Page 85 of 116 FirstFirst ... 357581828384858687888995 ... LastLast
Results 1,261 to 1,275 of 1737

Thread: 200 Greenwich Street - Proposed WTC Tower #2 - by Norman Foster

  1. #1261

    Default

    I just had a thought about a possible solution for this whole dilemma about Chris Ward decided to scrap plans for a restaurant at the top of 1WTC. Although he never explicitly stated the reasons for why he thought it would be unprofitable, the reason seems obvious to me because it's something that I'd had concerns and questions about for literally years and has been discussed here on the forums. Because the floor area in 1WTC gets smaller the higher you go, the square footage for a restaurant very close to the top would be quite small, just 22,000 sq. ft. compared to the 43,000 sq. ft. Windows on the World. In the one rendering of the restaurant that was ever released, you can see how they planned to have a 2nd floor mezzanine, though it didn't cover a full floor and likely only would have added another 10,000 sq feet or so, bringing the total to say 32,000. And I'm sure half of WOTW's 43,000 sq ft of available space had to be taken up by the restaurant's kitchen itself. This would leave about 21,500 sq ft for tables in the original WOTW, but for the new one it would leave only about 10,500. About half. Meaning they could only serve half the amount of customers and hence earn half of the profit.

    So a solution to this dilemma is simple... Put the restaurant at the top of 2WTC! Not at the very top, where the building tapers inward, but they could put it on the top one or two full-size floors. The height would be slightly lower than it would have been in 1WTC, but it would still offer impressive views, and it'd be better to have it at this height and in 2WTC than have nothing at all.

  2. #1262

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RKOwens44 View Post
    So a solution to this dilemma is simple... Put the restaurant at the top of 2WTC!
    Not so simple.

    2WTC is leased by Silverstein - the building itself, not just floor space. He would have to decide if the expense is worth the ROI.

  3. #1263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RKOwens44 View Post
    So a solution to this dilemma is simple... Put the restaurant at the top of 2WTC! Not at the very top, where the building tapers inward, but they could put it on the top one or two full-size floors. The height would be slightly lower than it would have been in 1WTC, but it would still offer impressive views, and it'd be better to have it at this height and in 2WTC than have nothing at all.
    I half-heartedly mentioned this when the restaurant news first came out.

    Another problem: express elevators to that floor.

  4. #1264

    Default

    Then they would have to alter the design, the floor plates, the foundations.....and with no news on 2WTC landing any tenants, the restaurant doesn't have a bright future at the tower.

  5. #1265
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HoveringCheesecake View Post
    I half-heartedly mentioned this when the restaurant news first came out.

    Another problem: express elevators to that floor.
    One could always put it on the skylobby floor. The old Tower 1 had an employee cafeteria on the 44th floor skylobby. They called it the Sky Dive. However, even if they came up with an equally amusing name for it, it still wouldn't please the internet hordes.

  6. #1266

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RKOwens44 View Post
    I just had a thought about a possible solution for this whole dilemma about Chris Ward decided to scrap plans for a restaurant at the top of 1WTC. Although he never explicitly stated the reasons for why he thought it would be unprofitable, the reason seems obvious to me because it's something that I'd had concerns and questions about for literally years and has been discussed here on the forums. Because the floor area in 1WTC gets smaller the higher you go, the square footage for a restaurant very close to the top would be quite small, just 22,000 sq. ft. compared to the 43,000 sq. ft. Windows on the World. In the one rendering of the restaurant that was ever released, you can see how they planned to have a 2nd floor mezzanine, though it didn't cover a full floor and likely only would have added another 10,000 sq feet or so, bringing the total to say 32,000. And I'm sure half of WOTW's 43,000 sq ft of available space had to be taken up by the restaurant's kitchen itself. This would leave about 21,500 sq ft for tables in the original WOTW, but for the new one it would leave only about 10,500. About half. Meaning they could only serve half the amount of customers and hence earn half of the profit.

    So a solution to this dilemma is simple... Put the restaurant at the top of 2WTC! Not at the very top, where the building tapers inward, but they could put it on the top one or two full-size floors. The height would be slightly lower than it would have been in 1WTC, but it would still offer impressive views, and it'd be better to have it at this height and in 2WTC than have nothing at all.
    I see what you are saying but the s/f of the no longer to be restaurant was roughly 35,000 s/f. I don't think it's the size, there must be other issues. There are many much smaller very successful restaurants in NYC. (Both the old WotW S/f figure and the new T1 s/f figure also include the core, it would be rather time consuming to calculate the actual s/f of each.)

    I meant to repost because the ad made RK's post hard to read.
    Last edited by ZenSteelDude; April 13th, 2011 at 07:21 PM.

  7. #1267

    Default

    ^
    You shouldn't be seeing ads or banners if you are logged-in.

  8. #1268
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Yesterday I kept getting unlogged. Very unusual (I just stay logged in here at WNY). But I didn't see any ads.

  9. #1269
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    613

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZenSteelDude View Post
    (Both the old WotW S/f figure and the new T1 s/f figure also include the core, it would be rather time consuming to calculate the actual s/f of each.)
    There wasn't much of a core that high up in the towers. This is from the 100th floor (the highest level I have hi-res photos of). The 107th lacked the 2nd local elevator bank on the right side of the core, as well as stairway B (which according to the NYC fire code as it existed in 2001, the two stairs that served that level were half of what code would have dictated for such a populated public space) The core took up ~10% of the floor.

    http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/3113/marsh100a66.jpg
    Last edited by STR; April 15th, 2011 at 05:29 AM.

  10. #1270

    Default

    Been quiet here lately...
    But finally can see at least something - busy at the site today; big pour ahead!
    Last edited by yepole; April 18th, 2011 at 04:57 PM.

  11. #1271
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Battery Park City
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Picture 1298.jpg 
Views:	5294 
Size:	79.1 KB 
ID:	12778Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Picture 1299.jpg 
Views:	5291 
Size:	57.8 KB 
ID:	12777

  12. #1272
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default

    Aside from the bottom slab they are about to pour, there has actually been quite a lot going on at T2 lately. It's hard to tell, but you can see in the shot that yepole took (above) that the B3 level floor is up (on the far right). It is about halfway around now - all of the north side and most of the east side.

  13. #1273
    Disgruntled Optimist lofter1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC - Downtown
    Posts
    32,654

    Default

    Does the dog-leg in the west sub-grade wall seen in yepole's photo correspond to anything above grade at Foster's 2WTC? Or does that jag just make way for vehicle circulation down below?

  14. #1274
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    613

    Default

    It's all due to the freight/bus road. The columns will merge to form the tower perimeter columns at ground level, the arches that you can see beginning to form will continue through all of the sublevels.






  15. #1275

    Default

    Here's a long-due update from wtc.com, and although recently posted, the picture itself is about 2 weeks old already...
    But anyway, nice columns close-up:

Similar Threads

  1. Greenwich Village Preservation Watch - Be on the alert!
    By OKoranjes in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: June 24th, 2015, 04:17 AM
  2. Greenwich Street 'Restoration'
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: December 21st, 2013, 06:05 PM
  3. 165 Charles Street @ West Street - by Richard Meier
    By ASchwarz in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: June 8th, 2010, 06:36 PM
  4. 497 Greenwich Street - Condo
    By Edward in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: February 3rd, 2006, 05:44 PM
  5. Director's Guild of America Tower -110 West 57th Street
    By londonlawyer in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 18th, 2003, 12:37 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software