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

[weidncol]

Guys, let's just get back on topic please. This is not a thread dedicated toward your opinion of the tower, it's dedicated to the construction of it. Thank you.

[chris123678]

Originally Posted by weidncol

Guys, let's just get back on topic please. This is not a thread dedicated toward your opinion of the tower, it's dedicated to the construction of it. Thank you.

Are you being for real right now?
I'm more than sure that this thread welcomes opinions regarding the tower......

[WorldTradeCenter]

I have to say, even though the Trade Center's been blocked for years by political and financial gridlock they've really come along recently and damn do these buildings look good. Can't wait for Tower 3 to start rising!

[ArtDecoRevival]

I'm not sure why some people are getting so worked up over Banksy's comments. He's a great artist, but his opinion on architecture doesn't carry any more weight than anyone else's (especially since to the best of my knowledge, he's never trained as one). And Banksy would hate it with or without the spire randome too, for people trying to make that connection. That's beside the point for him. His criticism is focused more on the so-called "bunker mentality" of it, which to me is kinda silly when you compare the appearance of the former twin towers with the current One WTC. While less secure, the old twin towers definitely seemed on the surface to be more utilitarian, vanilla and clinical than the new tower. Their attachment comes mostly through their absence. The new tower is an improvement on the downtown skyline, and while not the soaring, groundbreaking monument to New York's spirit it should have been, it's not a disaster either.

Like someone else said, the true bottoming-out for NYC architecture was the 70's where, besides the twin-towers, the only decent building to come out of that decade was the Citigroup Center (and that almost collapsed due to a shoddy structural design).

In contrast, in the 00's and 10's we have gotten (or we will get) Beekman tower, 4 World Trade Center, Bank of America tower, NY Times tower and One57. A lot of cool new towers that are redefining the skyline. So while I love Banksy's guerrilla art, I'm not sure how well informed his editorial opinions are.

[antinimby]

^ The Citi tower was never in danger of collapsing. It was vulnerable to earthquakes, hurricanes, etc. if not corrected.

[drumz0rz]

Originally Posted by ArtDecoRevival

His criticism is focused more on the so-called "bunker mentality" of it, which to me is kinda silly when you compare the appearance of the former twin towers with the current One WTC. While less secure, the old twin towers definitely seemed on the surface to be more utilitarian, vanilla and clinical than the new tower. Their attachment comes mostly through their absence.

I disagree that the attachment to the original WTC comes from their absence. They were by far my favorite buildings while they stood. I was only a child but I was pretty obsessed with them. Yes they were 60s modern grey boxes, but they were revolutionary in a multitude of ways and beyond that, they stood as a defiant contrast against the slender bank towers which dominated downtown. They were the first true "super tall" buildings, and there was 2 of them. Everyone has differing opinions but I consider the loss on 9/11 one of the worst architectural losses in history. For all it's gritty grandeur, I don't think the old Penn Station held a candle to the WTC complex.

Originally Posted by ArtDecoRevival

Citigroup Center (and that almost collapsed due to a shoddy structural design).

The Citigroup Center never 'almost collapsed' nor was the issue structural design. The fabricators decided to cut corners and use bolted joints instead of welded joints as the engineer had specified. No one bothered to recalculate the loads after the switch. After the building was constructed, the engineer found out about the switch, locked himself in a room for a week, and figured out that if 70mph winds hit the building at a 45-degree angle, the bolts would sheer and the tower could fall over killing thousands. They secretly welded thick steel plates over every single bolted joint in the building to reinforce it. If welded joints had been used in construction, there would have been no issue despite the recalculated loads.

[Traynor]

Originally Posted by ArtDecoRevival

I'm not sure why some people are getting so worked up over Banksy's comments. He's a great artist, but his opinion on architecture doesn't carry any more weight than anyone else's (especially since to the best of my knowledge, he's never trained as one)...

But that's the point... The average person's opinion DOES matter, because they are the ones looking at this thing and living with it for the rest of their lives. What if 75% of the population agreed with Banksy? Would that not count because they are not ALL professional architects?

Are you advocating that only an Architect's opinion matters? Then that renders moot this whole thread, nay, this whole website. From now on Movie Critics get to decide what movies get made and we get to watch. The politicians get to decide what is good for society without input from their constituents.

You are forsaking the populace's view in matters from here on out. "The People" have no say. So much for the Constitution of the United States "We The People..."

I may be taking your argument to the extreme (reductio ad absurdum) but if you relinquish your voice in the workings of society it is s a slippery slope that ends in Tyranny.

[NYC2013]

Speaking of Banksy's comments, I bet they said the same thing about the twin towers.

[kpdrummer82]

A whole new level of idiocracy just came about this forum in the past few comments.

[Traynor]

Originally Posted by kpdrummer82

A whole new level of idiocracy just came about this forum in the past few comments.

Yes, and that new level includes making up words that sound real but are not.

[rjb001]

I hear what Traynor is saying about the need for the opinion of the majority to be recognized. I think that while most people usually look at an object and either "love it" or "hate it", the more thoughtful approaches to considering something are more worthy of attention. Banksy's comments, therefore, seem to miss the point of the distribution of usage in the complex, which implies he's just using the typical perspective of what is visible a mile away and not taking the time to study the complex carefully enough. It's true that corners were cut such as the spire and radome, but while the complex as a whole will be representative of replacing what was lost, his comments, to me at least, would fall under the typical quick glance type of judgement that doesn't tale into account the fact that the memorial is first and foremost exactly what it is called, and One World Trade Center is first and foremost an office building built off of the original hallowed soil where the towers stood. The name change of a couple years ago is proof that the PA recognizes that distinction. While the design of each building on the complex incorporates moments of reverence, it is the purpose of the memorial and museum to be fully reminiscent of what happened.

[ArtDecoRevival]

Originally Posted by antinimby

^ The Citi tower was never in danger of collapsing. It was vulnerable to earthquakes, hurricanes, etc. if not corrected.

Right. Vulnerable to hurricanes. If Hurricane Sandy had hit when Citigroup was in such a precarious state it would have collapsed. It's dumb luck it came in 2012 and not 1977. This isn't revolutionary thinking on my part. I'm mostly repeating what a thousand other people have already said about Citigroup.

Originally Posted by Traynor

But that's the point... The average person's opinion DOES matter, because they are the ones looking at this thing and living with it for the rest of their lives. What if 75% of the population agreed with Banksy? Would that not count because they are not ALL professional architects?

You're missing my point (and at the same time strangely reinforcing it). The average person's opinion counts as much as the next average person's opinion, not moreso which is what people were doing with banksy's opinion (in essence elevating it above the average person's).

Banksy's opinion about One WTC matters as much as your opinion or my opinion should. Not more, not less, which was always my point. I believe that addresses the rest of your post, since you have no points to make after that, just ridiculous hyperbole about tyranny and lots of other over-the-top rhetoric in the place of any additional and meaningful points.

[ArtDecoRevival]

Originally Posted by drumz0rz

I disagree that the attachment to the original WTC comes from their absence. They were by far my favorite buildings while they stood. I was only a child but I was pretty obsessed with them. Yes they were 60s modern grey boxes, but they were revolutionary in a multitude of ways and beyond that, they stood as a defiant contrast against the slender bank towers which dominated downtown.

I respect your opinion. I just don't agree with it. The original Twin Towers hold a special place in my heart too. But I wonder how much of that is clouded by the manner in which they left us. I think in a few decades the new One WTC will grow on people the same way the initially much-maligned Twin Towers did. Because if this forum existed in the early 70's, I think we would all be complaining about them too.

They were the first true "super tall" buildings, and there was 2 of them. Everyone has differing opinions but I consider the loss on 9/11 one of the worst architectural losses in history. For all it's gritty grandeur, I don't think the old Penn Station held a candle to the WTC complex.

Like I said, I respect your opinion and I won't belittle you for thinking differently. I'm not sure the two are even comparable though. They made impacts for different reasons. Penn was a gem in the rough with a focus on interior and underground grandeur and the Twins dominated a skyline. Perhaps a better comparison would be the Singer building, which was also a huge loss.

The Citigroup Center never 'almost collapsed' nor was the issue structural design. The fabricators decided to cut corners and use bolted joints instead of welded joints as the engineer had specified. No one bothered to recalculate the loads after the switch. After the building was constructed, the engineer found out about the switch, locked himself in a room for a week, and figured out that if 70mph winds hit the building at a 45-degree angle, the bolts would sheer and the tower could fall over killing thousands. They secretly welded thick steel plates over every single bolted joint in the building to reinforce it. If welded joints had been used in construction, there would have been no issue despite the recalculated loads.

If hurricane force winds, like Sandy, had impacted Citigroup from a certain angle during this time it would have collapsed. Guess what, Sandy happened. So, since conditions exist in New York for that kind of event, we're talking about lucky timing. To me if there's a 5% chance of a tower having a catastrophic collapse that would have killed thousands, that's pretty damn huge.

As for design, weren't some of these issues caused by their decision not to demolish the church, but build around it and support the structure with pillars? I'm pretty sure I read that.

[Hudson11]

they tested the spire lights and beacon again tonight.





it looks really cool with the mist

[Xoltage]

[StrongIsland]

Are they going to light the rings as well? I hope so it looks a bit odd without it...

[chris08876]

I wonder if come Christmas time they will light the spire to resemble this:


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-rHY3LRLiG3...candy-cane.png

[Traynor]

Originally Posted by ArtDecoRevival

You're missing my point (and at the same time strangely reinforcing it). The average person's opinion counts as much as the next average person's opinion, not moreso which is what people were doing with banksy's opinion (in essence elevating it above the average person's).

Banksy's opinion about One WTC matters as much as your opinion or my opinion should. Not more, not less, which was always my point. I believe that addresses the rest of your post, since you have no points to make after that, just ridiculous hyperbole about tyranny and lots of other over-the-top rhetoric in the place of any additional and meaningful points.

Again... Close but not quite...

Banksy's opinion counts because he brought the conversation to light. His opinion does not count more. It is only of note because he is the one who most recently brought it to the forefront and has stirred the average person to get off their ass and join the conversation.

I never said his opinion mattered more than another persons. That was some other poster who was upset that Banksy was getting attention. In all of my posts I have said WHAT was being said was important, not WHO was saying it.

On a side note: You obviously don't know what Reductio Ad Absurdum means. I was clearly admitting that I was taking the issue to an extreme to make my point. Only children need to belittle their debating partner in order to feel superior. I will address you as one from now on.

[gramsjdg]

Originally Posted by StrongIsland

Are they going to light the rings as well? I hope so it looks a bit odd without it...

They should, but I don't believe there are any plans to do so.

[mat97]

the windows washing is now working on the west side of building finally