NEW YORK | 200 Greenwich - 2 WTC | 1,226 FT | 55 FLOORS

[rlw777]

It looks like shit is what it looks like.

[Hamilton]

It looks decent from some vantage points, but the image below ruins it for me. It looks like an ill-proportioned affront to NYC's cityscape and skyline. They managed to make a soaring 1,340-foot supertall look like a squat brutal hulk. I guess that's an accomplishment, kind of...

Bjarke Ingels Group usually has a better sense of proportion than this. I'm usually a fan of their designs, but in this case it's a huge step down from the Foster & Partners design.

[Onn]

New York is starting to look like Chicago.

[Citylover94]

Can you explain why? I don't see how NYC is starting to look like Chicago...

[Onn]

Originally Posted by Citylover94

Can you explain why? I don't see how NYC is starting to look like Chicago...

Tall buildings with steeped boxy setbacks.

[Hamilton]

Originally Posted by alex1217

It's so... blocky. I like the terraces on the east side, I just wish it more gracefully bent toward 1 WTC rather than just give the appearance of stacking a bunch of cubes together. Hopefully, like the Nordstrom tower, this will be tweaked. There's potential there but right now, it looks like a 5 year old made this using his jumbo blocks.

Well said. This design is completely graceless. If you're going to build a 1,340 foot tower, it needs to be more graceful than this, unless it's going to be in the middle of a godforsaken desert in Jeddah or Dubai.

[sparkling]

Originally Posted by hamilton

it looks decent from some vantage points, but the image below ruins it for me. It looks like an ill-proportioned assault on our cityscape and skyline.

Bjarke ingels group usually has a better sense of proportion than this. I'm usually a fan of their designs, but in this case it's a huge step down from the foster & partners design.

+1

[TBone7281]

I always thought the diamond design was a little off putting but this one is... well, it's different.

[Streamliner]

So does this mean they are bulldozing the foundation work that's already been done? Its base seems to be quite different than the Foster design.

[Vertical_Gotham]

• Video Link

I know the new design will illicit initial negative responses and it has, only because we Foster’s Design so embedded in our minds. But in time, if you can be open minded and let the new look marinate a bit, I am confident the design will be widely accepted.

If anyone knows me, they know how I feel strongly about Foster’s design. It’s Iconic and ever since they revealed Foster’s design long long time ago, it has been etched permanently in my memory anticipating it will arise one day. Believe me when I say I'm disappointed that I may never see those diamond in our skyline, especially at the WTC site.

The only way, I would like whatever Bjarke comes up with for me, it would have to be interesting and surprisingly, I think he did it!!! Bravo.

While, it is not Iconic, it doesn’t have to be. It will be a great addition to the WTC and it’s definitely interesting & radical enough that it will draw even more interest to the site. It definitely is not boring.

I have to say, I am surprised how soon Bjarke came up with the design and that suggested that this has been in the works for some time and he obviously wowed Murdock enough for Newscorp to sign a non binding LOI. Can you blame Murdock?? The tower looks like a great atmosphere to set roots for your employees.

At every perspective, there is something interesting to look at the tower. From the East, you sort of have a twisted stacks and the wedding cake look from the North.

West is what I’m really ecstatic about. IMO, It is conservative and respectful facing the memorial but it has an interesting reverse set back as the tower rises, which I really dig. Lol. (If there is such a term)


West facing memorial side

From afar looking from the Hudson, because of the conservative side… it give the illusion kind of like it’s a twin to tower 1 but with no spire from afar which is not a bad thing.



Anyway, looking forward for new details.

[Vertical_Gotham]

via wired

The Site

Two World Trade Center is located at 200 Greenwich Street and bounded by Church Street to the east, Vesey Street to the north, and Fulton Street to the south. The base of the building utilizes the maximum area of the 56,000-square-foot site.

Transition Between Typologies

Floor plates between the maximum and minimum sizes are optimized to specific tenant needs and requirements.

Following the “Wedge of Light”

2 WTC is aligned along the axis of Daniel Libeskind’s “Wedge of Light” plaza to preserve the views to St. Paul’s Chapel from the Memorial Park

Leaning Toward 1 WTC

As a result of the stacked columns, the building’s steps are at an angle parallel to the incline of 1 WTC, a nod to the twins that previously stood on the site

Stepping Terraces to St. Paul’s Chapel

The terraces are heavily planted, creating a vertical succession of the greenery rising from St. Paul’s to the skyline.

[Guiltyspark]

The New World Trade Center has to be the most disappointing development I have ever followed. A bait and switch of a development if I ever saw one. At least I have Hudson Yards.

[yankeesfan1000]

It looks like Silverstein called BIG last week and told him a needed a new tower end of this week, and then one of the interns at BIG forgot to tell the architects until yesterday at five, and then they came up with this.

[gttx]

Originally Posted by yankeesfan1000

It looks like Silverstein called BIG last week and told him a needed a new tower end of this week, and then one of the interns at BIG forgot to tell the architects until yesterday at five, and then they came up with this.

If only. Given the video done by squint/opera, I imagine this has been in the works for quite some time. Shame.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by Guiltyspark

The New World Trade Center has to be the most disappointing development I have ever followed. A bait and switch of a development if I ever saw one. At least I have Hudson Yards.

To a certain extent I agree, but keep in mind how much people hated the original WTC. At least we have 4 supertalls (4WTC is close enough) rather than 2 and the two tallest are about the same height as the twin towers.

It could have been so much worse, think back to the hideous latticework tower that would have ruined NY forever and the stubby other towers which were no taller than 900'.

[vandelay]

Bjarke is a famewhore clown, but the form of this tower is interesting and not that awful for the context.

[rlw777]

Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham

I know the new design will illicit initial negative responses and it has, only because we Foster’s Design so embedded in our minds. But in time, if you can be open minded and let the new look marinate a bit, I am confident the design will be widely accepted.

On the contrary the more I look at it the worse it gets. WTF were you thinking BIG? WTF? It's soooo bad the proportions are awful, the parts that are even remotely interesting are so gimmicky. I like a lot of BIG's work but I think after this Bjarke should maybe go home and rethink his life.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by rlw777

On the contrary the more I look at it the worse it gets. WTF were you thinking BIG? WTF? It's soooo bad the proportions are awful, the parts that are even remotely interesting are so gimmicky. I like a lot of BIG's work but I think after this Bjarke should maybe go home and rethink his life.

Yea, I feel the same way. From some angles it's fine (albeit not totally interesting) but from others it's just downright awful. No grace whatsoever.

The only good thing is that it's 1,340 solid feet to the roof. The outdoor terraces are cool too.

[M II A II R II K]

On it's own it could pass but I much preferred that diamond version. This design could be salvaged if they at least give it an artistic top.

[JR Ewing]

STUNNING!!!!!!



The Capital of the World!