NEW YORK | One World Trade Center (1WTC) | 541m | 1776ft | 104 fl | T/O

[meh_cd]

Originally Posted by patrick989

I really don't see how a shorter, slanted-roof building would have a greater impact rising first than 1 WTC...

Perhaps because it is a more striking building than 1 WTC, which most people see as a simple box? (Yes, I realize it is not a box.) There are very few slanted roof supertall buildings in the world. In fact, are there any others? I know the Smurfit-Stone building in Chicago is slanted, but is a shorter building. That was my point. Like it or not, not everyone in the world is obsessed with height. The vast majority do not care.

And perhaps I am misunderstanding your post, but 2 WTC is/will be nearly the same height of 1 WTC's parapet, so I fail to see the point. Especially after the antenna mess.

[Kanto]

It's still shorter than 1WTC, the North Tower and even the South Tower, which in my opinion is a humiliation

[ThatOneGuy]

Because 2wtc will be the most massive out of all the towers in terms of area

[ThatOneGuy]

Also that slanted building in chicago is pretty much a landmark and it's what, 40 stories? Imagine 2wtc.

[marsh]

Again, 2WTC (in the renderings) is just ugly in my opinion. Sure, 1WTC may be simple, but it still has that classical shape and you can see elements of historical New York skyscrapers in its design, from the Empire State Building, to the Twins..In my opinion, they should have build a twin of 1WTC..2WTC just looks weird and out of place, and it certainly won't be matching 1WTC in terms of height..I just don't like slanted roof buildings at all. They look half-finished, and 2WTC looks like its roof is about to slide off and fall into the Plaza below..I never have liked 2WTC, but to each their own. They should have done a twin of 1WTC without the antenna...Lastly, again, its FAR from certain that 2WTC and 3WTC will ever be built to their intended designs..1WTC will probably be the only supertall on the site for years.

[aquablue]

Originally Posted by yankee fan for life

As i stated before on previous post for me its not about a matter of height, but a matter of closer and renewal and that's what 1 wtc represents for me .

A matter of closure, I believe?

As far as the height is concerned and after looking at that diagram, I am rather annoyed with what has transpired at this site. Asia owns everybody now, and It is a shame in my view that there is nowhere else that has the will to build as tall as they. When you look at all the fantastic 600m towers proposed and built, it is quite easy to start wondering how fantastic a building of such gigantic proportions could have looked in NYC. It would have been a nice counterbalance in a world in which Asia dominates and will continue to dominate for decades to come. Hopefully they don't remain the only continent building hypertall towers.

[marsh]

One thing I will say, while Asia may have more supertalls in numbers, NOONE can match the iconic nature of the supertalls that New York and even Chicago have. For instance, all the Asian supertalls run together, no any one stands out. Whereas, we have the gorgeous Empire State Building which is a timeless icon, and even the Sears Tower in terms of it's prominence. Soon we will have 1WTC, which may not break any global height records, but it equals the Twins' height, and it will be another symbol for the city & country. Sometimes less is more! So the US has fewer supertalls than Asia, but our supertalls are more interesting and refined than many generic-looking Asian monstrosities.

[meh_cd]

Originally Posted by marsh

Again, 2WTC (in the renderings) is just ugly in my opinion. Sure, 1WTC may be simple, but it still has that classical shape and you can see elements of historical New York skyscrapers in its design, from the Empire State Building, to the Twins..In my opinion, they should have build a twin of 1WTC..2WTC just looks weird and out of place, and it certainly won't be matching 1WTC in terms of height..I just don't like slanted roof buildings at all. They look half-finished, and 2WTC looks like its roof is about to slide off and fall into the Plaza below..I never have liked 2WTC, but to each their own. They should have done a twin of 1WTC without the antenna...Lastly, again, its FAR from certain that 2WTC and 3WTC will ever be built to their intended designs..1WTC will probably be the only supertall on the site for years.

Uh? Yeah, it will assuming you ignore the antenna.

[aquablue]

I disagree, I find most Asian supertalls far more cutting-edge and impressive. Although the old beauties are wonderful here in the US, we have many dull supertalls and only a few are standout icons. We are missing out on more radical designs that we see in Asia. Also, the audacity and drive to build taller is now extinguished here in this country, so it seems.

[jardine2000]

These are some of the most important buildings of the 21st century. They represent a turning point for the world. Thick twirly spire or thin elegant spire......makes no difference. This is a wonderful building that will grow to become part of New York. People are just a little afraid of change and have become used to the plans.

[marsh]

Don't get me wrong, I hope the US will see one or two mega-talls constructed sometime in the future..But the iconic supertalls we have like ESB, Sears, and soon 1WTC will stand alone..I don't like the new antenna for 1WTC either but I still hold out hope a solution can be reached. If not, ah well, maybe we will learn to love it in time lol. And we will have 432 Park soon too.

[BeastNYC]

why does 2 wtc look taller than 1 wtc in almost all of the renderings

[k25150]

Scrap 2 and 3 and build a twin for 1.

[marsh]

Yeah, my problem with 2 and 3 is that: a). 2wtc looks weird and I can't stand the tilted roof and b.) both 2wtc and 3wtc both look too generic and dull like they could be any bland office buildings in any random large city like Houston or Minneapolis or Dallas...They should have built a twin for 1WTC but its not going to happen so oh well...I think the best tribute they could have done on the site was to build twin supertalls as a tribute to the lost Twin Towers.

[patrick989]

Originally Posted by meh_cd

Perhaps because it is a more striking building than 1 WTC, which most people see as a simple box? (Yes, I realize it is not a box.) There are very few slanted roof supertall buildings in the world. In fact, are there any others? I know the Smurfit-Stone building in Chicago is slanted, but is a shorter building. That was my point. Like it or not, not everyone in the world is obsessed with height. The vast majority do not care.

And perhaps I am misunderstanding your post, but 2 WTC is/will be nearly the same height of 1 WTC's parapet, so I fail to see the point. Especially after the antenna mess.

You're assuming most people would not be impressed with 1 WTC and see it as a "simple box." This is all your own assumptions and opinions, nothing more. You think 2 WTC would have had some kind of greater impact had it risen first, and I think it's just a moot point. 2 WTC was never heralded as the centerpiece of the complex, ever.

[RandomNameTag]

Originally Posted by marsh

One thing I will say, while Asia may have more supertalls in numbers, NOONE can match the iconic nature of the supertalls that New York and even Chicago have. For instance, all the Asian supertalls run together, no any one stands out. Whereas, we have the gorgeous Empire State Building which is a timeless icon, and even the Sears Tower in terms of it's prominence. Soon we will have 1WTC, which may not break any global height records, but it equals the Twins' height, and it will be another symbol for the city & country. Sometimes less is more! So the US has fewer supertalls than Asia, but our supertalls are more interesting and refined than many generic-looking Asian monstrosities.

Lol! Ignorance at its highest. No wonder many look at us Americans so poorly! Kingkey, Shanghai Tower, and Guangzhou IFC are anything but generic.

[marsh]

Originally Posted by RandomNameTag

Lol! Ignorance at its highest. No wonder many look at us Americans so poorly! Kingkey, Shanghai Tower, and Guangzhou IFC are anything but generic.

Oh really? Lol THIS you idiot....If you're going to resort to personal attacks.. I am far from ignorant. I was making a generalized statement about the iconic status of skyscrapers for their unique appealing aspects, rather than pure height...Anyone who thinks the Shanghai Tower or some obscure structure called Guangzhou IFC will be as iconic a structure as the Empire State Building or Chrysler buildings is delusional. Height isn't everything. Finesse counts for something. It has nothing to do with the country that particular skyscrapers are in...It has to do with attractiveness and being visually interesting. Next, since you went there, the reason many had a poor view of Americans is due to foreign policy blunders and economic meltdown (oh and electing George W. Bush as president). But, architecture has nothing to do with that. So before you imply "ignorant" again, get your forums clear!

[ThatOneGuy]

Funny, the nicest Asian tower for me is the Moi Center in Shenyang, because of its box shape. I guess the lack of real updates really drives the forum to go off topic.

[NewYorkSkyline117]

Asian supertalls are just super boring. Honestly, I'm getting caught up in 3 wtc, I love it because it's such a Chicago-New York mix because of the criss-crosses and multiple spires on the top. The more I look at the renderings of 4 wtc, the more I love it's simplicity. 1 wtc is not disgraceful or ugly in any way, renderings are just poor for it because it seems disproportionate...as for 2 wtc, it's extremely important because when the sun hits the building when it's September 11th, every Year, it casts a beam of light on the memorial the same time the tower collapsed. Very symbolic without many knowing

[ThatOneGuy]

Lol, didn't know that.