NEW YORK | 1 + 2 Manhattan West | 995 FT + 935 FT | 67 + 56 FLOORS




from today, by me


What prompts development companies to use different methods of construction? This building appears to be going up in a “core first” method similar to 3wtc while other buildings use a “steel frame” first method. I don’t have a background in construction so I’ve always been curious about this


AWESOME shots!


From eyeballing it, looks like the core is at 400 ft?






I believe a part of it is dependent on the earth its sitting on; which is why companies do soil boring tests, to see if the loads of the soil in that specific area can handle a large building. Also don’t forget that the Far West Side isn’t as plentiful in Manhattan Schist Rock as the rest of Midtown. MW sits on a very small foundation that’s anchored to the ground because of the train tracks that run adjacent to it, hence the steel being bolted above that instead of it rising at the same time as the concrete core, like at 1 WTC. With 3 WTC it might also be due to lower costs and the different construction trades working on the building. Look how much faster 3 WTC rose compared to MW because 3 WTC steel rose with the concrete core until the core took off. 30 Hudson is pretty much sitting above the train tracks as opposed to MW, hence the all steel construction. Also means it’s a bit more expensive, but it’s the only feasible way. So partly money, partly engineering and partly the earth.

Fun stuff from architecture school lol. I hope I’m right! Haha. Correct me otherwise.


Great to know there are people with this type of expertise in our forum!
I had never seen you much before!
Most of us are engineering/architecture amateurs, so Always feel free to give your insight on any project I’m sure everyone will find it interesting!


Well thanks! I post pictures from time to time, but mostly just admiring the incredible stuff posted here by you guys! I’d be happy to provide insight when necessary!


The perspective is greatly appreciated. I’ve been wondering about that for some time. Thanks!


The professional-services giant is in talks for around 400,000 square feet, we’re told — a major commitment although not as large as previously reported.


I think that number was floated around earlier than when the 1msf was reported. I wonder which is accurate?


Via. c.lilianmarlen






Nice shots!


Thanks Robert



Any idea what that structure attached to the north side steel is? It’s definitely not the facade but I’ve never seen anything quite like that before