NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS

[alan88]

PORT AUTHORITY AND DURST ORGANIZATION WILL TEST SPIRE AND BEACON ON TOP OF ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER TONIGHT
B-roll and photo opportunity tonight, November 8

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and The Durst Organization will conduct a test of the spire and beacon atop One World Trade Center this evening. Together, the spire and beacon stand 408-feet tall.

The beacon, which is the top section of spire, contains 288 50-watt LED modules that produce 288,000 lumens of light that will enable the spire to be visible up to 50 miles on a clear night. The spire will serve a state-of-the-art broadcast facility, to be operated by The Durst Organization. It will provide unparalleled transmission services for the region’s broadcast outlets. Ironworkers completed installation of the spire on May 10, 2013 bringing One World Trade Center to its iconic height of 1,776 feet.

Who: The Port Authority of NY and NJ and The Durst Organization

What: Test lighting of the spire and beacon

When: Friday, November 8 beginning at 5:30 p.m.

Where: Spire and beacon will be visible throughout the city.
Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter @WTCProgress for updates on the World Trade Center site.

[randy1991]

The beacon has been turned on!

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7457/10749179106_3f5c5951d9_b.jpg

Picture from EarthCam (http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/brooklynbridge/)

[weidncol]

Annnnnd, it's gone.

[RobEss]

Stood for 20 minutes in Elanore Roosevelt park waiting for the spire to light - took a 2 minute walk to Bowery and caught a glimpse of the lit spire just before it turned off. Now both the beacon and spire are dark - is that it? This blows.

[weidncol]

Could you all just be patient and wait? They will light it up eventually...

[islandxtreme26]

WNBC-NY has live streaming view of 1WTC right now...the spire just had purple-ish lights chase up the spire from the comm ring to the top of the beacon then they went out....doubt the test is over since the beacon has gone on and off a couple times in the last ten mins

http://4.nbcny.com/ifWuaEX

[NYC GUY]

Spire's ON!! :cheers::cheers::cheers:

[Hudson11]

saw the beacon from where i'm at near White Plains... it was a beautiful sight. It flashed every 15 seconds or so.

[islandxtreme26]

On again....taken from Statue of Liberty Torchcam.
http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/statueofliberty/?cam=liberty_hd

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/9382/b4ml.jpg

[randy1991]

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5511/10749381974_45d952c15d_b.jpg

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3753/10749274445_f151776446_b.jpg

Earthcam (http://www.earthcam.com/usa/newyork/brooklynbridge/)

[NYguy]

I don't know why they bothered to announce the testing, but I guess it's not to alarm anyone. Anyway, they shouldn't make a big deal about it until it's on permanently.


http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20131108/financial-district/wtc-spire-set-shine-friday-as-controversy-surrounds-its-height


The 408-foot beacon and spire will be lit up as a test at 5:30 p.m. Friday, officials said.
With its 288 50-watt modules shining brightly, the spire, which is also a broadcast tower, will be visible from 50 miles away on a clear night.

The goal is to eventually have the spire lit every night, adding some extra shine to the New York skyline, said a spokesman from The Durst Corporation, which co-owns 1 WTC with the Port Authority.


https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/1403410_10151754906362689_295861061_o.jpg
https://www.facebook.com/wtcprogress

[Ninja Man]

I say that the white antenna is to honor me getting my wisdom teeth removed! I'm glad that they're lighting up the antenna right now!

[Enigmatism415]

Looks great. I can't wait for them to light the mechanical floors too!

[NYguy]

Looks great. I can't wait for them to light the mechanical floors too!

Let's hope that they do (along with the ring). It's been shown as being lighted in the renderings.


Anyway, we should be done with this little piece of drama next week....

http://www.nbc4i.com/story/23915890/height-of-1-world-trade-center-debated-in-chicago

Height of 1 World Trade Center debated in Chicago

Nov 08, 2013

A committee of architects recognized as the arbiters on world building heights is meeting Friday to decide whether a design change affecting the skyscraper's 408-foot needle disqualifies it from being counted. Disqualification would deny the tower the title as the nation's tallest.

second place by a vote in favor of the New York structure.

"Most of the time these decisions are not so controversial," said Daniel Safarik, an architect and spokesman for the nonprofit Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat. The 30 members of its Height Committee are meeting to render a judgment behind closed doors in Chicago, where the world's first skyscraper appeared in 1884.

The committee, comprising industry professionals from all over the world, will announce its decision next week.

The question over 1 World Trade Center, which remains under construction and is expected to open next year, arose because of a change to the design of its tower-topping needle. Under the council's current criteria, spires that are an integral part of a building's aesthetic design count; broadcast antennas that can be added and removed do not.

The designers of 1 World Trade Center had intended to enclose the mast's communications gear in decorative cladding made of fiberglass and steel. But the developer removed that exterior shell from the design, saying it would be impossible to properly maintain or repair.

Without it, the question is whether the mast is now primarily just a broadcast antenna.

Safarik said the committee might consider amending its height criteria during the Friday meeting - a move with much broader implications that could force a reshuffle in the rankings of the tallest buildings in the world.

"We take our hats off to them out here in Chicago and the Midwest," said Robert Wislow, chairman and chief executive of U.S. Equities, the firm that manages the Willis Tower. "And we welcome the building to the elite club of the tallest buildings in the world. Nobody's looking at this like a competition."



http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2013/11/08/how-tall-is-one-world-trade-center-a-council-will-soon-decide/


Don’t expect a widely publicized decision later today: The Council says it expects to announce the result next week.

[deepen915]

looks awesome!

[cadiomals]

I think it looks weird that only the antenna is lit and it's kinda just floating there in the dark, seemingly detached from the rest of the building. I hope they'll light the communication ring or parapet, like what they do for the Goldman-Sachs building and 4WTC.

[Hudson11]

http://distilleryimage5.ak.instagram.com/4d7a8d8448cb11e3b5f8122668b8a817_8.jpg
mgambatese (http://instagram.com/p/geL6XEDsj1/#) on instagram

https://o.twimg.com/2/proxy.jpg?t=HBgpaHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0cGljLmNvbS9zaG93L2xhcmdlL2RraTBtdi5qcGcUsAkUiA4AFgASAA&s=pMklgtve0-7rrWwP33Bfk-dfmYxLRQyIjCEIWysPbqE
Randy AU (https://twitter.com/Randy_Au/status/398950970882654208)

[weidncol]

Mast lights are now out, now it's just the beacon.

EDIT: Never mind! The mast is back on!

[Blaze23]

I was out and took a good look at the spire, it desperately needs the ring to be lit up. It just looks like a colorful stick on top of a building, there needs to be a sense of transition to the top. It feels good to see the downtown skyline back to life but let's be honest, the lighting on that stick doesn't come close to that of the Empire State. Tho the beacon is a welcome addition.

[JMGarcia]

I got to see the spire lit in person for the first time from fairly close (Canal St.). The lighting really impresses on you how big that thing really is. It also really impresses how dull its finish is during the daylight hours. Unfortunately the uneven textures of the different spire pieces are kind of highlighted by the light as they reflect light differently, but it's not too bad and disappears mostly in photos.

All in all it's a huge improvement over the daylight version with one exception. Without the rings lit, they get lost. There is a serious disconnect between the building and the spire with them dark that changes the architecture of the buildings. The rings during the day give a nice architectural feature to the top of the building that just disappears at night.

I'm pretty much 100% sure the rings won't be lit which is a real pity, but then again there's a lot of that to go around.

[JMGarcia]

As much as I want to get in on that, the question on hand is whether or not the mast on top of the Freedom Tower is to be considered a spire or simply an antenna......

Specifically about what the CTBUH will do, it will be interesting. They're in a very touchy area here that is laying bare how out dated their current rules are.

On the one hand, if they decide it's an antenna because its covering was not put on, there's going to be a lot of media attention and quite a bit of head scratching from a lot of people. I'm sure there'll be a lot of folks that'll be interviewed in the media saying they're wrong. It'll hurt their credibility.

On the other hand, it's so obviously not designed to be seen I can see how lots of people can also wonder how it would be considered an architectural feature if the CTBUH rules that it is. It just doesn't look like something someone would design to be seen, i.e. a piece of architecture. I think if they rule in favor that this could also hurt their credibility.

Personally, I think if you read the rules carefully it should be considered an architectural feature as it does not meet all the criteria for being a non-architectural feature and clearly has an architectural meaning behind it.

I also think, that this is a perfect opportunity for them to say that modern construction and design technology has advanced enough that they are "refining" their rules and correct standards that allow the toothpick on the NY Times to count and something like the Willis Tower's antennas to not count. This is the type of thing that'll enhance their credibility IMO.

To me, the tip of the building is 1787 and the top is 1368. It was quite obvious tonight that the FAA light is above the beacon at 1776 feet.

[deepen915]

I think it looks weird that only the antenna is lit and it's kinda just floating there in the dark, seemingly detached from the rest of the building. I hope they'll light the communication ring or parapet, like what they do for the Goldman-Sachs building and 4WTC.

definitely agree with this! :cheers:

[bunky]

From Brooklyn

http://benjaminrosamond.com/r1383970056/cc/8/0/3/12803/w/1640x830-QF7TAalaO7M2b7cw.jpg

http://www.benjaminrosamond.com

[weidncol]

From Brooklyn

http://benjaminrosamond.com/r1383970056/cc/8/0/3/12803/w/1640x830-QF7TAalaO7M2b7cw.jpg

http://www.benjaminrosamond.com

Wow, amazing photo! :worship:

[kpdrummer82]

Wow, amazing photo! :worship:

That just screams "F U terrorism" Go America!

[Yankee fan for life]

1 wtc beacon 14 miles away from Coney Island !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFPBNJwjr8s

[dropdeaded209]

let's all just be honest and admit how stupid it looks without the radome...

[NYdude]

Love it! It looks amazing at night with everything lit up. I like personally, but that's just my opinion.

[weidncol]

Hey didn't the original Twin Towers change their antenna after about 10 years or so? Who knows, maybe the same will happen with One World Trade Center... :shrug:

[marvelfannumber1]

:previous:

I doubt it, since the twin's original antenna was very small, and obviously temporary.

[Tectonic]

This antenna looks better at night but you can tell something's not right with it.

[wilfredo267]

lt would look a thousand times better if the the rings were lit up.

[NYguy]

I think it looks weird that only the antenna is lit and it's kinda just floating there in the dark, seemingly detached from the rest of the building. I hope they'll light the communication ring or parapet, like what they do for the Goldman-Sachs building and 4WTC.

I do believe they plan to. I don't understand why they couldn't just keep testing it like they have been doing, no need to pull extra attention to it. I was looking for the rotating beacon, but was disappointed I didn't get to see that. And to have it lit up without the ring being lit was just silly.

I wonder why they wanted all eyes on the Freedom Tower mast for last nights showing. :hmmm:

Hmmm, it's maybe just a coincidence that it just happened to be on the same day the case was being made in Chicago to include it in the buildings height! That's right folks, nothing to see here, just a coincidence.



Specifically about what the CTBUH will do, it will be interesting. They're in a very touchy area here that is laying bare how out dated their current rules are.

On the one hand, if they decide it's an antenna because its covering was not put on, there's going to be a lot of media attention and quite a bit of head scratching from a lot of people. I'm sure there'll be a lot of folks that'll be interviewed in the media saying they're wrong. It'll hurt their credibility.


Their credibility is already hurt in that they're entertaining this farce to begin with. And now they may want to alter rules yet again, where a simple "no" would have done the trick. But as I've said, if they want to include it, you may as well include all the others. Imagine the fun with the rankings. The Freedom Tower brings everyone up. On the other hand, if they decide that neither spires nor antennas will count in official height, then it's all the same.

Meanwhile, the media is all over themselves with this one, and nobody has a clue...


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/chicago-new-york-compare-building-sizes-article-1.1511259

Chicago contending if One World Trade Center rises above Second City's Willis Tower on a technicality
With the imminent completion of 1 World Trade Center, the logical question arises: is it bigger than the Willis Tower in Chicago.


http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1511255.1383949435!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/sept-11-construction-glance.jpg


By Larry Mcshane
November 8, 2013


The Second City — apparently tired of looking up at New York — could be conspiring to steal the title of the nation's tallest building. A Chicago-based committee of 30 architects will decide whether the 1,776-foot 1 World Trade Center rises above all skyscrapers from coast to coast, or finishes second to the Willis Tower on a technicality.

Architects for 1 World Trade Center say the spire is not merely a broadcast antenna, but a part of the building’s overall aesthetic appeal.

Disappointment awaits one of the two cities, as either the new World Trade Center or the Windy City skyscraper will wind up as second-tallest. A decision is due next week.



http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1511338.1383958072!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/spire.jpg



And I love this beautiful headline.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/et-cetera/is-the-1-world-trade-centre-tallest-building-in-the-world-chicago-panel-debates/articleshow/25490938.cms

Is the 1 World Trade Centre tallest building in the world? Chicago panel debates

By AP | 9 Nov, 2013



http://nation.time.com/2013/11/08/whoops-one-world-trade-center-may-not-be-americas-tallest-building/?iid=ent-main-mostpop2

Whoops! One World Trade Center May Not Be America’s Tallest Building
A change in the tower's 400-ft. spire opened debate over the building's height

By Noah Rayman Nov. 08, 2013



http://www.npr.org/2013/11/08/243714332/size-does-matter-at-least-in-the-tallest-building-debate

Size Does Matter, At Least In The Tallest Building Debate

http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/11/08/TallestTower_wide-976023c9b2fea9519241c21e61d5c556bbfc14cb-s40-c85.jpg


by David Schaper and Joel Rose
November 08, 2013

There's a question that's looming over the new skyscraper at the World Trade Center site in New York: Should it count as the tallest building in the country?

The developers say yes. But by some measures, the Willis Tower in Chicago — formerly known as Sears Tower — can still lay claim to the title.

Now, an obscure organization known as the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat is preparing to settle the debate.

"It's a seminal moment for skyscrapers," says Antony Wood, the council's executive director. "It doesn't come along every year."

The issue has been hanging over the architecture world since the spring, when construction crews hoisted a 400-foot metal mast into place at the top of One World Trade Center. As far as New Yorkers are concerned, it's now the tallest skyscraper in the hemisphere.

"It's a fact. It's taller," says Jerry Romano of New Jersey. "It doesn't matter to me. I'm just stating facts."

Veronica Smalls of Harlem agrees. "It has to be the tallest," she says.

"Not one of the tallest," interrupts her friend Tyreek Jones of Brooklyn, " 'cause New York City needs to be known as No. 1."

"We're standing on a sheet of glass, looking 1,353 feet straight down to the street," says Bob Wislow, standing on a ledge extending out from the sky deck on the 104th floor of the Willis Tower.

Wislow is a lifelong Chicagoan who watched this building go up 40 years ago. Now he's chairman and CEO of the company that manages it. Wislow says he has great respect for New York and for the developers and builders of One World Trade Center, which he calls a great symbol of American resilience. But, "I do think technically, if you strictly interpret the rules, that this would continue to be the tallest building," he says.

Even visitors from overseas agree. Lee Colgan and her family are visiting the sky deck from England.

"I think Chicago should have it, yeah," says Colgan. "The mast doesn't matter — it's the floors, in my eyes."

But Colgan doesn't get to decide; the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat does. It's based in Chicago — suspiciously — but it's made up of people from all over the world. Its 30-member "height" committee will be debating these buildings on Friday.

"The last time we did this, in 2007 ... we spent all day talking," says Wood.



There are two other issues that people aren't picking up on. One, this building won't be 1,776 ft either way. And two, forget about Chicago, this building is potentially on course to be no higher than number 3 in New York.

[Hudson11]

I was looking for the rotating beacon, but was disappointed I didn't get to see that.

really? it was on all night. :shrug:

[NYguy]

really? it was on all night. :shrug:

I didn't see it at all. I just saw the mast lit up.

This is what I was looking for...


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/141731957/large.jpg

http://www.allledlighting.com/author.asp?section_id=560&doc_id=559438

The capstone of 1-WTC's lighting will be a rotating beacon at the top of the spire. The beacon will project light in two opposing directions in a horizontal plane, like a lighthouse. It will rotate once per minute. John Gebbie sent this description of the beacon, developed by equipment suppliers J.R. Clancy and Strong Lighting: "...they developed the energy-efficient LED beacon which uses 50W LED modules, shot into a set of mirrors that concentrate the 288,000 lumens into a 1-degree beam spread, visible from miles away."

Once it lights up, the 1-WTC spire will be illuminated from dusk until 12:00 a.m. ET time.

[NYC GUY]

^^^
Don't forget about 1 Vanderbuilt isn't that supposed to at least reach 1500'? New York will eventually have it.

[Hudson11]

I didn't see it at all. I just saw the mast lit up.

This is what I was looking for...


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/141731957/large.jpg

http://www.allledlighting.com/author.asp?section_id=560&doc_id=559438

it looked sort of like that from where I could view it, ~25 miles north. The rendering is exaggerated of course.

[Tectonic]

11.07.13
Day & Night...sorry no tripod

http://imageshack.us/a/img21/2797/ld6h.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img266/1994/ljjb.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img266/328/wppw.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img23/6310/1gja.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img96/9408/3yne.jpg

©tectonic

[Silverfox]

From Brooklyn

http://benjaminrosamond.com/r1383970056/cc/8/0/3/12803/w/1640x830-QF7TAalaO7M2b7cw.jpg

http://www.benjaminrosamond.com

It appears that the rings are lit up in this photo.

[TransitEngr]

I didn't see it at all. I just saw the mast lit up.

This is what I was looking for...


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/141731957/large.jpg

http://www.allledlighting.com/author.asp?section_id=560&doc_id=559438



I think that rendering might be an exaggeration. I could make out the rotating beacon last night, and also on the very first night they tested the beacon a few months back .... it's somewhat like the rotating beacon atop the Eiffel Tower.... only much much less bright.

Although I could be wrong... perhaps someone knows the precise lumen count for each beacon. I also seem to remember the rotating beacon on the Eiffel Tower is double-ended and I don't remember what I saw last night was double-ended here at 1 WTC.

[Blaze23]

You're absolutely right. The rotating beacon on the Eiffel Tower is far more powerful than this one, you can see it from miles away. I was downtown yesterday and although I could see it, it clearly not that powerful so i can only imagine how it looks from a distance; actually judging from videos that have been posted so far, it's not that visible from afar. Basically it's a cheap version of the Eiffel tower's beacon. When will the disapointment end with this tower?

[Duck From NY]

You're absolutely right. The rotating beacon on the Eiffel Tower is far more powerful than this one, you can see it from miles away.
-
Truths. Eiffel's is like a giant lightsaber slicing through the sky.

One let down after another.

http://i1058.photobucket.com/albums/t413/Mark_W_NYC/IMG_0929.jpg (http://s1058.photobucket.com/user/Mark_W_NYC/media/IMG_0929.jpg.html)

http://i1058.photobucket.com/albums/t413/Mark_W_NYC/IMG_0955a.jpg (http://s1058.photobucket.com/user/Mark_W_NYC/media/IMG_0955a.jpg.html)

http://i1058.photobucket.com/albums/t413/Mark_W_NYC/IMG_0910a2.jpg (http://s1058.photobucket.com/user/Mark_W_NYC/media/IMG_0910a2.jpg.html)

[weidncol]

Who thinks they will light it tonight?

[sw5710]

The beacon on the Eiffel tower is listed as xenon 6000 watt lamps.

[mfastx]

The beacon reminds me of the Williams Tower beacon in Houston, TX:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Williams_Tower.jpg/250px-Williams_Tower.jpg

[CCs77]

Except Willis' antennae have been replaced and upgraded while 1WTC's mast is a permanent structure.

1WTC will never add anything substantial to the mast that effects the height nor will it add anything above the beacon at the top. Willis on the other hand can attach and replace antennae at will. See this article (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000-02-16/news/0002160355_1_sears-tower-council-on-tall-buildings-tallest) about them '1-uping' the Petronas and Twin Towers.

Pretty cool article. I will post some part of it for you (the article is from february 16th 2000, when the old WTC still stood and Sears Tower recently lost its long held title as the world's tallest building)
Sears Tower To Stand Tallest In Antenna Race
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000-02-16/news/0002160355_1_sears-tower-council-on-tall-buildings-tallest

It's a game of inches up there in the skyscraper heavens.

Sears Tower, which lost its world's tallest building crown in 1996 to twin towers in Malaysia by a scant 33 feet, is adding 22 feet to one of its twin broadcast antennas for digital TV.
That will do more than alter the most prominent set of rabbit ears on the Chicago skyline.
It will give Sears the arcane distinction of having the tallest broadcast antenna atop a building--1,729 feet, precisely 12 inches higher than New York's World Trade Center.

And it will heighten the competition for lucrative lease deals with local television stations.


That's what I say too, for the CTBUH not counting antennas has more to do with the mutable nature of them than the fact that it contains communication equipment. The antennas of of Sears or other buildings used purely as antennas are much more susceptible of change than spires, as the former can change as necessities change, the spires being basically useless architectonic features are not likely to change.
The spirettena of 1WTC, although will hold communication equipment is a fixed structure in terms of height whether you like it or not, whether it has a radome or not, whether it has communication equipment or not, it will stand on those symbolic 1776 ft. that's why I think the CTBUH, according to its rules will determine it as a spire, what they care is not if it contains communications equipment but if it is a fixed element in terms of height, and in this case it does.

http://www.ctbuh.org/TallBuildings/HeightStatistics/Criteria/tabid/446/language/en-US/Default.aspx

1. Height to Architectural Top
Height is measured from the level1 of the lowest, significant,2 open-air,3 pedestrian4 entrance to the architectural top of the building, including spires, but not including antennae, signage, flag poles or other functional-technical equipment.5 This measurement is the most widely utilized and is employed to define the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat rankings of the "World's Tallest Buildings."

5 Functional-technical equipment: this is intended to recognize that functional-technical equipment is subject to removal/addition/change as per prevalent technologies, as is often seen in tall buildings (e.g., antennae, signage, wind turbines, etc. are periodically added, shortened, lengthened, removed and/or replaced).

[sw5710]

The beacon reminds me of the Williams Tower beacon in Houston, TX:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Williams_Tower.jpg/250px-Williams_Tower.jpg

Thats true. I wonder other then these three how many other places have rotating lights like these?

[Nomadd22]

I give up. How is 1729 feet 12 inches higher than 1787 feet?

[Thaniel]

I give up. How is 1729 feet 12 inches higher than 1787 feet?

It's an old article talking about some change in antenna height in the year 2000. The original 1 WTC height was like 1,727 with antenna. What the article was referring to, not the current building.

[Hudson11]

this is more like it.

http://www.raischstudios.org/storage/OneWTC_EagleRock_RaischStudiosAlt_LR.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1383975784186
Raisch Studios, Entry by Lori and Micheal (http://www.raischstudios.org/one-world-trade-center/author/loriandmichael)

[King DenCity]

^Yeauhhhh!!!

[sw5710]

I did a little research on the beacons. The Williams Tower in Houston has a 7000 watt beacon 900' up, seen to 40 miles. The Eiffel Towers are listed as 2-6000 watts 950' up. Seen to 80 kilometers. The 1WTC is listed as 288-50 watt lights 1760' up, seen to 50 miles.

[Onn]

The beacon looks REALLY obnoxious. The skyline is not about the 1WTC, but the skyline taken collectively. One building outshining the rest is a over-the-top. It looks like they stuck a huge light bulb on top of the antenna. Not only did they now destroy the spire but the lighting for the antenna. This is becoming a circus! :(

[-Filipe-]

Oh shut your complaining, if it was a tiny light bulb you would still be bitching now its too powerful please...

[NYguy]

I give up. How is 1729 feet 12 inches higher than 1787 feet?

Read it again.




http://imageshack.us/a/img266/328/wppw.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img23/6310/1gja.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img96/9408/3yne.jpg
©tectonic



You're absolutely right. The rotating beacon on the Eiffel Tower is far more powerful than this one, you can see it from miles away.

Maybe it's because it's still on the testing phase, they have to get it just right, who knows. There is a video animation of what the beacon is supposed to do (where I took that still from), I have to find it.



Similar thoughts to what I said earlier...

http://gothamist.com/2013/11/09/photos_video_world_trade_centers_co.php#photo-1

The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitats is debating whether to allow the spire to count as part of the building. Earlier this year, Kevin Brass, the public affairs manager the group, told the Guardian, "Our criteria are very specific. We include spires and not antennas. If this is an antenna, it won't be part of the height measurement. The cladding was an integral part of the design and made the extension part of the permanent look and feel of the building."

Obviously the timing of this test (which is not the first—it was tested a few weeks ago, too) seems to be deliberate. The Port Authority explained, "The beacon, which is the top section of spire, contains 288 50-watt LED modules that produce 288,000 lumens of light that will enable the spire to be visible up to 50 miles on a clear night." In other words—can any ol' antenna do THAT?



http://galleries.gothamistllc.com/asset/527e422ee0fbc06d23221aae/web_gallery/Freedom%20Tower%20Light%20T_chun.jpg



http://galleries.gothamistllc.com/asset/527e422ee0fbc06d23221aae/mobile/IMG_4631.jpg



http://galleries.gothamistllc.com/asset/527e422ee0fbc06d23221aae/web_gallery/IMG_4633.jpg



http://galleries.gothamistllc.com/asset/527e422ee0fbc06d23221aae/web_gallery/2013_10_wtcprogress4.jpg



http://galleries.gothamistllc.com/asset/527e422ee0fbc06d23221aae/web_gallery/2013_10_wtcprogress2.jpg



http://galleries.gothamistllc.com/asset/527e422ee0fbc06d23221aae/web_gallery/2013_10_wtcprogress6.jpg



http://galleries.gothamistllc.com/asset/527e422ee0fbc06d23221aae/web_gallery/2013_11_wtcprogress1.jpg


http://www.komonews.com/news/national/Tallest-or-not-Height-of-1-World-Trade-Center-debated-in-Chicago-231151031.html
http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/153313794/original.jpg



Similarities?

http://beforeitsnews.com/contributor/upload/104385/images/muslim-minaret-spire-proudly-tops-new-one-world-trade-center-tower.jpg
http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2013/11/see-it-one-world-trade-center-in-new-york-city-is-topped-with-a-muslim-minaret-2456144.html

[antinimby]

So the beacon just lights up but doesn't rotate like the Eiffel tower for example?

Damn, we're so boring.

[Blaze23]

It actually was rotating. I was close by and I could clearly see it but it just didn't look powerful enough to be seen from a distance. I too hope it's still a test cause that'll be some let down.

[NYC GUY]

It rotates and saying it isn't bright is false when the beacon rotates right at you it's blinding.

[Blaze23]

There's nothing "false" about my statement, I clearly stated that "it didn't look strong enough to be seen from a distance" as I was close by, so it's merely an opinion cause I don't know what I looks like from a further distance; all you guys who could see it from afar feel free to chime in.

[sw5710]

The CTBUH recognizes height in three categories

1. Height to Architectural top
2. Highest occupied Floor.
3. Height to tip.

#3 includes lightning rods.It is the same as you find on Aviation charts.

[NewYorque]

I hope they won't admit the iron stick as a spire.
I hope they will say that it is an antenna.

Then the debate will become public: new yorkers will know that 1WTC is officially 1368ft tall. They will wonder "I thought it was supposed to be 1776ft tall!"
they will ask questions.
Sooner or later, all the new yorkers will discover that all this shit is the result of one greedy man who wanted to save his money.
They will criticize him.

It will become a national issue. And, then, the architects will fell like they really have to add a radome. If they don t, 1WTC will become New York's Sagrada Familia forever.

I hope this iron stick, thinner than the old 1WTC's antenna, will never recognized as a spire.

[r18tdi]

Similar thoughts to what I said earlier...


http://galleries.gothamistllc.com/asset/527e422ee0fbc06d23221aae/web_gallery/IMG_4633.jpg




http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31XEyQvMLwL._SY300_.jpg

Glow in the dark thunder beads?

[cadiomals]

Okay, we have really, really exhausted this spire/antenna issue by now. It has basically been discussed continuously for months, with different people essentially repeating the same things.

I hate the cheapness and greediness of the people who kept the radome from being installed as much as anyone else, but the bottom line is the Lower Manhattan skyline is back, and the hole in our hearts and in the skyline that was there for the past decade is finally starting to be filled. This is not as much about having the "tallest" building in the US as much as it's simply about New York bringing downtown back to how it used to be, a vibrant business and tourist destination. Even if they count the spire and 1WTC becomes the tallest in America, something will eventually be built within several years that will surpass it. But what will stay is the new symbol of New York (and America's) resilience after a disaster. :cheers:

How the antenna turned out is a huge shame, but ultimately if nothing is done about it the only thing we can do is appreciate what we've got (and what we're going to get with the rest of this beautiful complex).

[O-tacular]

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31XEyQvMLwL._SY300_.jpg

Glow in the dark thunder beads?

Lol! :haha:

[O-tacular]

Okay, we have really, really exhausted this spire/antenna issue by now. It has basically been discussed continuously for months, with different people essentially repeating the same things.

I hate the cheapness and greediness of the people who kept the radome from being installed as much as anyone else, but the bottom line is the Lower Manhattan skyline is back, and the hole in our hearts and in the skyline that was there for the past decade is finally starting to be filled. This is not as much about having the "tallest" building in the US as much as it's simply about New York bringing downtown back to how it used to be, a vibrant business and tourist destination. Even if they count the spire and 1WTC becomes the tallest in America, something will eventually be built within several years that will surpass it. But what will stay is the new symbol of New York (and America's) resilience after a disaster. :cheers:

How the antenna turned out is a huge shame, but ultimately if nothing is done about it the only thing we can do is appreciate what we've got (and what we're going to get with the rest of this beautiful complex).

I think that's a defeatist attitude. And quite frankly I think Americans are starting to become complacent and no longer demand the best. This tower doesn't symbolize resilience to me as much as it symbolizes capitulation to the terrorists and greedy bastards like Durst.

[O-tacular]

The toothpick looks even more out of place at night with the top of the tower dark and the rings left unlit. I'm not sure why they would choose to highlight it's least attractive feature.

[sw5710]

I said before that I hope the CTBUH uses the same criteria they use on existing buildings here to. Well I just read an article online where Daniel Safarik, an architect and spokesman for the CTBUH said the committee could consider amending its height criteria - A move with broader implications that could force a reshuffle in the rankings of the tallest buildings in the world! Those are there words!

[weidncol]

Do you think the spire will be lit along with the beacon the opening night of 4 WTC? It sort of makes sense to do so.

[Davidsam52]

With everyone talking about the spire of late, has anyone else noticed that they have quietly begun to clad the last major portion of the base?:cheers::cheers::cheers:

[Hudson11]

There's nothing "false" about my statement, I clearly stated that "it didn't look strong enough to be seen from a distance" as I was close by, so it's merely an opinion cause I don't know what I looks like from a further distance; all you guys who could see it from afar feel free to chime in.
It was like a lighthouse, very noticeable and extremely bright when facing you

[antinimby]

I agree with whoever said the rings should be lit as well. It would look like a beautiful crown.

[Thaniel]

The CTBUH recognizes height in three categories

1. Height to Architectural top
2. Highest occupied Floor.
3. Height to tip.

#3 includes lightning rods.It is the same as you find on Aviation charts.

The question still remains. Is the top of the spire an architectural top? Being that the only purpose of the spire is to be tall NOT to serve as a communication antenna or anything like that.

[cadiomals]

I think that's a defeatist attitude. And quite frankly I think Americans are starting to become complacent and no longer demand the best. This tower doesn't symbolize resilience to me as much as it symbolizes capitulation to the terrorists and greedy bastards like Durst.

I don't want to sound too scornful here, but when will you be making picket signs and arranging a crowd of at least 100 to protest outside Durst offices or 1WTC? When will you be gathering signatures for a petition? I'd love to know when and where your planned protest is set to be.

Your time for actually getting up and protesting and petitioning with regards to the radome and the design of the new WTC in general has long passed, and as far as I know you never had any intention of doing such a thing. Now people here are just venting their feelings on an online forum which will make ZERO difference (slacktivism), and although you all have the right to express your opinions it's frankly getting quite annoying. People have been saying the same things over and over about the spire for months, and has Durst changed its mind yet? Nope.

You all can go ahead and continue complaining, but as long it's on here your words will fall on no one's ears. You can say all you want how America has become "complacent" but as long as you're not out there actually educating the public and "demanding the best", you are just as complacent as the rest of us, while also being a hypocrite.

[ArtDecoRevival]

Similarities?

http://beforeitsnews.com/contributor/upload/104385/images/muslim-minaret-spire-proudly-tops-new-one-world-trade-center-tower.jpg
http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2013/11/see-it-one-world-trade-center-in-new-york-city-is-topped-with-a-muslim-minaret-2456144.html

Please tell me you're joking.

[sw5710]

The question still remains. Is the top of the spire an architectural top? Being that the only purpose of the spire is to be tall NOT to serve as a communication antenna or anything like that.

If all the city's broadcast needs were already taken care of would the 1776' number be a non issue and they would have stopped at the parapet.

[599GTO]

Okay, we have really, really exhausted this spire/antenna issue by now. It has basically been discussed continuously for months, with different people essentially repeating the same things.

I hate the cheapness and greediness of the people who kept the radome from being installed as much as anyone else, but the bottom line is the Lower Manhattan skyline is back, and the hole in our hearts and in the skyline that was there for the past decade is finally starting to be filled. This is not as much about having the "tallest" building in the US as much as it's simply about New York bringing downtown back to how it used to be, a vibrant business and tourist destination. Even if they count the spire and 1WTC becomes the tallest in America, something will eventually be built within several years that will surpass it. But what will stay is the new symbol of New York (and America's) resilience after a disaster. :cheers:

How the antenna turned out is a huge shame, but ultimately if nothing is done about it the only thing we can do is appreciate what we've got (and what we're going to get with the rest of this beautiful complex).

It's not a symbol of anything but the ills of bureaucracy, greed, incompetence. I really hope something bigger goes up in front of 1 WTC, perhaps a true 1776 footer, and blocks it.

I will never get over that horrid antenna. What a tragedy.

[cadiomals]

It's not a symbol of anything but the ills of bureaucracy, greed, incompetence. I really hope something bigger goes up in front of 1 WTC, perhaps a true 1776 footer, and blocks it.

I will never get over that horrid antenna. What a tragedy.

I can't tell if you read my response to a similar comment above and you're just saying that to intentionally troll or if you're actually serious. Either way, you sound pretty pathetic. :rolleyes:

[patrick989]

people have as much right to complain about the building as they do to compliment it, it's a free forum to do so.

[599GTO]

I can't tell if you read my response to a similar comment above and you're just saying that to intentionally troll or if you're actually serious. Either way, you sound pretty pathetic. :rolleyes:

No, you idiot, I didn't read your reply. I tend to skip over the 1 WTC fanboys who defend this tower at any cost since you guys really add nothing to the conversation other than blind support. The spire is fucking hideous. I see this building from my window and always look up at that rusty stick (erm, "spire") and laugh out loud. I am really hoping the skyscraper council slaps this building down to earth..down to 1373 ft..where it belongs. Get the fuck over it.

[TechTalkGuy]

The spire looks fine to me.

[NYguy]

people have as much right to complain about the building as they do to compliment it, it's a free forum to do so.

That's true. Not everyone has to agree to be 100 % in awe of the building. We don't stop people from stating how nice it looks, there is no need to stop the opposite. Personally, I'm never offended if someone differs from my opinion.


Okay, we have really, really exhausted this spire/antenna issue by now. It has basically been discussed continuously for months, with different people essentially repeating the same things.


As long as its still visible, it's worth commenting on. Otherwise, why have a thread for a building to begin with? Just to throw praise? Is there a limit to how much you can compliment a building?



So the beacon just lights up but doesn't rotate like the Eiffel tower for example?Damn, we're so boring.

It actually was rotating. I was close by and I could clearly see it but it just didn't look powerful enough to be seen from a distance. I too hope it's still a test cause that'll be some let down.

The toothpick looks even more out of place at night with the top of the tower dark and the rings left unlit. I'm not sure why they would choose to highlight it's least attractive feature.


I'm still thinking that all of that will change a bit. This isn't the finished product, and it was only brought to attention on that day because the CTBUH was focusing on it. They wanted the public to focus as well, and to show how much it "adds" to the building. You can see a little bit of the shine in this cam shot (hardly worth the effort)...


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/153330461/original.jpg



I said before that I hope the CTBUH uses the same criteria they use on existing buildings here to. Well I just read an article online where Daniel Safarik, an architect and spokesman for the CTBUH said the committee could consider amending its height criteria - A move with broader implications that could force a reshuffle in the rankings of the tallest buildings in the world!


That was posted in an earlier article. I believe they would only do that to a) strip spires from height criteria or b) include antenna masts in height.

As it is today, the top 3 in the US would look like this:

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/153330525/original.jpg
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2013/11/10/is_1_wtc_the_tallest_building_in_the_western_hemisphere.php



Please tell me you're joking.

Tell me you're not.



If all the city's broadcast needs were already taken care of would the 1776' number be a non issue and they would have stopped at the parapet.

Well, now we get to the larger issue, which no one is talking about, and the media has yet to catch on to. The 1,776 figure is really the only thing about this tower left over from the original site plan concept. Not only did it have to reach that height, but it had to be reached by and upraised, asymmetrical spire that would symbolize Liberty's upraised torch. The redesign caused the spire to be centered, but David Childs kept the 1,776 ft height. Or so it was thought, until it was revealed that the building elevation giving that height didn't include the extra 5 or 6 ft drop from south to north.

The north entrance is basically the same as the south - except there are a small flight of steps leading to the level lobby floor.


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/150118950/original.jpg


This is why the tower will not be 1,776 ft, or even 1,368 ft (which is measured from the south). You can add 5 or 6 ft to those numbers (depending on the exact difference).

In my opinion, instead of focusing on the Sears Tower in Chicago, the media should be asking questions of this.


http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-09-11/news/ct-met-kamin-tallest-building-0910-20130910_1_tallest-building-willis-tower-ground-zero-tower/2

Addressing the issue of the lower secondary entrance, a spokeswoman said SOM's hope is that the design will be grandfathered in because it was unveiled in 2005 — four years before the council made its rule change.

"The 'front door' of (One World Trade Center) — symbolically and practically — is the south entrance," SOM said in its email. "This is the entrance that faces the 9/11 memorial and is, therefore, the most significant entrance to the building from every standpoint."

Anybody hungry? Because they're throwing a lot of baloney our way.

[Roadcruiser1]

Honestly I don't mind if this building is 1,368 feet tall. You guys might kill me for it but that is my opinion. That reason is I am pretty happy to know that at least the height of One World Trade Center is the same height as the old North Tower of the former World Trade Center. For me that symbol means it has been fully rebuilt regardless of what you guys think. I just like it the way it is. Just don't kill me guys. I know that you are unhappy to know this, but taller towers will come. 225 West 57th Street, 432 Park Avenue, and etc will help us defeat Chicago so don't panic if this isn't the one...

[sw5710]

When again does the verdict get announced. Tuesday?

[NYguy]

Honestly I don't mind if this building is 1,368 feet tall. You guys might kill me for it but that is my opinion. That reason is I am pretty happy to know that at least the height of One World Trade Center
is the same height as the old North Tower of the former World Trade Center. For me that symbol means it has been fully rebuilt regardless of what you guys think. I just like it the way it is. Just don't
kill me guys. I know that you are unhappy to know this, but taller towers will come. 225 West 57th Street, 432 Park Avenue, and etc will help us defeat Chicago so don't panic if this isn't the one...

Well first off, nobody is "defeating" Chicago. And the building won't match the height of the twins exactly in either form. Did we rebuild a tower of similar height? Yes. Is the skyline restored? Pretty much.

I don't care if the mast is included in the height either. Just don't tell me that mast as is was designed as an architectural addition to the tower, which otherwise looks fine by itself.



whatisintheblackbox (http://www.flickr.com/photos/procrun/10638490123/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7418/10638490123_fea49a595d_b.jpg



http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7418/10638490123_656f7a5379_h.jpg

[cadiomals]

No, you idiot, I didn't read your reply. I tend to skip over the 1 WTC fanboys who defend this tower at any cost since you guys really add nothing to the conversation other than blind support. The spire is fucking hideous. I see this building from my window and always look up at that rusty stick (erm, "spire") and laugh out loud. I am really hoping the skyscraper council slaps this building down to earth..down to 1373 ft..where it belongs. Get the fuck over it.

I don't "blindly" support the tower, I am just as disappointed by the spire as everyone else. I mean, after a beautiful sheathing was planned, who wouldn't be? So stop building strawmen.

And guess what, if CTBUH doesn't count the antenna as part of the height, will it disappear? Will they get rid of it? Cause that's where your mind seems to be. I think YOU need to get over it, because the antenna is here to stay no matter how much whining on the Internet you do, and no one is affected but you when you allow yourself to be disgusted by it.

Like I said before, when are you organizing your public protest? Where is the petition you created that I can sign? Oh, you're not doing any of that? :runaway:

[cadiomals]

That's true. Not everyone has to agree to be 100 % in awe of the building. We don't stop people from stating how nice it looks, there is no need to stop the opposite. Personally, I'm never offended if someone differs from my opinion.

My perspective on this controversy is not stopping people from voicing their opinion, it's "how are these constant complaints going to effect change, if at all?"

If people are so pissed about how this antenna turned out, they can gather enough people or create a petition to actually bring this to Durst or others involved. The thing is, as far as I know no one here has voiced plans to do that. It reminds me of Kony 2012, this huge viral campaign where all 98% of people did was tweet #Kony2012 and then go back to their own lives. It's pathetic. That's how I view it and that's my individual opinion. People on this forum complain about the "corruption, greed, and cheapness" involved in this debacle, but that's all they do, and it has no effect on the situation except adding an atmosphere of negativity to this thread.

I am not a blind supporter of this tower and I don't praise it. Frankly, the design is bland and of course the antenna is even worse. But I know that I'm not going to take time out of my life to make picket signs and march around the developer's offices because I'm just really not that passionate about the issue. Even if I was, I know my efforts would be in vain unless I managed to gather thousands of people. So I limit my worthless complaints which add nothing constructive and in turn, I don't make myself look like a hypocrite.

I just can't wait till 2 and 3 WTC start rising so we have something to distract us from the disappointment at 1 WTC, both here and in the skyline.

[Thaniel]

Similarities?

http://beforeitsnews.com/contributor/upload/104385/images/muslim-minaret-spire-proudly-tops-new-one-world-trade-center-tower.jpg
http://beforeitsnews.com/conspiracy-theories/2013/11/see-it-one-world-trade-center-in-new-york-city-is-topped-with-a-muslim-minaret-2456144.html

Both are phallic statements by insecure cultures? lol

And the other hidden message: humans like tiny walkways that go around tall pillars.

[O-tacular]

I don't want to sound too scornful here, but when will you be making picket signs and arranging a crowd of at least 100 to protest outside Durst offices or 1WTC? When will you be gathering signatures for a petition? I'd love to know when and where your planned protest is set to be.

Your time for actually getting up and protesting and petitioning with regards to the radome and the design of the new WTC in general has long passed, and as far as I know you never had any intention of doing such a thing. Now people here are just venting their feelings on an online forum which will make ZERO difference (slacktivism), and although you all have the right to express your opinions it's frankly getting quite annoying. People have been saying the same things over and over about the spire for months, and has Durst changed its mind yet? Nope.

You all can go ahead and continue complaining, but as long it's on here your words will fall on no one's ears. You can say all you want how America has become "complacent" but as long as you're not out there actually educating the public and "demanding the best", you are just as complacent as the rest of us, while also being a hypocrite.

My commentary is from the outside looking in as I am Canadian. Just an observation from your friendly neighbour to the north. Take it for what it's worth.

Edit: and btw there was a petition going around a year or so back that I did sign.

[O-tacular]

My perspective on this controversy is not stopping people from voicing their opinion, it's "how are these constant complaints going to effect change, if at all?"

If people are so pissed about how this antenna turned out, they can gather enough people or create a petition to actually bring this to Durst or others involved. The thing is, as far as I know no one here has voiced plans to do that. It reminds me of Kony 2012, this huge viral campaign where all 98% of people did was tweet #Kony2012 and then go back to their own lives. It's pathetic. That's how I view it and that's my individual opinion. People on this forum complain about the "corruption, greed, and cheapness" involved in this debacle, but that's all they do, and it has no effect on the situation except adding an atmosphere of negativity to this thread.

I am not a blind supporter of this tower and I don't praise it. Frankly, the design is bland and of course the antenna is even worse. But I know that I'm not going to take time out of my life to make picket signs and march around the developer's offices because I'm just really not that passionate about the issue. Even if I was, I know my efforts would be in vain unless I managed to gather thousands of people. So I limit my worthless complaints which add nothing constructive and in turn, I don't make myself look like a hypocrite.

I just can't wait till 2 and 3 WTC start rising so we have something to distract us from the disappointment at 1 WTC, both here and in the skyline.

Well you conveniently gave yourself an out. I guess no one should ever voice concerns or criticisms unless they have a mob of several thousand at their disposal.

[Fishman92]

No, you idiot, I didn't read your reply. I tend to skip over the 1 WTC fanboys who defend this tower at any cost since you guys really add nothing to the conversation other than blind support. The spire is fucking hideous. I see this building from my window and always look up at that rusty stick (erm, "spire") and laugh out loud. I am really hoping the skyscraper council slaps this building down to earth..down to 1373 ft..where it belongs. Get the fuck over it.

Well that was unnecessary. Can't we just all agree to disagree?

Personally, I'd maintain that it's tallest by pinnacle, and the Willis/Sears is taller by roof. To me, it's that simple.

[NYguy]

My perspective on this controversy is not stopping people from voicing their opinion, it's "how are these constant complaints going to effect change, if at all?"

Excuse me, but when did that become a part of the criteria for voicing opinion? Because believe me, if it were, there would be a whole lot of changes in the world. And nothing would be constant because everyone has an opinion on something. No, I think the problem is more likely that you just don't want to see or hear about it anymore, and that frankly is your problem.



Meanwhile, a decision from the CTBUH comes tomorrow...


YaIOKWfpkcI



EpSx6r_2uqk
Diana Love

[hunser]

http://www.ctbuh.org/News/GlobalTallNews/PR_131111_1WTCPressConference/tabid/5944/language/en-US/Default.aspx

CTBUH Press Conference:
Ruling on Height of One World Trade Center


November 11, 2013

The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH) will hold a press conference to announce the determination of its Height Committee with respect to the architectural height of One World Trade Center, New York.

WHEN:

Two conferences will take place simultaneously on Tuesday, Nov. 12 at 10:00 a.m. (Central) in Chicago and 11:00 a.m. (Eastern) and New York.

WHERE:

Chicago:

Illinois Institute of Technology Tower
10 W. 35th St.
19th Floor
Chicago, IL, 60616

New York:

NBBJ Inc.
2 Rector Street, 25th Floor
New York, NY, 10006

WHO:

Representatives will be available for interviews and to answer questions following the announcement.

Chicago:

Antony Wood, CTBUH Executive Director
Peter Weismantle, Chair, CTBUH Height Committee; Director of Supertall Building Technology, Adrian Smith + Gordon Gill Architecture

New York:

Timothy Johnson, CTBUH Chairman; Design Partner, NBBJ

[sw5710]

How many people are still pissed about rulings on past buildings the CTBUH has made. Has the same thing ever happened before, or are we on uncharted territory here?:)

[Thaniel]

So what was their decision? It's 11:40AM Mountain time where I am. So that conference took place a while ago. Can't find any articles online talking about what they decided though.

[bunky]

Anyone know the timeline for the removal of the East elevator?

I believe it was dependent on Conde Nast's interior build out? Any info would be appreciated.

Cheers

[NYguy]

http://www.ctbuh.org/News/GlobalTallNews/PR_131111_1WTCPressConference/tabid/5944/language/en-US/Default.aspx

CTBUH Press Conference:
Ruling on Height of One World Trade Center

November 11, 2013

The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (CTBUH) will hold a press conference to announce the determination of its Height Committee with respect to the architectural height of One World Trade Center, New York.

There should be a spoof of this.


Anway, relive the spire animations from the past here...
http://www.lowermanhattan.info/construction/project_updates/freedom_tower_26204.aspx
under "Nighttime Flyby" and "Timeline". Not sure we will get anything like that now.

[UTEPman]

I figured when I saw the antenna lit, it would help the disappointment I've had when it comes to this building. Now that I've seen it lit, it simply highlights the architectural flaw of this building.

It is WAY too long and skinny. It doesn't blend with the tower at all. The antenna being lit at night makes it look even more out of place than it does in the daytime. Terrible.....

[Blaze23]

I don't mean to pile up on the criticism of this tower, but I've watched plenty of videos of the beacon and it reinforces what i saw on friday, it's not that visible! At least not as it was portrayed to be and definitely not even close to that of the Eiffel tower. Maybe it wasn't fully powered. And you're totally right UTEPman, they need to light up that ring to bring a semblance of coherence on top.

[deepen915]

So what was their decision? It's 11:40AM Mountain time where I am. So that conference took place a while ago. Can't find any articles online talking about what they decided though.

TODAY IS MONDAY.. do you have a calendar? SMH

[deepen915]

I figured when I saw the antenna lit, it would help the disappointment I've had when it comes to this building. Now that I've seen it lit, it simply highlights the architectural flaw of this building.

It is WAY too long and skinny. It doesn't blend with the tower at all. The antenna being lit at night makes it look even more out of place than it does in the daytime. Terrible.....

they haven't completed the lighting on the upper floors yet or the communications ring.. just have patience, I for one, think it looks gorgeous. I have learned to move on from the Radome removal issue. This tower makes me proud to be American everytime I look at it!