NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS - Page 138

[SP]Neo · #**2741** Posted **Apr 27, 2008, 8:58 PM**

Quote:

Could someone use those overhead shots and just draw an outline around the towers which are planned to be at the site? I've been to ground zero a couple of times and I find it really hard figuring out what is going where. The WTC towers must have been absolutely massive!

T1 is the freedom tower and T2 is WTC 2. (hope it's right...)

RockMont · #**2742** Posted **Apr 28, 2008, 3:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by O-Town Hockey

Could someone use those overhead shots and just draw an outline around the towers which are planned to be at the site? I've been to ground zero a couple of times and I find it really hard figuring out what is going where. The WTC towers must have been absolutely massive!

These new ones are going to be also.

Kamatzu · #**2743** Posted **Apr 28, 2008, 11:30 PM**

There are so many versions out now... Does anyone know if this is the final (or at least current) version of 1WTC's antenna?
(I believe that gallery belongs to someone here. It's got alot of great pictures in it, whoever you are!)

It's great to see sweet, sweet progress!

philvia · #**2744** Posted **Apr 29, 2008, 2:44 AM**

i think that's the latest version^^

ramvid01 · #**2745** Posted **May 1, 2008, 4:20 PM**

I am surprised no one has noticed this, but today they are doing a core pour of the southern core.

philvia · #**2746** Posted **May 1, 2008, 7:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ramvid01

I am surprised no one has noticed this, but today they are doing a core pour of the southern core.

i cant tell anything... what times?
EDIT: nvm i see it... hiding behind the crane! lol

ramvid01 · #**2747** Posted **May 2, 2008, 5:25 AM**

If you don't see the concrete truck that is always parked by Route 90, then that mean's it's pumping. But yea, I have had times were i couldn't decipher if it was behind the crane.

With the southern core poured, they can raise the formwork in the next 7 days and then finish working on the first full floor at the rebar.

chex · #**2748** Posted **May 2, 2008, 5:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingKrunch

3 overhead shots of the site (about one week old) posted by Tag_one on SSC:

there are still many empty floors on 7wtc...?
great pix btw...

theWatusi · #**2749** Posted **May 2, 2008, 7:41 PM**

looks like the core is about at street level

JDRCRASH · #**2750** Posted **May 2, 2008, 7:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by theWatusi

looks like the core is about at street level

Although I don't live there, I will say that by looking at it, its almost one floor above street level.

Realthang · #**2751** Posted **May 2, 2008, 9:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Although I don't live there, I will say that by looking at it, its almost one floor above street level.

Optical illusion... its one floor below street level (the southern core that is). They should be raising the forms one floor over the next 2 weeks on both of the cores (south to 1st basement level, north to 2nd basement level).

At the rate they complete these floors it'll still be another 2.5 months before they start on the lobby level.

Ghost · #**2752** Posted **May 3, 2008, 4:44 AM**

So am I the only one who thinks the former WTC was actually beautiful? But I think the new one rocks too.

Little update (earthcam):

Kamatzu · #**2753** Posted **May 4, 2008, 10:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost

So am I the only one who thinks the former WTC was actually beautiful? But I think the new one rocks too.

I absolutely agree with you. The towers, the plaza and its buildings, the concourse... It was all so brilliant, so unique. It was like an entire world spread out over 16 magnificent acres.

As much as the new buildings may be "artistic" looking, they all seem like they're fighting for attention. (Probably the result of multiple architects working on a project...) The original Twin Towers shared their spotlight, with the elegant plaza buildings still flowing seamlessly with them.

I can't see the World Trade Center being nearly as iconic, unique, or as much of a landmark as the old Trade Center. It all seems so spread out, too tall, and just unwelcoming.

I can't imagine there was anything like sitting on a bunch beneath two towering behemoths in a beautiful plaza. Certainly, it would seem, more interesting than 4 glass boxes fighting for the spotlight, lined up on a street.

I'm still excited for there to be something built, though.

philvia · #**2754** Posted **May 4, 2008, 10:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kamatzu

I absolutely agree with you. The towers, the plaza and its buildings, the concourse... It was all so brilliant, so unique. It was like an entire world spread out over 16 magnificent acres.

As much as the new buildings may be "artistic" looking, they all seem like they're fighting for attention. (Probably the result of multiple architects working on a project...) The original Twin Towers shared their spotlight, with the elegant plaza buildings still flowing seamlessly with them.

I can't see the World Trade Center being nearly as iconic, unique, or as much of a landmark as the old Trade Center. It all seems so spread out, too tall, and just unwelcoming.

I can't imagine there was anything like sitting on a bunch beneath two towering behemoths in a beautiful plaza. Certainly, it would seem, more interesting than 4 glass boxes fighting for the spotlight, lined up on a street.

I'm still excited for there to be something built, though.

you're envious of looking up at 2 towering behemoths but you rag on 4 towering behemoths - "too tall" "too spread out"
i really dont understand where you're coming from. street grid is too spread out? plaza isn't?
elaborate??

Kamatzu · #**2755** Posted **May 5, 2008, 1:35 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by philvia

you're envious of looking up at 2 towering behemoths but you rag on 4 towering behemoths - "too tall" "too spread out"
i really dont understand where you're coming from. street grid is too spread out? plaza isn't?
elaborate??

I'm not terribly against the new plan, I'm grateful for something being built and I'll have no problem enjoying visiting it once it's completed. It just seems to me that the new design is more "buildings" and less "community", if that makes sense.

I'll explain that: With the original WTC, it had an open and beautiful plaza. A place to hang out and truly appreciate your surroundings. To have lunch, to meet friends. A place to look up and say, "Wow!"

With the new WTC, it's several buildings lined up on a street with nowhere to just sit back and enjoy it. The memorial park is as close as that gets, but it's still across a street from any of the towers.

Maybe I'm too picky. =P It just seems to me that we've traded perfection for average.

(I really liked the Twin Towers II idea of putting the remaining tridents from the old WTC on the old footprints, and building new 111-story twin towers beside the old footprints. Talk about iconic! I suppose that could never have happened though, as it would be an identical security threat...)

Basically, I just see the new complex as too spaced out, with too much street in between. It all depends on how the memorial turns out, I suppose. I have hope that it will be just as much the relaxing place that the old plaza surely was. What good is a national landmark you have to view from a sidewalk?

Dac150 · #**2756** Posted **May 5, 2008, 1:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kamatzu

It just seems to me that the new design is more "buildings" and less "community", if that makes sense.

You hit the nail right on the head. My thought exactly. Well said.

bryson662001 · #**2757** Posted **May 5, 2008, 1:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost

So am I the only one who thinks the former WTC was actually beautiful? But I think the new one rocks too.

Now that they are gone, and largely because of how they went, many people idolize them and pine over their loss. At the time they were built they were considered banal and mediocre at best, the ultimate warehouses for office workers set on an empty, windswept "plaza" that served no purpose. Paul Goldberger called them "not worthy of a bank headquarters in Omaha".

gramsjdg · #**2758** Posted **May 5, 2008, 5:17 PM**

I think the current Freedom tower design rocks, for the same reason Trumps proposed NY stock exchange tower did- its a powerful design. The test facade/windows looked great too.
There are only two problems with this tower that I see, and they can both be remedied:

1) The butt-ugly "structural top" (...yeah right) ring of microwave dishes in place of the original tiara.

2) The tower is too short (roof, not spire) The roof should be at least 1500ft, or 165 feet taller than the current plan. That shouldn't be too hard to incorporate into the design.

37TimPPG · #**2759** Posted **May 5, 2008, 7:34 PM**

Wasn't the plan for FT to be "above ground sometime during Quarter 1 of 2008?" Has Mr. Silverstein been given control over the whole site from Port Authority yet? And if so is the FT Construction on schedule or slightly behind?

Thanks for any insight you can provide to my questions!

aaron38 · #**2760** Posted **May 5, 2008, 9:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kamatzu

What good is a national landmark you have to view from a sidewalk?

There's no adjoining plaza you can view the ESB or Chrysler building from, and there's no need for one.
You view them from the sidewalk, because that's what a city is. Buildings sit on streets so that people can easily get to them.