HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive


    One World Trade Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #23021  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 1:54 AM
CarlosV's Avatar
CarlosV CarlosV is offline
Bionic Boogie
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 3,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 View Post
Won't be much different from the one on the North Tower's roof.



Also most of the people that are saying that are either people that live in Chicago and are happy to have their Willis Tower for another day, or they are fearful that it would be attacked, but then again any building can be attacked. Those people are just ignorant because the World Trade Center was attacked once. See how sometimes I wished 9/11/2001 never happened?


^^^
attacked twice 1993, 2001
__________________
I Love NY
September 11, 2001 Never Forget
Save water, shower with a friend!
SSP member since 2003
Please do not use any of my photos or videos without my permission. thanks
     
     
  #23022  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 2:06 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,107
Agreed. The Empire State Building was built during the Great Depression with absolutely no problems. What is going on with the World Trade Center?
     
     
  #23023  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 2:07 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlosV View Post
^^^
attacked twice 1993, 2001
Don't worry I highly doubt a 9/11 like even will ever happen again.
     
     
  #23024  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 2:25 AM
jthornton17 jthornton17 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 127
I just have to ask this question to all my friends in New York. With all the powerful people in NYC, why doesn't anybody stand up here and do what's right? I mean, is there just nothing that can be done? How can a site that's so important, be so disgraced? Is this final or will we atleast see something else go up, other than this?
     
     
  #23025  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 2:36 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 52,392
^ Because there's a difference in being a disgrace, and being ugly. The redesign won't be attractive, but no one can argue that it is a disgrace. It's an office building.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbana View Post
I can't imagine the rendering posted here is final. I am sure SOM is working on something to make it more architecturally pleasing as we speak. I didn't see any indication that the rendering were even official, it may just be something a New York Times worker threw together
Well, it's nice to dream, but more important to read.

Quote:
Asked whether architects could find a compromise design, Mr. Durst demurred. The scaled-down top, he said, "is going to be mounted on the building over the summer. There's no way to do anything at this point."

It's what will be built unless someone steps in to change minds. That would have to be the Port Authority, but it was the PA who approved the change. It would be left to their bosses (the governors) to overrule.


A closer look from the Wall Street Journal...









That's obviously an antenna as opposed to a spire.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
     
     
  #23026  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 2:51 AM
yankeesfan1000 yankeesfan1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: 10014
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbana View Post
I can't imagine the rendering posted here is final. I am sure SOM is working on something to make it more architecturally pleasing as we speak. I didn't see any indication that the rendering were even official, it may just be something a New York Times worker threw together
I'm clinging on to the idea that SOM has something up their sleeve, because what has been pictured is hideous. No way around it. This is encouraging I suppose:

"...David Childs, the building's lead designer, said in a statement. "We stand ready to work with the Port on an alternate design."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...619775032.html
     
     
  #23027  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 2:56 AM
MikelAS MikelAS is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 8
Is that the new communications ring? That looks HIDEOUS! We all need to write to someone (governor?) to express our displeasure with this atrocity.
     
     
  #23028  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:10 AM
marshall marshall is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 291
Whoa, what the hell??! They are changing the communications ring toon? When the hell did this happen? I thought only the spire would be affected..That rendering of the revised antenna/ring is UGLY as HELL! Why would they strip the parapet down too? I sure hope SOM or the PA or somebody who cares about design on this tower will stop being a wimp and speak up, like ASAP! Leave the damn tower alone, you idiotic corporate suits! Did you go to design school? I think not. They should just build the roof itself higher, to 1776 feet, and then if they want a basic antenna, so be it..But ONLY if they build the roof higher!
     
     
  #23029  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:12 AM
NYC GUY's Avatar
NYC GUY NYC GUY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 575
I just have a question on how the Bank of America tower's spire is a spire. Since the Bank of America towers spire is open not enclosed why is 1WTC's antenna not considered a spire?
     
     
  #23030  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:17 AM
gramsjdg's Avatar
gramsjdg gramsjdg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 756
They've taken the hideous monstrosity that is Four Times Square's antenna, engorged it, and placed it on what will be the most prominent building in the city. Add to that a now naked communications ring.

The building would look better with nothing on top as opposed to this. It overwhelmingly clashes with the architectural style of the building. I can't believe that the powers that be in NYC will allow this to happen.
     
     
  #23031  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:19 AM
Don098 Don098 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Rosslyn, VA
Posts: 1,179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbana View Post
I can't imagine the rendering posted here is final. I am sure SOM is working on something to make it more architecturally pleasing as we speak. I didn't see any indication that the rendering were even official, it may just be something a New York Times worker threw together
That's extraordinarily hopeful and pretty ridiculous. That's a professional render, and it hasn't been photoshopped from a previous one. If Durst is calling the new design "not the end of the world" and downplaying its significance, what could possibly make you think that they care about aesthetics? They're engineers, not architects, and blaming the architects for not accounting for maintenance is a typical engineer-architectural culture war.
     
     
  #23032  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:22 AM
gramsjdg's Avatar
gramsjdg gramsjdg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYC GUY View Post
I just have a question on how the Bank of America tower's spire is a spire. Since the Bank of America towers spire is open not enclosed why is 1WTC's antenna not considered a spire?
I'm going to hazard a guess that there is no communications equipment on it, so its function is purely aesthetic. Personally, I don't think Spires or antennas should count in the final height of any building. Now if there is an obs deck in it, that might be different. But I don't think safety standards would allow for something to hold people if it is not structural...
     
     
  #23033  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:23 AM
sw5710 sw5710 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,519
Does David Childs still need to talk with the port about options or is what Durst said the final verdict. They now all agree?

Last edited by sw5710; May 10, 2012 at 3:41 AM.
     
     
  #23034  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:27 AM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,107
That's it. Tell Durst to drop dead.
     
     
  #23035  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:31 AM
marshall marshall is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 291
Lets HOPE this is not set in stone yet! If this awful alteration to the design is decided upon, then I have a great idea....do away with an antenna completely, and put a rooftop observation deck on top, like on the old South Tower! Would solve the constant quarreling about the spire/antenna, and give many visitors what they want...the chance to take in the amazing views from the roof like in the old days! Come on Durst, give us SOMETHING to look forward to!
     
     
  #23036  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:40 AM
meh_cd meh_cd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 571
At least it is painted white in the "newest" render that NY Guy posted. Christ what an ugly mess.

I can't tell if the communications ring in that render is what it will look like permanently, or if it is just an example of an "empty" version of the ring without any broadcast dishes installed.
     
     
  #23037  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 3:48 AM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
Don't know quite what to think right now......

Perhaps if the radome would be as difficult to maintain overall has Mr. Durst tried to justify, this could be seen by some perhaps not as much a matter of value engineering as simply being realistic....especially if the overall WTC completion timeline is expected to be fulfilled.

TBH, I was never 100% on board with the whole idea. The somewhat bloated shell IMO created a visual discontinuity with the geometry of the building.
And the decision to change the telecom ring to a circular design from the polygonal one before it more or less committed the same insult...maybe more blatantly.

If the above sketches show us what we in fact wind up getting, perhaps they'll live up to the tried and true principle that renderings are generally not completely faithful to the actual finished product.

Stay tuned(?).........I have a slight feeling that we haven't heard the final verdict.

Edit: I *do* wonder if this latest trip-up will spur Bloomberg to throw his hat into the debate. Again, I hear too much hot air being released from too many official big mouths to make sense of what's really happening. There's no way of telling right now who has the last word...at least from my POV.

Edit 2: The more I look at what I originally wrote here, the more I think it is a dangerous thing to give the benefit of the doubt to any public official who thinks he can just trot out lame excuses and expect everyone beneath him to fall for it hook, line and sinker. End of Editing.

Last edited by JayPro; May 10, 2012 at 5:30 AM. Reason: expansion
     
     
  #23038  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 4:21 AM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
After reading others' comments and a bit of thought on the issue:

Indeed, why didn't Durst just come out and say *much* earlier in the process that in his opinion, the cladded spire/antenna wouldn't be practical for reasons A, B and C? This literally wicked curveball seems to be courtesy of a corrupt and/or inept PA. Durst has proven himself a stooge for them with his comments. It's BS artistry by proxy; and to do so at such an important juncture in the process is suspicious at best...but equally predictable.
     
     
  #23039  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 4:23 AM
599GTO 599GTO is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 878
NYC's new landmark looks like crap. Really, that antenna looks nasty as hell. The posters telling us to get over it are even more shameful. London or Paris would never compromise the design of a new highly touted landmark. Well, they have style after all. But in typical NYC, everything must be trash and watered down to maximize every cent of profit, aesthetics be damned. I absolutely hate the developers in this city. Tacky, cheap, lacking an once of civic pride. And that cheap greedy pig bastard Durst has the nerve to lie and blame the redesign on "difficult maintenance"?!

And yes, I hope the 1,776 height designation is revoked immediately. It's 1,373 ft which is so pitiful on the global stage. No longer even the tallest building in the USA! You would think a site like the WTC Complex deserves much more. Such a shame, I was just getting warmed up to the slightly banal design of 1 WTC and the only thing I was really excited for is the spire. Now it's gone!

10 years later: 1 WTC. Blotched. 2 WTC. Nonexistent. 3 WTC. Non existent (and the design of course was shortened, watered down in the process). Tower four, the shortest and most banal of the complex of course is springing up, untouched. NYC.

Last edited by 599GTO; May 10, 2012 at 4:49 AM.
     
     
  #23040  
Old Posted May 10, 2012, 4:33 AM
Otie's Avatar
Otie Otie is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
 

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Completed Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:13 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.