NEW YORK | 200 Greenwich St (2WTC) | 1,348 FT | 88 FLOORS | ON HOLD


It will almost certainly be BIG’s design, since the Foster design was discarded years ago.

Not sure why people love the Foster design given it doesn’t restore the skyline like BIG, it isn’t what tenants want, and it doesn’t even fit with the redesigned complex (it has no relation to the other towers now).


Larry if you’re reading this: get this done for the city and country.

Your legend will live on forever. Your name will be as synonymous with NY, NY as Sinatra, Bloomberg, and LaGuardia.


I think point number one, for the sake of costs.

I recall reading an interview in which Larry stated that Foster is still on the table; this was within the last 7 months or so.


With tenants, makes me wonder if it will be tech. If purely finance, Foster would make sense, but given the growth of the tech sector, to the point where NYC now outranks San Francisco, if the tenant prospects are tech based in nature, BIG might make more sense.

But I do also think costs and the time tables required to retrofit the foundation for BIGs design could play a factor.

Don’t forget that Foster still complements the memorial (has to do with light and how it reflects), and its design is intentional to work with the original master plan. Besides the value engineering at 3 WTC and the spire sacrilege with 1 WTC, the master plan for the most part is still the same.


Yes, finally!!


Silverstein himself said that Foster’s design has not been discarded, and would be pitched to prospective tenants. BIG’s was designed specifically for Fox.

I’ll have to find the article, but the enormous complexity of building BIG’s design on the current foundation is considerable.


BiG’s 2 WTC was designed for News Corp, a media company not a tech company.

BiG’s design had at least 7 very different floor layouts. Less ‘very large’ floors. Aimed at multiple smaller newer tech/media companies which might fill a ‘section’ or a larger company with many divisions to be split across a few of them. My guess is that Fox was in talks to take the bottom 2 or top 3 ‘sections.’

Much like ESB, Foster’s design has a large base (~20% of office floors), nearly uniform main tower body, with the only major setbacks after the base being on the top 10-15 floors. Designed primarily for ‘old school’ financial tenants and law firms in the tower portion.

If Silverstein builds this on spec my guess is that he would build Foster’s design because its almost certainly a bit cheaper to build, hews closer to what the WTC historic tenant base is expected to desire and less controversial.

Personally, I think he’s saying this to get attention, but I welcome being wrong. This isn’t SJP Properties building 11 Times Square, a 1.1M structure on spec. This is a building 2.5 times larger and probably 4 times as expensive when there are new half empty buildings next door.

If he builds it they will come…though it might take 15 years to fully lease out and will contribute to an office glut that will inhibit office construction until the 2030s.


In addition to Foster’s design just looking better, it’s probably a bit inappropriate and insensitive to have a “leaning” tower at this site.


If he has a source of foeign funding (e.g., a Persian Gulf state), I can see him proceeding. However, I don’t see a traditional lender financing this.


There has been so much value engineering done to the entire WTC campus that I don’t see Larry spending extra time and money on a design that doesn’t have any leases signed. They can always redesign the interiors of the Foster version to fit any tenant. A large commercial tower like this is always built with some flexibility in mind.


Overall though, the WTC has turned out beautifully. I think that all three towers that have risen thus far are magnificent, as are the Memorial and the Transit Hub.


You’re right Robert. 2 Manhattan West is being built on spec but Brookfield has the Qatar Investment Authority behind them. They’ve poured more than $2B in already.


Exactly. I can see a Gulf State wanting to own a piece of a NY icon, and a few billion dollars would be a minimal investment to it. JPMC, Wells, etc. isn’t going to finance a 2.8msf spec tower, but our friends in the Middle East could do so easily.


Oh yes, I agree. There were some missed opportunities, but overall, it has turned out well. Especially at street-level. If he is trying to just get some attention, I hope it works!


Honestly, the new WTC site is way better looking than the old one. The new one is truely beautiful.

Y’all even realize how spoiled we are!?
270 Park Ave
15 penn (new design)
Hyatt hotel
Tower fifth

Not to mention all the supertall residentials.


This is great news! I’m hoping he doesn’t change his mind. I would love to see this rise before the 20th anniversary for sure.


I really can’t say enough how truly ugly and terrible I think BIG’s design is. I just went back and looked at all the renders I could and it’s disastrous from every angle. Buildings like 3 Hudson Blvd are boring and dull, but they’re not offensive: this design to me is actually offensive.

It would be disgraceful to have this tower on the skyline. In reading through all the comments on Instagram skyscraper pages I can hardly find but more than a few who think BIG’s tower is worthy of being built. It’s hard to see why the city would allow a tower that is likely universally disliked to rise on such an important site.


Brings memories of “Tower 5th” which is another disaster in the making from an aesthetics standpoint.


Most people outside of skyscraper forums love BIG’s design. As I’ve said many, many times, if this were being built in Chicago, LA, Dallas, Houston, Atl., Charlotte, Miami, Seattle, etc., the local residents would be doing backflips to celebrate that they’re “on the map.”


You forgot London!