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


Maybe it’s just that I got used it, but Foster’s just fits. To me it just screams New York, and brings the complex to completion as a whole.
BIG’s creates chaos and doesn’t seem to fit in the slightest. If built I predict it will be seen as a blunder on par with the demolition of Penn Station.


the flat roof is a major detractor IMO. This is the cornerstone building, it needs a better pinnacle. The cantilevers are just wrong for this campus. Insensitive, and unnecessary.


I could be alone in this, but the Foster design – with its sloped, diamond-shaped roof – always screamed Chicago to me, in particular the Crain Communications Building. Still prefer it to BIG, but that similarity is one of the reasons I’d rather see a new design over Foster’s original, as unlikely as that is.

edit: corrected embarrassing misspelling of ‘Foster’. Must have had Edward Morgan on the mind!


It makes my heart hurt to think he might pick BIG’s. The city council should demand a return to the master plan.


the good news about Amazon not establishing a new campus in the city means they could possibly go to 2 WTC should they wish to expand their presence as they claimed.


That’d be nice if it happened. More likely, though, before making a major move like that, Amazon would proceed with its current plans to expand in Manhattan West.


The only silver lining to this delayed construction is that as soon as they decide to build it will only be a matter of weeks before we see some verticality due to the foundation being complete


I don’t think that Amazon will be doing anything in Moscow on the Hudson after the absurd reception that our Marxist politicians gave it.

I hope that Amazon gives the other half to Atlanta, Dallas, or Chicago to show our moronic politicians how royally they fu…cked up. They said that they won’t re-open the HQ2, but they don’t need to. They already have 19 other contenders. I hope that rub salt into the wounds of our ridiculous Marxist politicians.


The politicians won’t care about the betterment of other cities and thus won’t learn from this unless they’re voted out of office or there is a major recession.

I’m a progressive but this was the wrong fight for them. Everyone should know the Amazon debacle is mostly the result of the actions of just two misguided legislators: Michael Gianaris of Queens and the NYS Senate majority leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins (of Yonkers). AOC and most others in her vein were merely cheerleaders for the wrong side.

I still believe this won’t rise for at least 5 years. Larry can’t do it with willpower alone and the Amazon debacle will reduce desire for major companies to relocate/consolidate their offices here.


Its only a matter of time before we get our answer on which design Larry will pick and construction will finally start. :thinking:


Are both to the same scale or is the BIG version that much bigger than the Foster version?


the BIG version is higher and more imposing. The BIG version would be more adequate to fill the emptiness on the horizon, it would give the sensation of the return of the twin towers. Sisters towers, but not twins.


Hopefully, Larry has a Middle Eastern partner with deep pockets and will build this on spec.


How much bigger is BIG’s internal square footage?


They are the same height to the top floor (1270’) but BIG’s has the appearance of being more substantial because Foster’s top is ‘wedged out’ BIG’s has a boring flat parapet instead. Foster’s is actually taller, but by an insignificant margin. (1348’ vs 1323’)

Foster’s was 2.4m sf and BIG’s is 2.8m sf


I love both designs. I would expect Larry to build Foster’s though because it has to be cheaper to build since the foundation exists and because it’s smaller.

I really hope that he follows through and wasn’t just BSing.


The BIG design is a sophisticated work of modern high rise architecture: artful and unusual, and simply interesting to behold. The diamond top design looks cheesy, or Kitschy: I am thinking Vegas, Chicago, Houston. That above statement is all subjective IMHO type of commentary: some will ‘get it’ and agree, and other not - its all good mutual observation.


I respect your opinion, but don’t you think it’s at least a little inappropriate to have a “leaning” tower - arguably suggestive of falling - at this particular site?


I like this design (Bjork), although, (the north to south is awful, in my opinion) just want this to get going!


The BIG design does not (to me) evoke either ‘leaning’ or ‘falling’ - I see something different. However, if we could some how take a poll and many people do also see this design as suggesting ‘falling’ : then yes, that design would understandably be deemed “inappropriate” . My guess is: the number of people who deem that design as being ‘inappropriate’ would be little to none.