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

[brian.odonnell20]

is construction up to ground level going to be sluggish?

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I do think it would look way better though if the last 80 feet or the "spire" where solid, like covered in some kind of glass or something to make it look like the whole building goes to 1350 feet and doesnt stop at 1270

Hardly matters, because the whole thing comes to a point. I don't think that percentage will make an overall difference.

Originally Posted by brian.odonnell20

is construction up to ground level going to be sluggish?

It will be the same as the rest of the towers that have already reached ground level. It's expected to reach street level by January 2012.

[hunser]

http://www.lowermanhattan.info/const...wer_49193.aspx

UPDATE: As of spring 2010, the Tower 2 site is expected to be built to grade with the option of full construction pending real-estate market conditions.

*The following information was last updated on November 5, 2010

* Foundation work and footings preparations at the T2 site began in summer 2010. It is expected to be complete to grade by 2013.
* Drilling, demolition, rock excavation

[NYguy]

the Tower 2 site is expected to be built to grade with the option of full construction pending real-estate market conditions.

Translation, Silverestein better get a tenant if he wants financing.

[NYC4Life]

I would expect he does soon since there are large corporations looking for office space.

[NYC4Life]

* Foundation work and footings preparations at the T2 site began in summer 2010. It is expected to be complete to grade by 2013.

Wow, 3 years sure is a long time just to see this being built to street level.

[slayerhk47]

Originally Posted by NYC4Life

Wow, 3 years sure is a long time just to see this being built to street level.

Perhaps the length in time has to do with the subway station next to it?

[winlinmac001]

Or perhaps they are planning to choose what should be the final design. A few extra feet wouldn't hurt.

[Don098]

Originally Posted by winlinmac001

Or perhaps they are planning to choose what should be the final design. A few extra feet wouldn't hurt.

I think it would hurt...that would throw the entire scale of the complex off while simultaneously stunting WTC1. If any building should be taller, it's WTC1 in my opinion, by about 100 feet. That's when I believe the height proportions would have been perfect. I honestly think WTCs 2, 3 and 4 are too tall by that same amount. I'll never understand the obsession over height. Designed as a compliment to the star of the show, I think 1,278 feet is plenty tall...

[Obey]

Originally Posted by Don098

I think it would hurt...that would throw the entire scale of the complex off while simultaneously stunting WTC1. If any building should be taller, it's WTC1 in my opinion, by about 100 feet. That's when I believe the height proportions would have been perfect. I honestly think WTCs 2, 3 and 4 are too tall by that same amount. I'll never understand the obsession over height. Designed as a compliment to the star of the show, I think 1,278 feet is plenty tall...

Couldn't have said it better myself. The only tower that should have been taller was 1WTC to stand out more.

[CHAPINM1]

Originally Posted by Obey

Couldn't have said it better myself. The only tower that should have been taller was 1WTC to stand out more.

What are you both talking about? Height is just as important, especially in this complex. It has to be the perfect mix of design AND height. I do agree though about 1WTC being a little taller to stand out more. Also, I wish that the top of 2WTC would be at least 1,362 feet to give omage to 2WTC Volume 1 just like the top of the parpet is 1,368 for 1WTC to give omage to 1WTC volume 1.

[Don098]

No one outside of this forum knows about the former heights of the original WTC, nor do they care. Great architecture should speak for itself without any explanation, and operates independently of arbitrary (but in this case symbolic) heights. I'll bet you a thousand dollars that if you were to ask any general citizen to guess the heights of buildings, they wouldn't know 1,000 from 1,200 feet, or even 500 feet from 1000 feet. But people would notice more general artistic appearances like proportion, scale, and quality of design. People get way too hung up on skyscraper heights, that's all I'm saying... Give me the Chrysler building over the Burj Dubai any day of the week.

Anyway, does anyone have recent pictures of the foundation work? I feel like it's been two to three weeks since I've seen any isolated shots of the site, and I'm sure much has been done since. Thanks!

[sw5710]

At least 2 WTCv2 is 1358' to the top. About the same as 2WTCv1 1362'

[STR]

Originally Posted by Don098

No one outside of this forum knows about the former heights of the original WTC

I'd argue most people HERE don't know the exact height of the building. Sure, they can quote 1368/1362 but most don't know where the measurement starts, when it stops, or that the most common perception of those building's heights was actually around 1358, where the aluminum facade ended, the full heights includes things you wouldn't even see unless you were standing on the roof. I'm not even sure how accurate those numbers are given some of the things added to the top of Tower 2 as an afterthought.

Point is, don't ##### about 10 measly feet. You don't even know if that's the real number. I sure as hell don't, and I'm the f######g resident expert on the place.

[NYguy]

I can still remember when the height of the Twin Towers was given as 1,350 ft.


Update from wtc.com (Nov 8)

[STR]

Originally Posted by NYC4Life

Wow, 3 years sure is a long time just to see this being built to street level.

I think it's bad info. Originally the tower was supposed to be done by 2013. As of right now, there's no set date, so they just reused (misapplied) the old date to the current program. I'd actually be surprised if they really did leave the site just at grade, there's a lot of construction that's actually part of the PA funded transit hub, so I'd expect we'll at least see a stump rising up to the 4th floor, leaving a really nice entrance to the PATH station and 5 floors of retail (3 in the stub, 2 beneath).

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I can still remember when the height of the Twin Towers was given as 1,350 ft.

Exactly, I would bet that there would probably be some slight tweaking to the towers' design before construction... That being said I think the spiral element is kind of lost anyway as tower two is already very close to the height of tower 1, and to be honest I like it better that way, The spiral idea is kind of silly IMO.

But 1 WTC does have the communications ring up to 1400 feet so even if tower 2 ended up with a roof height of 1300 or so and close to 1400 to the tip it would still look slightly smaller from most angles, Towers 3 and 4 are also much close in height than most of the renderings show (most show tower 4 way too small, I mean look at the NYC diagram) there is only 175 feet between them and many renderings make it look like there is at least 300.

The towers are all pretty tall as is, but I do agree 1WTC should have been at least 100 feet taller.

I'm sure there were be some slight design and height modifications to the other towers though. Nothing huge but still.

BTW sweet that we can see the outline for the core of tower 2 already!

[STR]

^1350 was the height of the parapet on the Twin Towers, through adjustments that ended up as 1358/1364 on the buildings as constructed. The rest of the height up to 1362/1368 was a slight mound-like shape of the roof cause by the hat truss, which was modified to this design when the PA agreed to relocate broadcasting facilities to the WTC when concerns grew about "ghosting," which is when you get the signal from ESB, then a split second later you get a reflection off the WTC resulting in a slight double image. With digital TV, you don't have nearly as much of a problem with this due to built-in error correction, which is why you haven't heard much about this now.

Anyway, since both towers were built with this same hat truss (which also connected the famous perimeter columns to the central core), the old 2WTC was fully able to mount an antenna as large as the one on 1WTC.

The new tower 1 is 1368 to the parapet, which means it does look slightly taller than the original tower when placed side by side, even when you exclude the directional broadcasting equipment.


And some new stuff:






From Top of the Rock


From Empire State, outdoor deck.


And because, why the hell not, the 102nd floor as well.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Exactly, I would bet that there would probably be some slight tweaking to the towers' design before construction... That being said I think the spiral element is kind of lost anyway as tower two is already very close to the height of tower 1, and to be honest I like it better that way, The spiral idea is kind of silly IMO.

But 1 WTC does have the communications ring up to 1400 feet so even if tower 2 ended up with a roof height of 1300 or so and close to 1400 to the tip it would still look slightly smaller from most angles, Towers 3 and 4 are also much close in height than most of the renderings show (most show tower 4 way too small, I mean look at the NYC diagram) there is only 175 feet between them and many renderings make it look like there is at least 300.

I'm sure there were be some slight design and height modifications to the other towers though. Nothing huge but still.

Yeah, Tower 4 and the Carnegie 57 are basically the same height on the NY diagram. It will be topped out before towers 2 and 3, so it will get a little while to shine.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by STR

^And some new stuff:

I can't get enough of these.