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

[Zapatan]

Someone finally figured out that a 1,300 foot pile of sh*t is not suitable for the WTC site.

Not only is Foster's far superior the f'ing foundation already exists, a real no brainer if you ask me.

I hope the height is 1,362 feet in respect to the original tower though, 1WTC needs company downtown.

But anyway this is amazing news, cheers

[mistermetAJ]

This is excellent news! BIG's design was always out of place for 2WTC. Hopefully Foster's new design maintains a decorative crown, even if we lose the diamonds.

Originally Posted by NYguy

Finally some news...

https://nypost.com/2020/01/15/2-worl...foster-design/

2 World Trade Center getting revamped Norman Foster design

By Steve Cuozzo
January 15, 2020

[Bill Ditnow]

Foster's "great" design is dead, dead, dead.

2 World Trade Center getting revamped Norman Foster design

Of course, we don’t yet know what “revamped” means. One can only hope it maintains the stunning diamond tops, which were to be, and now still could be, the signature design element of the whole site — not only symbolically pointing down in homage to the site of the original twins, as was intended, but also breaking the monotony of the flat tops of the other three bland, disappointing non-entities that make up the rest of the site. It’s no surprise that BIG’s design had no takers, IMO. I think that a bunch of crookedly stacked boxes that look as if they are all about to tip over is pretty much the LAST thing you would want at THIS site, and not very attractive to work in. Also the BIG design would have incorporated another stark, boring flat top, topping off, as it were, the whole banal monotony of the site as it currently is. The failure of imagination at Ground Zero has been stunning. Fingers crossed for the diamond tops!

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by mistermetAJ

This is excellent news! BIG's design was always out of place for 2WTC. Hopefully Foster's new design maintains a decorative crown, even if we lose the diamonds.

BIG’s design was no more out of place than Foster’s. Meanwhile, look at the towers that are filling up, even as they rise - BIG’s Spiral and Foster’s 50 Hudson are going head to head as they race for 1,000 ft. Don’t be surprised to see something similar here. But one thing for certain, it will rise higher than 3 WTC.

the old Foster design is being “significantly modified to be more reflective of contemporary needs and taste,” Silverstein says.

One thing Foster’s old design didn’t have is a lot of terrace space. I expect to see that in the new design.

[Crawford]

The BIG tower was much better than Foster's original, which was outdated (looked like the 90's) and lacked the skyline presence of BIG. The WTC site is all unbalanced and needs a second tower with roughly 1 WTC's presence (no, I'm not advocating for twins).

But if Foster is gonna completely redesign the original, should be pretty good. Foster rarely does crap. I just hope it's a muscular skyline-filler as with BIG, with the full 1,340 to the top. No skinny spire tops or pomo crowns.

[rgarri4]

I really hope he starts from scratch with this one as the original design , while nice, seems out of date to me. In my opinion Fosters skyscrapers can be hit or miss especially in the massing. Lets hope we don't get something like the monstrosity he did in Philly, or the twin tower proposal he has in Paris.

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Crawford

The BIG tower was much better than Foster's original, which was outdated (looked like the 90's) and lacked the skyline presence of BIG. The WTC site is all unbalanced and needs a second tower with roughly 1 WTC's presence (no, I'm not advocating for twins).

But if Foster is gonna completely redesign the original, should be pretty good. Foster rarely does crap. I just hope it's a muscular skyline-filler as with BIG, with the full 1,340 to the top. No skinny spire tops or pomo crowns.

I don't think there will be any spires here, but a nice crown could give us some relief to the awful spire of the FT.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I don't think there will be any spires here, but a nice crown could give us some relief to the awful spire of the FT.

It really is awful, hopefully that thing gets it's radome someday

[TonyNYC]

Originally Posted by NYguy

I don't think there will be any spires here, but a nice crown could give us some relief to the awful spire of the FT.

How about a tower that twists slightly, think like the original Girasole 3 Hudson Blvd design with a few outdoor decks added in.

At 1360 Ft that twist would be more pronounced and could be topped off with a slanted crown who's peak ends closer to the 1 WTC side of the building.

Wish I could draw it up, here's a pix of the original Girasole design:

[Busy Bee]

Would love to see go taller than ONE but thats pretty unlikely. But impossible?

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Would love to see go taller than ONE but thats pretty unlikely. But impossible?

Technically 1WTC is 1776 feet tall, so anything below that

[Busy Bee]

Roof height of course

[pianowizard]

2001 ft would be appropriate, to commemorate the year when the original twin towers were destroyed. This way, the structural heights of both 1 WTC and 2 WTC would be symbolic.

[chris08876]

I hope the revamp is with mixed used functionality in mind.

Larry has been having success at 3 WTC, and filling up towers like 4 and 7. Unless he's building on-spec in time due, IF there is a sq-ft minimum commitment before 2 WTC rises based on this revamp thats in the works, I do hope mixed-used is the target. Would greatly aid the probability of tenant commitment, unless the revamp is cost engineered, in which, the $/sq-ft would drop. A plus is the foundation is already there, but I bet its going to be cost or valued engineered to get the projected 4+ billion cost down.

Either way, we could be looking at a 3.5 billion dollar tower. And thats being conservative.

Would help Larry if he took a page from Extells playbook and offers incentives for "X" years, just to make the negotiations smoother. Asking top dollar might get him in trouble based on the competition up North in Midtown.

They shouldn't get greedy in other words. Anything in the range of 3-4 million sq-ft is a hell of challenge to fill, and unless he offers good rates, the big players looking to lease will bounce to Midtown West or East. Smaller ones would be ideal, and slowly fill up, as we've seen with 3 WTC for example.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by pianowizard

2001 ft would be appropriate, to commemorate the year when the original twin towers were destroyed. This way, the structural heights of both 1 WTC and 2 WTC would be symbolic.

Yes please. Damn that would be amazing.

[blacktrojan3921]

Hallelujah~

[NYguy]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Would love to see go taller than ONE but thats pretty unlikely. But impossible?

The closest we could get is close to the roof height of the Freedom Tower. They’re even forcing tower 5 to abide by the spiral, with a 900 ft height limit.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NYguy

The closest we could get is close to the roof height of the Freedom Tower. They’re even forcing tower 5 to abide by the spiral, with a 900 ft height limit.

If the tip of Foster's design was at 1,362 I think it would be perfectly proportioned.

I don't think the Spiral plan said anything about the roof of 1WTC though, technically it just has to be lower than 1776. Visually it would still look taller (and stupid tbh) but just saying, a 1500 foot building would be cool here.

[NYguy]

Silverstein speaks on leasing activity in the City...



https://nypost.com/2020/01/16/old-an...ices-to-lease/

Old and new buildings citywide become snazzy offices to lease

By Lois Weiss
January 16, 2020

As building owners scramble and compete to attract and keep top tenants, money is pouring into old and new office buildings.

New buildings, says Jeremy Moss of Silverstein Properties, are a “tool” for recruitment. “I feel like the whole city is running at 150 percent,” declares Moss of the local leasing activity. Moss oversees leasing for Silverstein’s Three, Four and Seven World Trade Center, along with the future Two World Trade, among other properties.

A decade ago, many in the industry questioned the need for new office construction. Despite that, over 25 million square feet has been built in the past 10 years — and most of it is leased. “The demand validates the work,” says Moss.

“What makes us feel spectacular is that we’ve leased 9 million square feet of office space at the same time Related leased 11 million square feet [at Hudson Yards] and at same time as Brookfield leased 5 million square feet [at Manhattan West],” says Larry Silverstein, head of his eponymous company. “These are three chunks of real estate and they were leased simultaneously.”

Silverstein continues, “All the buildings are first class and the latest and the best — and at the end of the day, we [all] leased up. I don’t know any other city in the world that can support 25 million square feet of new, trophy-quality office buildings.”

[pianowizard]

Do we know for sure that this revised version of the 2 WTC will still be a supertall?