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

[Hamilton]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I challenge anyone to find a better view from street level with the old design.

Most New Yorkers will not interact with this design from the street-level vantage point. Most will only ever see it on the skyline from the north. It absolutely mars the skyline looking south from Midtown or SoHo/TriBeCa. Its massing is like a cartoonish take on NYC's pre-war wedding cakes/ziggurats.

Even at street level, I think you're unlikely to be able to take in the whole building like that rendering suggests. My impression is that the setback after the ground-level box will really hide the rest of the building from view unless you're positioned perfectly. This will give the illusion that you're looking at a 20-story office park box. I admit that we won't really know if this is the case until it's built.

[chris08876]

From the harbor, it does at least give the resemblance of two twin towers. In an ideal world, it would of just been 1WTC replicated, but at least this attempts to restore what was lost in an aesthetic sense. But I could imagine seeing this from Midtown and over the steps.



Although it could just be the color contrast between the gardens and the tower that makes it look bad. This rendering I think is a poor one. The others make it seem great, but IDK, this angle. Either the angle or the tower viewed from this perspective is giving me bad vibes but the rest is great.

[jsr]

I could kind of see the marriage of Tribeca-to-the-WTC thing with a much shorter tower, but this thing is way too tall to pull it off.

[chris08876]

Here are some quotes from SSC on the design. At least here we took it kindly.

=======================
=======================

So I read it and here are some quotes from over there.

what a ******* crime. what a goddamn shame.

No way! Build that shit at Hudson Yards not at the World Trade Center.

Worse than I could have imagined. And the bottom of the boxes are a ticker for fox news? Get the **** out of here.

Bjarke gotta be joking. He did as bad as he could. How the magnificent Foster tower ended up being this monstruosity? F*CK YOU BIG, F*CK YOU!.

Is this forreal now? OMG excuse me I'm out gotta throw up real quick

Let the boycott of News Corp. begin.

I have a plan, we must act. All of shall call BIG and tell them how horrible there shit can idea of a skyscraper is. We have to tell them they we hate the idea and deisgn. Also what a load of shit 3 wtc needs those spires backs.

I will gladly sign the petition, we need to at everyone on SSC on board with this we need to spread the news fast.

please, it has video screens facing down so fox can crap out their shitty views even more.

ACTUAL SSC PETITION: https://www.change.org/p/larry-silverste...ate-ingels-two-world-trade-center-design

Why God?

F*CK YOU BJARK INGELS ARE YOU F*CKING JOKING???

1) GET RID OF THOSE FÜCKÏNG CANTILEVERS AND MARQUEES.
2) Will Westfield still have those extra 100,000 square feet of retail space?! They'd better!
3) Why isn't it 1,362 feet tall if he wanted to pay homage to the twins?!
4) It doesn't fit in with the complex at all from most angles! It seriously needs to straighten up!
5) Why isn't "2 World Trade Center" written anywhere in sight? Labeling it simply as "200 Greenwich Street" implies that Silverstein just sold off the parcel to an unrelated project, and it sure appears that way from the outside!
5) WHY THE HELL SHOULD IT BOW TO THE AESTHETICS OF TriBeCA?! This is FiDi; this is the World Trade Center, a strong symbol of business and economy! It's not some modern artist's loft!

[SkyscrapersOfNewYork]

Originally Posted by Crawford

There are no new renderings of 3 WTC.

If you're referring to the released renderings of 2 WTC, they are present in some, and not in others, just like 1 WTC is taller in some and shorter in others.

Pay attention to the thing rendered, not the background noise. And if you're going to pay attention to the background noise, don't cherry-pick some, and ignore others.

There not present, pay attention and if your going to be rude dont reply to me.

[dendenden]

Originally Posted by NYguy

It's basically the same building with a different shape.

But a building that's more open and will bring more life to the area.

But more importantly, it's a building with a design that will allow it to be built. No waiting another decade for a tenant.

This video seals the deal for me...
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a15943/two-world-trade-center-design/

Damn it! I wanted to hate it so much! but that video sells the HELL out of it. I went from hate to love in 5 minutes.

[Hudson11]

without those annoying cantilevers:

[deepen915]

Good thing I ate lunch earlier..

I would have thrown up my food had I read this while eating SMH

The Diamond Design was BEAUTIFUL. looked better than 1WTC. I don't see why multi-billion dollar developers would stoop to such an uninspiring design like this. Even a small tweak to the diamond design would have been acceptable to me.

[Enigmatism415]

The design of 2 WTC is derived from its urban context at the meeting point between two very different neighborhoods: the Financial District with its modernist skyscrapers and TriBeCa with its lofts and roof gardens. The design combines the unique qualities of each, melding high-rise with low-rise and modern with historical.

No no no no no no no and a million times NO! This kind of thinking is poisonous to the World Trade Center. This is NOT the aesthetic of FiDi! We are a completely different neighborhood, and TriBeCa's aesthetics should NEVER bleed into its centerpiece! The World Trade Center is a not a 'loft and roof garden' complex! It is a solid, bold, strong, and clean-cut collection of office towers!

At the very least, please get rid of the cantilevers; they are hideous! It is a lopsided and unbalanced design. The shape of the base should run all the way up, and you can carve out the steps from that! This tower should also be 22 feet taller if he wants to pay homage to the twins. The ridiculous cantilevers with their shameless text tickers need to be erased; otherwise, this tower will never fit in with the rest of the complex.

[chris08876]

Best series of comments on WTC from SSC: This is funny

"Money talks!..Murdoch is a piece of shit but thanks mister Murdoch for bringing that project back on track!I feel sorry to see so many people unhappy but,come on,at least we have something!"

As a reply to this:

"At dinner time would you rather have an empty plate in front of you or one with dog shit on it?"

As a reply to this:

"Oh please, dog shit is filet mignon compared to this..."

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by chris08876

Best series of comments on WTC from SSC: This is funny

"Money talks!..Murdoch is a piece of shit but thanks mister Murdoch for bringing that project back on track!I feel sorry to see so many people unhappy but,come on,at least we have something!"

As a reply to this:

"At dinner time would you rather have an empty plate in front of you or one with dog shit on it?"

As a reply to this:

"Oh please, dog shit is filet mignon compared to this..."

While the reactions might be a little over the top, to be fair it does look like a 400+ meter pile of sh*t from some angles. It looks okay from others but hey, why can't it look good from all angles like most skyscrapers?

I've never been a huge fan of Ingles and even I was expecting better... or at least something that doesn't look like not even a half hour of time was spent creating it.

[andydie]

sorry but this new design is just fugly as hell. also wtf to 3 loosing its spires! the Spires made the character of the Building! 2 now looks as if some kid playing tetris designed it. What a loss for the WTC site

[forj]

so uhhh. is this confirmed to be what they are building? kindof jarring. heavy looking. those setbacks are disgusting

[sparkling]

Just pasted my own comment from the "36 Park Lane" thread

Pretty mediocre design IMO, too. But got no skin in the game so no say either. However, it's not that often we see that many terraces in NY+ the "gardens" and cantilever may distinguish it to an extent from other glass banalities in the city.

Seems like we got a new trend going on - throw a cantilever or two, some trees and open spaces and hope people like it . Not the most creative but with the astronomical construction costs and specific owner/tenant demands great (office) tower designs won't be easy to come.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by SkyscrapersOfNewYork

There not present, pay attention and if your going to be rude dont reply to me.

They are present, and nothing I wrote was rude.

Don't ask a question if you don't want it answered.

[JMGarcia]

First, Forster's tower in and of itself was brilliant. It was a classic skyscraper done with a completely modern twist. There was a distinct base, shaft, and crown as is seen in so many of the most loved towers. However it was not particularly cutting edge by today's standards.

Foster's tower also followed the spirit of the site plan much better than any of the other towers including creating a certain jaggedness to the skyline that none of the others achieved. So, for all it's brilliance it didn't, IMO, really fit with the other towers.

The BIG design is not a very classic skyscraper. It is asymmetrical in an ungainly and disconcerting way, especially at certain angles. The mind cannot create any easily discernible patterns in it, jutting out, setting back, squared sides, and stacked boxes none of which follow a familiar pattern of size or shape. It, unlike Foster's tower, is cutting edge, like it or not. Ironically, much like Foster's kissing towers design it gives the impression from certain angles of falling over, of instability only adding on to the unease of looking at it. In many ways it also follows the same sense of incongruous angles in Libeskind's site design, the difference being Libeskind used acute angles and BIG uses 90 degree angles for the most part.

So, does it work for a tennant? The answer is most probably yes. The interiors and amenities are probably fantastic. It also seems to express the idea of "new media" much better than Foster's more "financial institution" tower.

Does it fit with the site and it's surroundings? It does in some ways much better than Foster's tower. Calatrava's building is the outlyer now.

Is the building beautiful? Well, that's in the eye of the beholder but by classical standards, beautiful it is not. It's the big box version of 56 Leonard St.

[chris08876]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

I've never been a huge fan of Ingles and even I was expecting better... or at least something that doesn't look like not even a half hour of time was spent creating it.

Which makes me think that the news Corp Deal happened way before the public was notified. I'm talking months even. A tower such as this is a huge task, and renderings along with the complete design came out relatively quickly. I was thinking it would be in the fall, but was kinda surprised at the speed of it all.

[Guiltyspark]

Oh Christ, I didn't even notice the news tickers before. Its just... Its just the worst.

[Enigmatism415]

Originally Posted by JMGarcia

Does it fit with the site and it's surroundings? It does in some ways much better than Foster's tower.

How, exactly? The flat top is really the only thing that makes it match the others more closely. All of the towers stand uniformly, and yet this one has those cantilevers plucked fresh from the fires of hell. Will the average tourist even recognize this building as being a part of the complex? It's as if they carved up the WTC and fed the pieces to different projects. This site really should have had a single architect from the beginning. Or better yet, the twins should have been rebuilt, which is what I had supported from the beginning.

[Atlanta3000]

This Looks Like Shit!!!


The terrorist won. What a shame!

This is equivalent to the nuchsack of the f'en devil. Sorry for the language ladies, but this is complete travesty.