]

Sad that old man Foster is designing this tower. Guy just builds terrible buildings in NYC.

[newyorker]

I still think we should try to rebuild what was originally there. ..it's a no-brainer to me.



Besides, Snake Plissken could land on it.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by newyorker

I still think we should try to rebuild what was originally there. ..it's a no-brainer to me.



Besides, Snake Plissken could land on it.

This right here is better than that tacky diamond tower. However, 1WTC is still a dull design and should never have happened. Let's get Renzo PIano to design a NYC shard here.

[Visionist]

When you think about it, since the first 200' of Tower 1 is podium anyway, the same could be said of a potential twin in Tower 2. Extend the podium across the full base of the street level floorplan and have a 1362' twin rise on the western side of the podium across from Tower 1. They would be parallel rather than diagonal to each other but it would warm a lot of hearts I feel. I also like the design above where Tower 2 is appreciably shorter. Probably 1320' or so.

Edit: they wouldn't be as close to each other as they are in the image above though, as the Performing Arts Center is between them. The coffin shaped base of Tower 2 won't allow a clone of Tower 1 to be built without a hefty rebuild either. Unless the podium, at it's western end, flares up to the same width as Tower 1 above its own podium. Seeing as how not even the chamfered corners survived on Tower 1's podium, the odds of anything like this being signed off-on is about as remote as the odds of persuading a giraffe, into a flowerpot.

Let's get real, the best way to save money here is to just build out the whole coffin shaped base up to a flat parapet, with uniform floors and no frills in the cladding department. Perhaps a frilly glass parapet as a pseudo crown, illuminated at night to match Tower 1's podium. This would probably still yield a supertall.

[BuildThemTaller]

Originally Posted by Visionist

When you think about it, since the first 200' of Tower 1 is podium anyway, the same could be said of a potential twin in Tower 2. Extend the podium across the full base of the street level floorplan and have a 1362' twin rise on the western side of the podium across from Tower 1. They would be parallel rather than diagonal to each other but it would warm a lot of hearts I feel. I also like the design above where Tower 2 is appreciably shorter. Probably 1320' or so.

Edit: they wouldn't be as close to each other as they are in the image above though, as the Performing Arts Center is between them. The coffin shaped base of Tower 2 won't allow a clone of Tower 1 to be built without a hefty rebuild either. Unless the podium, at it's western end, flares up to the same width as Tower 1 above its own podium. Seeing as how not even the chamfered corners survived on Tower 1's podium, the odds of anything like this being signed off-on is about as remote as the odds of persuading a giraffe, into a flowerpot.

Let's get real, the best way to save money here is to just build out the whole coffin shaped base up to a flat parapet, with uniform floors and no frills in the cladding department. Perhaps a frilly glass parapet as a pseudo crown, illuminated at night to match Tower 1's podium. This would probably still yield a supertall.

A performing arts center is currently under construction in between 1WTC and where 2WTC will go.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Gives me little faith that they will comply with it this time around either.

The site plan actually was complied with. The only thing required of this tower was the height and wedge of light space.






The only architectural requirement if either tower, other than the height, was the spire if the Freedom Tower.

[jd3189]

I hope this gets build this decade. Once it’s done, the downtown skyline will completely recover.

[jackster99]

It will be incredible if both this and 45 Broad Street start to rise simultaneously this year. And with 9 DeKalb going up across the river in Brooklyn, oh boy. Finally some attention will be directed away from all the fun Midtown has been having.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by jackster99

It will be incredible if both this and 45 Broad Street start to rise simultaneously this year. And with 9 DeKalb going up across the river in Brooklyn, oh boy. Finally some attention will directed away from all the fun Midtown has been having.

Right, the WTC is too lonely.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by NYguy

The only architectural requirement if either tower, other than the height, was the spire if the Freedom Tower.

And look how well that was executed.

[Visionist]

I will always disbelieve the idea that the spire's cladding was impractical to repair if it suffered lightning damage. Did a bunch of monkeys design it?! The panels were designed to be lightweight. String a tackle from the spire's apex, send up a couple guys to dismount the damaged panel and lower it down, and reverse the process for the replacement panel, surely? The whole thing would take one working day, winds permitting.

Lucky Larry pocketed that 50 million. Buys a nice yacht I guess. What really boils the blood is how renders continue to show the original cladding to this day.

[chris08876]

Just a rendering. May or may not be indicative of the final form, just for rendering sake.





Credit: siniaevart

[Jordan de California]

Originally Posted by NYguy

The site plan actually was complied with. The only thing required of this tower was the height and wedge of light space.

The only architectural requirement if either tower, other than the height, was the spire if the Freedom Tower.

All this time, I had thought that the sloped roofline of Foster's design was there to conform with the wedge of light, keeping any part of the tower from overshadowing the memorial at the time in question.

But that's not the case? It's just the plan outline of the site?

EDIT: Never mind. I just looked at the previous page in this thread, and yep. I was wrong.

[Prezrezc]

And what, if not precisely, constitutes "current needs and tastes"?

IMO the overall architecture of the building pretty much conforms to the latter. And if Larry's aiming to fish for big business as anchor tenants, why change potential trading floor size?

Or are his words a hint-drop that he could go mixed-use here?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Jordan de California

All this time, I had thought that the sloped roofline of Foster's design was there to conform with the wedge of light, keeping any part of the tower from overshadowing the memorial at the time in question.

But that's not the case? It's just the plan outline of the site?

EDIT: Never mind. I just looked at the previous page in this thread, and yep. I was wrong.

Just thought we would revisit the site plan, since we're talking about it and the spiral, and the roles the towers play.




https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-a-...-30718714.html





https://www.nycurbanism.com/wtc