NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS - Page 79

sfcity1 · #**1561** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 5:00 PM**

There is also a #5 that will be rising at the same time I think, 123 washinginton and goldman sacks may be done. Very substantial development in such a developed area. This will be fun to watch.

Dac150 · #**1562** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 5:07 PM**

I garuntee that 90% of all people who say they hate tower 5 will like it once its completed.

Look at it this way. One of the meanings of the World Trade Center is diversity. All of the new buildings going up are divirse (different). Tower 5 will be very different. I think over time the building will be more liked and appreciated because its different from any other building in the city. I believe it will an impressive site to see.

Arriviste · #**1563** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 5:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

In over all height: the Freedom Tower is taller

In roof height: the Sears Tower is taller

That is the only way to slice it. Some will think spires count and others won't.

Spires don't count, and everyone knows that. The only people who disagree with that are individuals who are insecure as to the height of their beloved building. A spire is ornamentation and serves no real purpose other than inflating the ego's of rabid boosters. It's fucking tall regardless. Why does it matter?

aluminum · #**1564** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 5:39 PM**

With so many buildings rising or about to rise, what's the total development happening in downtown, ( in msf) ?

BTinSF · #**1565** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 5:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aluminum

And they all will be nearing completion in around 2011.
It will be an interesting site to see how all those 4 buildings rise together, 1 or 2 years later.

Lucky there won't be palm trees in the pics so we'll know it isn't Dubai.

Dac150 · #**1566** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 5:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arriviste

Spires don't count, and everyone knows that. The only people who disagree with that are individuals who are insecure as to the height of their beloved building. A spire is ornamentation and serves no real purpose other than inflating the ego's of rabid boosters. It's fucking tall regardless. Why does it matter?

Look I stand by the fact that spires do count in final building height. The spire of the Freedom Tower is incorporated into the design to serve a prupose for the building. The antennas of the Sears Tower are just two sticks added by broadcasting companies that can be removed at any time. The spire of the Freedom Tower is permanent.

And if you feel that way do you think the spires of the ESB and Chrysler should not be considered in the final height? If you don't then you are clearly out of your mind.

An antenna (broadcasting/radio/tv) does not count in the final structural height. That is why Petronas beat out the Sears Tower.

A spire is incorporated into the design to function as an ornate portion of the building.

Bottom line: Spires count and antennas do not. You can go to any architect, engineer, or developer in the world and he/she would tell you just that.

(And by the way.........if you feel spires do not count for anything, then the u/c Chicago Spire must mean nothing. After all its one big spire.) You hear how stupid that sounds. SPIRES COUNT

And saying that people who think spires count are "insecure" is just plain childish.

Tom Servo · #**1567** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 7:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

And by the way.........if you feel spires do not count for anything, then the u/c Chicago Spire must mean nothing. After all its one big spire.) You hear how stupid that sounds. SPIRES COUNT

And saying that people who think spires count are "insecure" is just plain childish.

dude, you're hilarious! i'm pretty sure the CS is a building, but i could be wrong. second, you stand on the roof of the FT and i'll stand on the roof of Sears, and who's looking down at whom? third, wow, give it up... the pointy stick on top of the FT bump its official height over sears', no one is arguing that. and untill CTBUH changes what 'official height' is, you win. jeeez.

Arriviste · #**1568** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 7:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac150

Look I stand by the fact that spires do count in final building height. The spire of the Freedom Tower is incorporated into the design to serve a prupose for the building. The antennas of the Sears Tower are just two sticks added by broadcasting companies that can be removed at any time. The spire of the Freedom Tower is permanent.

And if you feel that way do you think the spires of the ESB and Chrysler should not be considered in the final height? If you don't then you are clearly out of your mind.

An antenna (broadcasting/radio/tv) does not count in the final structural height. That is why Petronas beat out the Sears Tower.

A spire is incorporated into the design to function as an ornate portion of the building.

Bottom line: Spires count and antennas do not. You can go to any architect, engineer, or developer in the world and he/she would tell you just that.

(And by the way.........if you feel spires do not count for anything, then the u/c Chicago Spire must mean nothing. After all its one big spire.) You hear how stupid that sounds. SPIRES COUNT

And saying that people who think spires count are "insecure" is just plain childish.

All right Chief.
I'm going to let it go. I forgot who I was trying to converse with.

Dac150 · #**1569** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 8:30 PM**

We need to stop ruining this thread for the people who enjoy viewing it including myself. There is no need to debate something that people are going to have different opinions about. Lets just call it quits and enjoy watching the construction progress.

Swede · #**1570** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 8:39 PM**

Dac's right. None of the endless 'Do Spires Count?' bickering here. This thread is about the Freedom Tower/1 WTC. So keep it on topic. If you wanna talk about spires, there's the Buildings & Architecture forum.

Now don't do it again.

Dalton · #**1571** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 8:59 PM**

I agree. It's senseless comparing the Freedom Tower to what will soon be the second tallest building in North America anyway. The Chicago Spire will have no spire or antenna and its roof will be a couple hundred feet taller than the Freedom Tower's spire. Case Closed.

aluminum · #**1572** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 10:29 PM**

What's the total development happening in downtown including the FT and other WTC buildings , ( in msf) ?

Daquan13 · #**1573** Posted **Aug 11, 2007, 10:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arriviste

Spires don't count, and everyone knows that. The only people who disagree with that are individuals who are insecure as to the height of their beloved building. A spire is ornamentation and serves no real purpose other than inflating the ego's of rabid boosters. It's fucking tall regardless. Why does it matter?

Be that as it may, this is what the officials want, this is how it's going to be built, and this is what the final decision is. End of story.

37TimPPG · #**1574** Posted **Aug 12, 2007, 1:50 AM**

I am just glad they are building this building regardless of what the final name will be. I can remember a time after that awful day in September when people were saying the skyscraper was through and that no buildings taller than 50 stories would be constructed.

I say we've come a long way

Dac150 · #**1575** Posted **Aug 12, 2007, 1:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daquan13

Be that as it may, this is what the officials want, this is how it's going to be built, and this is what the final decision is.

Dac150 · #**1576** Posted **Aug 12, 2007, 1:55 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by aluminum

What's the total development happening in downtown including the FT and other WTC buildings , ( in msf) ?

I thought I heard it was a little less than the original WTC, but from looking at the new complex I don't see how that is.

JMGarcia · #**1577** Posted **Aug 12, 2007, 3:00 AM**

Buildings have a height to the highest occupied floor, to the roof, to any architectural element on top (including spires) and to antennas. That's it. There's four heights. The case is closed. Now, back on topic before I have to start deleting all the silly boosterim.

Ghost · #**1578** Posted **Aug 12, 2007, 6:34 AM**

Pics from June (From Port Authority of NY and NJ)
June 2007 - Freedom Tower Foundations (See # 8)

Daquan13 · #**1579** Posted **Aug 12, 2007, 3:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMGarcia

Buildings have a height to the highest occupied floor, to the roof, to any architectural element on top (including spires) and to antennas. That's it. There's four heights. The case is closed. Now, back on topic before I have to start deleting all the silly boosterim.

I'll just be so damn glad to see the whole thing built, open for business and millions of people happy. It's far better than some of the designs that we might have gotten!

liat91 · #**1580** Posted **Aug 12, 2007, 4:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMGarcia

Buildings have a height to the highest occupied floor, to the roof, to any architectural element on top (including spires) and to antennas. That's it. There's four heights. The case is closed. Now, back on topic before I have to start deleting all the silly boosterim.

I wonder since whatever committee decided to start counting spires as a buildings official height, could they in essence change their minds and start counting buildings to their roof heights as the official height? And if that happened there would be alot of buildings which would fall off the tallest of the tall list. Is it possible the ruling of official height could be changed?