NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS - Page 589

Alliance · #**11761** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 2:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by LOOMingTOWER

Shouldn't the panes of glass on the edge be flush with the angle of the trim? Looks like a design flaw (or in any case, weird) where the joints fall at a random place in respect to the layer above.

The glass sits on top of the trim. Its not a design flaw.

The quality of the glass though....that most certainly is. What happened to the great mock-up glass we had?

OneWorldTradeCenter · #**11762** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 3:04 PM**

At the 62nd floor it will pass 7 WTC.

NYguy · #**11763** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 3:32 PM**

DSTS

NYguy · #**11764** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 3:36 PM**

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/re..._bails_wtc_scores_hsHEF9tRXHYXwN2MVQOAeN

If state bails, 1 WTC scores

By STEVE CUOZZO
January 4, 2011

Quote:

All indications are that the marketing team for 1 World Trade Center will have nearly 600,000 square feet more to offer prospective tenants -- a rare instance of what's usually bad news for a landlord being good news.

Sources familiar with the Port Authority's fast-rising tower said the likelihood of the state Offices of General Services going through with a long-discussed lease there are increasingly remote.

Insiders cited an "expectation" it won't happen. We'll go farther out on a limb and say it's as dead as the Giants' playoff hopes, which just fell to mathematically zero.

The OGS "lease" was announced three years ago, along with a slightly larger one for the federal General Services Administration. Neither deal has been completed, however.

Now, Condé Nast has a letter of intent for 1 million square feet in the 2.6 million square-foot tower -- which just passed the halfway point and makes an arresting sight, especially to anyone walking west on Fulton Street. Several financial tenants are also kicking the tires.

Too much space leased to government offices automatically cheapens a commercial building's image. The last thing "iconic" 1 WTC needs are government workers hogging more than one-third of its floors at subsidized rents higher than public entities should be paying, but still far below market.

The PA, its partner Douglas Durst, and the leasing agent, Cushman & Wakefield's Tara Stacom, all declined to comment. An e-mail to Gov. Andrew Cuomo's spokesman, Josh Vlasto, was not returned.

The federal lease is still on the table, sources said. And the OGS lease is not formally dead. But a new governor committed to saving the state from fiscal collapse is not likely to look kindly on expensively relocating an agency whose tasks include providing state employees with parking spaces.

The Condé Nast talks have changed the dynamics of leasing at 1 WTC. The OGS would have moved into floors at the bottom of the tower. But Condé now wants the floors -- meaning the bureaucrats would have to go higher, where the rent would be higher too.

wong21fr · #**11765** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 3:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

The glass sits on top of the trim. Its not a design flaw.

The quality of the glass though....that most certainly is. What happened to the great mock-up glass we had?

Take a picture from fifty feet away at eye level of the glass and you'll get your "great mock-up glass". It's the same glass, it's the distance from which it's photographed that is showing an apparent distortion.

sw5710 · #**11766** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 5:06 PM**

The trim has angles to it. It turns inward near the glass. But if you look at it from the same height it is level. Is the quality of the glass a design flaw? I see wavy reflections in every glass building in NY and every other city ive gone to!

meh_cd · #**11767** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 5:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alliance

The glass sits on top of the trim. Its not a design flaw.

The quality of the glass though....that most certainly is. What happened to the great mock-up glass we had?

The mock-up picture was taken relatively close up in the California sun at an angle that was nearly perpendicular to the glass. We have no other frame of reference for the mockup other than close objects reflect with little aberration, which you also find on the "real" glass.

Oops, someone kind of covered this already. The point still stands. I suspect that the building will look radically different depending on the season and the location of the sun in the sky.

Kevin Scott Koepke · #**11768** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 6:05 PM**

[img]

lower manhattan at dawn by kevin s koepke (back to college i go), on Flickr [img]

Lecom · #**11769** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneWorldTradeCenter

At the 62nd floor it will pass 7 WTC.

Given that most nearby buildings are pretty much exactly the same height at best, and the Downtown skyline level tops off around 700-800 feet for the most part, passing 7WTC would pretty much mean breaking above the Downtown plateau, something we haven't seen at the WTC site in almost exactly 10 years.

Lecom · #**11770** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 6:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Scott Koepke

[img]

lower manhattan at dawn by kevin s koepke (back to college i go), on Flickr [img]

The way the dark bulk of AT&T Long Lines Building looms to the right in the photo, I had to strain for a while to figure out why I'm seeing an obvious ghost of 130 Liberty, with the same shape, height, location and abandoned look.

Dac150 · #**11771** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 7:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/re..._bails_wtc_scores_hsHEF9tRXHYXwN2MVQOAeN

If state bails, 1 WTC scores

By STEVE CUOZZO
January 4, 2011

Glad to hear this; I think as much space within these buildings should be open to private sector businesses as possible. It also sounds like there is a great deal of interest from private sector businesses to lease space within this building. I give a lot of credit to Conde for leading this charge, and in a big way (1 msf).

LOOMingTOWER · #**11772** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 8:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Remy_Bork

Do you mean the seams between the glass panes not lining up with the seams in the trim? They might look like they're not lining up because the photo is taken at a low angle and the trim is angled inward, giving the illusion that the seams are not aligned. I think if you look closer, you will find that everything lines up nicely.

Sorry if I was unclear, I meant where the panes of glass are cut out with a diagonal to meet the trim. The way the joint of the edges of the panes meet the glass above them as circled here looks awkward.

Dac150 · #**11773** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 8:39 PM**

I noticed that as well when they were first installed and opted to just overlook it as it is a minor detail. Unless you go out of your way to notice it, it’s not something that jumps out at you, especially from the street.

Remy_Bork · #**11774** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 8:51 PM**

Oh okay, I don't like that very much either. It seems like they could have just placed another seam in there and it would have looked better.

2-TOWERS · #**11775** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 9:08 PM**

Same here I thought another seem could have been there and we will see the same thing as the shape continues Also I thought where the edge is they put a seem and I think it could have looked better a one piece

sask1982 · #**11776** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 9:17 PM**

^^ Ppl it's definitely because that angle is looking up at the building. If you were looking straight on they would line up perfectly i bet.

sterlippo1 · #**11777** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 9:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lecom

The way the dark bulk of AT&T Long Lines Building looms to the right in the photo, I had to strain for a while to figure out why I'm seeing an obvious ghost of 130 Liberty, with the same shape, height, location and abandoned look.

that's interesting.....AT&T LLB, aka, The Building With No Windows

rjb001 · #**11778** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 9:25 PM**

It actually looks like the gray part that is attached to the glass ends where the seam behind it is and then the glass starts above it. I would also rather it be a defining border though, instead of just going from the gray to blue.

uaarkson · #**11779** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 10:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sask1982

^^ Ppl it's definitely because that angle is looking up at the building. If you were looking straight on they would line up perfectly i bet.

Yep.

Get some three-dimensional cognizance, people.

philvia · #**11780** Posted **Jan 4, 2011, 10:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by sask1982

^^ Ppl it's definitely because that angle is looking up at the building. If you were looking straight on they would line up perfectly i bet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by uaarkson

Yep.

Get some three-dimensional cognizance, people.

the conversation is about the joints of the glass, not the big silver trim.

i agree with everyone else, it looks awkward. not only the two areas circled, but the glass above on the angle. i'm not sure why that pane of glass is in two pieces rather than one.