PDA

View Full Version : New WTC design. Thank God!!


zulu69
June 30th, 2005, 05:11 AM
New Design to Be Unveiled Today for Freedom Tower



By DAVID W. DUNLAP and GLENN COLLINS
Published: June 29, 2005

With one eye on terrorism and another on what has already been lost to terrorists, New York officials will unveil a redesigned Freedom Tower today whose height and proportion, centered antenna and cut-away corners, tall lobbies and pinstripe facade would evoke - both deliberately and coincidentally - the sky-piercing twins it is meant to replace.

The new design for the 82-story signature building at the World Trade Center site in Lower Manhattan calls for an almost impermeable and impregnable 200-foot concrete and steel pedestal, clad in ornamental metalwork and set at least 65 feet away from Route 9A, the heavily trafficked state highway that runs along the west edge of ground zero.

This enormous pedestal would overlook the Sept. 11 memorial. Above it would be a tapering tower of glass - some panes laminated and several layers thick - with 69 office floors topped by a restaurant, indoor and outdoor observation decks and an antenna within a trellis-like sculpture that would bring the structure's total height to 1,776 feet.

That symbolic height is one of the few elements left intact from the building first envisioned in 2002 by the architect Daniel Libeskind, the site's master planner, and designed in 2003 by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. Gone are the asymmetrical spire, torqued form, parallelogram floor plan, energy-producing windmills, suspension cables, lacy facade and open-air arcade.

The hurried redesign has pushed the completion date of the Freedom Tower back by one or two years, to 2010. It is unclear what effect it will have on the budget, which has been estimated at $1.5 billion, since the extra security measures will add to costs, while the overall simplification of the structure may cut down on time and money.

The latest transformation was driven by the New York Police Department's insistence that the building be more resistant to attack, particularly from car and truck bombs. It was also intended to preserve as much as possible of the foundation design that had already consumed months of work. This includes threading the tower's underground columns among the looping outbound tracks of the World Trade Center PATH station.

Given those requirements, and the goal of maintaining the building's overall 2.6 million square foot floor area, the redesigned Freedom Tower almost naturally assumed some dimensions of the original twin towers, said David M. Childs of Skidmore, the building's chief architect.

Though uncanny, it was not an unwelcome turn, he said. In fact, adjustments and refinements have been made to underscore the similarities. For example, the altitude of the floor of the rooftop observation deck would be set at 1,362 feet, the height of 2 World Trade Center. The rooftop parapet would reach 1,368 feet, the height of No. 1.

Setting aside his publicly expressed enthusiasm for the first Freedom Tower, Mr. Childs said of the new one, "It is a rare moment when new is better." He added: "I feel better about this than the original. The building is simpler, architecturally. It is unique, yet it subtly recalls, in the sky, the tragedy that has happened here."

The new design for Freedom Tower is scheduled to be presented formally later today at a news conference attended by Gov. George E. Pakati and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, as well as Mr. Childs, Mr. Libeskind and Larry A. Silverstein, the building's developer.

At its base, the Freedom Tower would be 200 feet square, like the twin towers and the two voids that are to be created in their place as part of the Sept. 11 memorial. Mr. Childs said the new building's "most important role is being a marker in the sky of the memorial."

But he did not back away from the notion that it is still intended to be a statement of defiance, strength and resolve in the face of terrorism. Mr. Childs referred to the Freedom Tower several times as a "victory column" and invoked Cleopatra's Needle in Central Park and Nelson's Column at Trafalgar Square in London as precedents.

Like 7 World Trade Center, now under construction across Vesey Street, the Freedom Tower would essentially be two buildings in one: a utility-filled concrete pedestal topped by an office tower with a glass curtain wall.

The first 30 feet of the 200-foot-tall pedestal would be completely solid, with no windows. The next 50 feet would have some openings, allowing light to be brought into the lobby from above. The rest of the base would be occupied by mechanical equipment.

Stainless steel, titanium or aluminum panels would mask the concrete wall at the Freedom Tower, Mr. Childs said, much as a stainless-steel screen by James Carpenter Design Associates covers the base of 7 World Trade Center.

Office tenants would enter the building from the north or south, through lobbies on Fulton and Vesey Streets. Visitors headed to the observation decks would arrive across a plaza on the west side of the building. Diners would approach from a plaza on the east.

Almost four acres of open space would surround the Freedom Tower. It would share the block with the performing arts center being designed by Frank Gehry.

The main shaft of the Freedom Tower would begin as a 200-by-200-foot square. As it rose, the corners would be cut away, creating an octagonal floor plan through the middle of the building. ("And eight corner offices," Mr. Childs noted.) Toward the top, the plan would assume a square shape again, 140 by 140 feet.

Depending on the viewer's perspective, the structure might appear to be as rectangular as the original twin towers. Seen from an oblique angle, however, it would appear to slope like an obelisk. Each of the eight planes in its main facade would be an elongated isosceles triangle that would catch and reflect the light from a different angle.

The only externally visible separation between the window bays would be vertical stainless-steel elements known as mullions. The horizontal floor separations would not be expressed on the facade. This pinstripe effect might also recall the trade center to some.

The unusual shape will "confuse the wind," Mr. Childs said, making the building more structurally sound than if it had been a "large square sail" catching the wind at the top. The tapering corners yield ultimately to a narrower square at the top, 140 feet on each side, which will be the base for the spire and the antenna system.

Mr. Childs emphasized that the 408-foot spire and its setting have yet to be fully designed. But it has been decided that the spire will bring the tower's over-all height to 1,776 feet, the symbolically patriotic height proposed by Mr. Libeskind and insisted upon by Governor Pataki. The spire and its cabled supports will be designed to be "a functional piece of sculpture, a piece of civic art of an unusual scale," Mr. Childs said.

The architects are working on a distinctive, silver-or-white structural wrap for the spire, that would enclose the television antenna elements with fiberglass or carbon, substances that would not interfere with emanating radio waves. Currently, a tusk-shaped spire is being envisioned.

The spire is to be braced with guy wires - also woven from fiberglass or carbon - that would be anchored to a circular crown atop the observatory. The entire structure will be lit from within and programmed with shifting patterns of lights, or even a single heavenward beam.

To Mr. Libeskind, the circular new cable-anchor structure bears similarity to the base of the flame of the Statue of Liberty; others have likened its shape to that of the summit of the Empire State Building.

The architects struggled to unveil the redesigned building only seven weeks after Governor Pataki announced - during a luncheon speech to the Association for a Better New York on May 12 - that the tower would have to be reconfigured, and fortified, to respond to security concerns raised by the New York Police Department.

Mr. Childs said that the tower would meet or exceed the recent building-safety design recommendations announced by a federal panel, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, earlier this month, after an analysis of the factors that caused the collapse of the twin towers in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Elevators, sprinkler systems and electrical conduits in the new structure will all be protected in a central core of 2-foot-thick concrete. And an extra stairway will be provided for rescue workers to enter the building even while tenants are leaving.

But the chief Freedom Tower design change, driving other architectural considerations, was to harden the base of the tower against vehicle-borne explosives, since cars and trucks have proven to be an effective way of delivering large explosive charges. The new building is to have a solid concrete core with walls more than 2 feet thick, and a robustly redundant braced steel frame.

The original standoff, or setback from West Street, was 25 feet, which the police said was inadequate to protect the building from a large truck bomb. The new tower has been moved 65 feet back from West Street at its Fulton Street side, and 125 feet from the highway at Vesey Street.

The 80-foot-high lobby of the new Freedom Tower will be comparable to the World Trade Center lobbies' 79-foot height. The south lobby, facing Fulton Street, will be the main office entrance, since it faces the memorial. It will present a glass, cable-tensioned wall to visitors - similar to the lobby facade of Mr. Childs's Time Warner Center - but confront them with a solid concrete security wall (covered with art) that would have to be circumnavigated by pedestrians to obtain access to the building.

The tower's base would be clad with an intricate pattern of interlocking reflective sheets of titanium, steel or aluminum, "designed to catch and reflect the light," Mr. Childs said. "As the sun moves about it, each facade will be illuminated."

"I hope this can answer those who were worried that this would be a foreboding building," Mr. Childs said of the new security constraints.

Above the base, the glass sheathing of the building will be hardened against explosive overpressures with tempered, multilaminated sheets of blast-resistant plastic, especially on the west facade facing West Street-Route 9A. Thanks to the use of low-iron, water-white glass - panes that minimize the conventional greenish hue - the sections of laminate will be just as transparent as glass on the other facades, "so the building will look the same on all four sides - a continuous glass top," Mr. Childs said.

In the end, Mr. Childs said, the new building represents "the positive element of what was lost," he said. "It takes on its most important role as being the pylon marker for the memorial."

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=175993&page=14&pp=20

http://img295.echo.cx/img295/8264/dfdfgfgfbgb3by.jpg

http://img219.echo.cx/img219/7306/hfhjfjh3vc.jpg

What do you guys think?

Perth4life14
June 30th, 2005, 05:17 AM
i like, looks like the old crossed with a new design, btw i think there should be two otherwise it makes it look like NY is based around one tower :P

rondeez
June 30th, 2005, 05:41 AM
No matter what replaces it, NYC will never be the same without the twins :(

uewepuep
June 30th, 2005, 07:01 AM
Yes, lets put a fortress at the base "Freedom Tower" so we have a street level its a monument to just how scared america really is. How horrible will it feel to enter a giant block of concrete? Its like a giant neon sign with "Attack here, I dare you" written on it.
http://img230.echo.cx/img230/9477/modelviewsouthwest8x105rgbwmar.jpg

Looks good on the skyline but I far prefered libskinds and I didn't really like that.

Barsby
June 30th, 2005, 07:53 AM
yeh its laughable calling it freedom tower, when its surrounded by steel bars and thickened concrete and steel sheeting all over the place, far from freedom tower. NY say they are getting over the attacks on Sept.11 but i think they are far from it.

CULWULLA
June 30th, 2005, 07:56 AM
wow, kinda like 2 wtc twisted into 1. same height as original and spire 1776ft. i like it!
just build it!!
hey did harryS design the bottom section? lol

http://www.ct4host.lunarpages.com/bne/rip914.jpg

OSJ
June 30th, 2005, 08:27 AM
That's rubbish!! What's the point in having a competition if that's what happens to a design. It's nothing like the original design, which was much more distinctive - That looks like a bunch of completely ordinary office buildings with a few corners cut. The centred spire looks ridiculous and doesn't relate to the building below at all.

Still, better than Trump's so called design.

Malt
June 30th, 2005, 09:00 AM
This one is far better.
Im not all that pleased about the spire (which will no doubt be used to jack up the height stats as usual) but its 1000 times better than the old one (especially being that its got floors to the top instead of a useless cage)

Citystyle
June 30th, 2005, 09:28 AM
Add another 20 floors and build a twin next to it and i would buy it.

plotstyle
June 30th, 2005, 09:53 AM
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....

zulu69
June 30th, 2005, 09:55 AM
Well the spire shown isn't the final design for the spire. That has been stated.

Ipggi
June 30th, 2005, 11:59 AM
What a boring, conventional, conservative design this is ... Least the old one was grand and distinctive, just like the original twins. This new tower could be anything you would see in Shanghai, Dubai, or any of the current skyscraper growth cities. And within 10 years of it's completition I doubt it will be even considered a skyscraper landmark on an international scale.

You don't go anywhere by not taking any risks in design and architecture ..

skiesthelimit
June 30th, 2005, 12:03 PM
Disappointing. Out of ALL the designs they chose this one as the best? To replace the twin towers? Geez.

I'm not saying it's a bad design, but really, the old WTC site deserves a masterpiece, and this is certainly not one. I could've drawn up a tower like this in 5 minutes, it really lacks imagination and flair. :(

James Saito
July 1st, 2005, 05:45 AM
Yeah, it's not good enough to be a landmark.

Grantus
July 1st, 2005, 12:38 PM
Disappointing. Out of ALL the designs they chose this one as the best? To replace the twin towers? Geez.

I'm not saying it's a bad design, but really, the old WTC site deserves a masterpiece, and this is certainly not one. I could've drawn up a tower like this in 5 minutes, it really lacks imagination and flair. :(

How do the old WTC designs deserve a masterpiece award or whatever when they are tall big grey boxes?

Muse
July 1st, 2005, 01:02 PM
The newest design looks somewhat of a compromise between one of the blocky twins and that of the previous Freedom Tower. http://www.sayhey.co.uk/invboard/html/emoticons/scratchchin.gif

malec
July 1st, 2005, 09:19 PM
The newest design looks somewhat of a compromise between one of the blocky twins and that of the previous Freedom Tower. http://www.sayhey.co.uk/invboard/html/emoticons/scratchchin.gif
Exactly and that's what I like about it.

SkyHigh529
July 2nd, 2005, 02:59 AM
I like it, I think it is sophisticated, with a hint of flash, but not too much. Kinda reminds me of what used to be there, but with a refreshing future oriented look. Very symbolic more than anything, which is why it will be a landmark if not for its architecture alone. As far as the additional security features, its one of those things that has to happen. If they don't build them into it, and something happens, then everyone will throw a fit because it wasn't "secure" enough; however, if they do build them in it hurts the asthetics a bit... just one of those things you have to deal with, less to do with "scared" Americans and more to do with the people in charge watching their backs and being precautious.

SUNNI
July 2nd, 2005, 10:33 AM
i cant image how much better it would be without that fugly spire

gazmo
July 2nd, 2005, 03:15 PM
i cant image how much better it would be without that fugly spire

Something like this:

http://img16.echo.cx/img16/3771/10x7ftrriver7or6zb.jpg

Beacon
July 4th, 2005, 01:23 AM
I like it! Again, without the spire it would be even better, but I think it's elegant and modern. The originals were monolithic, and this adds a more sophisticated edge. Not sure about the podium though - does seem ironic for a building called "Freedom" Tower. I say, give it a chance.

Flatiron
July 13th, 2005, 04:59 PM
It's shit.

The original design was too.

neilio
July 13th, 2005, 05:30 PM
IMO it looks better with the spire

Blabbyboy
July 14th, 2005, 03:09 PM
fugly

Muse
July 15th, 2005, 12:09 AM
Oh god, even in here you're being a crud-bucket :| LOL

Looks fine. Just cheap renders for such a high-profile project.

...

Arunava
July 15th, 2005, 02:19 AM
^This is one I agree with Blabbyboy on. They could've done so much better, maybe not fugly, but certainly boring.

Muse
July 15th, 2005, 02:24 AM
Well, that's all subjective. I like, you don''t, they might, she don't, he perhaps...means jack at the end of the day as far as to what will be built.

I just wish there were better renders.

A r c h i
July 18th, 2005, 08:57 AM
Its better than Liebskind's original proposal. He should stick to designing museums and leave the big boys to the likes of SOM. The best proposal was the one of the two staggered towers which met at two points.

~SAMANTHA~
August 6th, 2005, 11:56 AM
Wow!

how did you guys find this information out, thats what there building where the twin towers used to be. That building is amazing.
One of my colleagues aunt was killed on one of those planes, Its funny how were all connected to these things in some way. I don’t think it was the one that hit the tower though.

Randwicked
August 6th, 2005, 02:38 PM
Something like this:

http://img16.echo.cx/img16/3771/10x7ftrriver7or6zb.jpg

I like that. Put an identical spire on the other one and then have giant bolts of lightning arcing between them, that's what I say.

Urbandeco
August 6th, 2005, 08:15 PM
I like it.

LA53R
August 30th, 2005, 06:40 AM
2 looks much better, like in Randwicked's chop!

Will
September 1st, 2005, 07:21 AM
In my opinion the best statement of defiance against the terrorists is to re-build twin towers. Whilst it would be of bad taste of re-build exact replicas, the proposal put forward on this forum is perfect.

Ipggi
September 10th, 2005, 12:10 AM
There is a large two page photo of the new tower in The Weekend Australian magazine. Seeing the render on a big A3 sheet really shows the downfalls of the current design. It blends in really nicely with all the other existing WTC towers. And unfortunately thats the problem, design wise the surrounding buildings very ordinary and uninspiring, just like this new replacement tower. Compared to the grandure and majesty of some of NY's existing scrapers from the 1920 & 30's this area of Manhattan will continue to be an area of dull, two-dimensional glass clones.

Ipggi
September 10th, 2005, 12:17 AM
There is a large two page photo of the new tower in The Weekend Australian magazine. Seeing the render on a big A3 sheet really shows the downfalls of the current design. It blends in really nicely with all the other existing WTC towers. And unfortunately thats the problem, design wise the surrounding buildings very ordinary and uninspiring, just like this new replacement tower. Compared to the grandure and majesty of some of NY's existing scrapers from the 1920 & 30's this area of Manhattan will continue to be an area of dull, two-dimensional glass clones.

BHK25
September 10th, 2005, 01:33 AM
I like those twins. They look really modern and the most important thing is that THE ARE TWINS, Those scums destroyed twin towers, we should built twins.

BHK25
September 10th, 2005, 01:34 AM
I like those twins. They look really modern and the most important thing is that THE ARE TWINS, Those scums destroyed twin towers, we should build twins.

A r c h i
September 10th, 2005, 06:13 AM
What's with all the double posts? Is it a reference to the twins? ;)

SUNNI
September 10th, 2005, 11:09 AM
the gap between HK and NY is gonna start to show, since HK is getting such beautiful towers (like Nina tower, 2IFC, etc) and NY is getting fugly boring skyscraper like this... :ohno:

Saithkar
September 11th, 2005, 04:16 AM
the gap between HK and NY is gonna start to show, since HK is getting such beautiful towers (like Nina tower, 2IFC, etc) and NY is getting fugly boring skyscraper like this... :ohno:

Disagree there, sure it's not the most stunning piece of design but in my opinion it's far from fugly. NY has some fantastic buildings and is the original "Skyscraper City" so has plenty of bragging rights, but that said I hope they do the WTC site justice with top notch buildings.

CULWULLA
September 19th, 2005, 07:05 AM
so any start date for this one? its beginning to be a pain.no more talk. lets see action
http://img295.echo.cx/img295/8264/dfdfgfgfbgb3by.jpg

STR
September 22nd, 2005, 04:49 AM
Foundation work begins Q1 2006
Grade level will be reached in Q3 2006
Top out in Q2(?) 2009
completeion of exterior work and inital occupancy in 2010
Completion 2011

CULWULLA
September 22nd, 2005, 06:47 AM
thAnks str

STR
September 22nd, 2005, 06:52 AM
I'm pretty sure those are the dates, but that's going by my not-100% memory. The official project site is http://renewnyc.org/plan_des_dev/wtc_site/new_design_plans/Freedom_Tower/default.asp, there's a PDF file with all the dates somewhere in there.

EDIT seems I was a bit off. The steel should rise above the surrounding road level in Q1 2007. I have no idea why it's going to take so long given the site is already excavated. The other dates are accurate.

mic of Orion
September 23rd, 2005, 05:22 PM
looks OK, I prefer older one with Statue of Liberty interpretation and 1776 tall
Was is Daniel Libskean (sorry not sure of spelling)

Saithkar
September 23rd, 2005, 09:34 PM
looks OK, I prefer older one with Statue of Liberty interpretation and 1776 tall
Was is Daniel Libskean (sorry not sure of spelling)

Isn't the new design supposed to be 1776 feet tall as well?

A r c h i
September 24th, 2005, 10:04 AM
Yes it is. I thought Libeskind's Statue of Liberty was somewhat pointless considering it's in the same city and it's not like it was the statue of Liberty that was destroyed. The height of 1776 ft makes alot more sense.