daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on one

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments

General Urban Developments Discussions of projects shorter than 100m/300ft. Also, please post all other threads not specified in other Development News subforums here.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 26th, 2012, 11:20 PM   #1
chris123678
Registered User
 
chris123678's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 448
Likes (Received): 9

NEW YORK | 1 World Trade Center News & Discussion

There probably have been many threads about this but I've created my own.
The thread is created to discuss the spire change.
1. This Thread is for the Spire, not construction.
2. The Base Of the building may also be discussed here.
3. Safety can also be discussed here. As in safety features for the building

No stealing others work.
No rudeness.

Enjoy.

Last edited by desertpunk; May 27th, 2012 at 03:42 AM.
chris123678 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old May 26th, 2012, 11:27 PM   #2
fish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

What has changed with the spire?
  Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2012, 11:43 PM   #3
chris123678
Registered User
 
chris123678's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 448
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by fish View Post
What has changed with the spire?
The Port Authority and Durst have decided to eliminate the radome covering.
Without this covering, it leaves the antenna exposed, therefore it will no longer be a spire, but an antenna. Taking the height from it's proposed to 1,776. To the roof at 1,368.

chris123678 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 03:30 AM   #4
comet the cat
Too tall is not an option
 
comet the cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 466
Likes (Received): 34

Wait wait wait,
I thought all of this fuss was about actual physical height decreases! If this is just about what an official paper says you should measure the final height from, that's just ridiculous! From the top of the spire/antenna, it's still 1776 feet!
__________________
My you tube channels

For buildings - http://www.youtube.com/user/isthereanythathasnt1

For physics - http://www.youtube.com/user/istherea...3?feature=mhee
comet the cat no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 04:21 AM   #5
chris123678
Registered User
 
chris123678's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 448
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by comet the cat View Post
Wait wait wait,
I thought all of this fuss was about actual physical height decreases! If this is just about what an official paper says you should measure the final height from, that's just ridiculous! From the top of the spire/antenna, it's still 1776 feet!
If Durst Follows through with their plan to strip the enclosure then it won't be a spire, it will be an antenna.

Antenna's are not included in the final height, therefore it will not be 1,776 feet tall.
Only 1,368.
chris123678 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 05:02 AM   #6
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buenos Aires
Posts: 2,012
Likes (Received): 28

The towers height in any case, whether they come to a compromise or not, will officially remain 1776 feet, it's just all media speculation.

I've probably said that 20 times on the WTC thread
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 05:24 AM   #7
CF221
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Miami, Fl
Posts: 1,462
Likes (Received): 44

That new antenna is just downright discusting. Ruins the whole Downtown skyline imo.
__________________
Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam.
CF221 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 05:43 AM   #8
fish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

On certain buildings such as the Chrysler and ESB, the spires ARE part of the towers.
On others such as this, it's clearly cheating its way to the top.

I'd be more impressed with either real floors or fake floors.
In other words, physical building structure.
  Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 06:40 AM   #9
Uaarkson
Registered User
 
Uaarkson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 1,993
Likes (Received): 125

This is not the appropriate forum for this thread.
__________________
Manhattan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1MySJoFl8&hd=1 (HD)
Uaarkson no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 06:53 AM   #10
fish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uaarkson View Post
This is not the appropriate forum for this thread.
We are discussing the spire, which is a structural part of One World Trade Center.
  Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 08:48 AM   #11
Nikonov_Ivan
Registered User
 
Nikonov_Ivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Minsk/ Jurmala/ Dubai
Posts: 1,467
Likes (Received): 97

I can't understand, why did they change the spire?
Nikonov_Ivan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 09:50 AM   #12
fish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikonov_Ivan View Post
I can't understand, why did they change the spire?
Budget cost, most likely. 💰
  Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2012, 10:19 AM   #13
Nikonov_Ivan
Registered User
 
Nikonov_Ivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Minsk/ Jurmala/ Dubai
Posts: 1,467
Likes (Received): 97

I am shocked. They could build really amazing tower, but this antenna killed it's view
Nikonov_Ivan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2012, 02:04 AM   #14
fish
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):


And that's the vision of the new World Trade Center !!
  Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2012, 07:07 AM   #15
Nikonov_Ivan
Registered User
 
Nikonov_Ivan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Minsk/ Jurmala/ Dubai
Posts: 1,467
Likes (Received): 97

It is much better than twin towers. I can't understand why so many people like twin towers more?
Nikonov_Ivan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2012, 07:24 PM   #16
Don31
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 94
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by fish View Post
Budget cost, most likely. ��
Cost and maintenance issues as well. It would have been very complex and dangerous to switch out any of the panels.
Don31 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 03:32 AM   #17
Jay
Registered User
 
Jay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Buenos Aires
Posts: 2,012
Likes (Received): 28

Quote:
Originally Posted by fish View Post
Budget cost, most likely. ��
It was a 3.8 billion dollar building, and they cut a 20 million dollar spire?
Jay no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 04:14 AM   #18
Tommy Boy
MEGATALLS for AMERICA
 
Tommy Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 210
Likes (Received): 2

We all can say that silverstein is not an EINSTEIN

Personally I don't care what they put on top of the 1wtc. You all know what I want on top of the 1wtc.

OBSERVATIONS DECK.

I WANT TO STAND ON TOP OF THE 1WTC IN LOWER MANHATTAN AS THE GOOD OLD TIMES AND FEEL THAT "leo quote" I AM TOP OF THE WORLD, WOOOOHOOOOOO. BUILD ME AN OBSERVATION DECK. NOW
__________________
SUCKER FOR HEIGHTS, ROOF HEIGHTS. THATS WHAT MATTERS

Will the REAL World Trade Center Please Stand UP

http://www.twintowersalliance.com/images/Golden_Towers.png
Tommy Boy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 05:07 AM   #19
chris123678
Registered User
 
chris123678's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 448
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy Boy View Post
We all can say that silverstein is not an EINSTEIN

Personally I don't care what they put on top of the 1wtc. You all know what I want on top of the 1wtc.

OBSERVATIONS DECK.

I WANT TO STAND ON TOP OF THE 1WTC IN LOWER MANHATTAN AS THE GOOD OLD TIMES AND FEEL THAT "leo quote" I AM TOP OF THE WORLD, WOOOOHOOOOOO. BUILD ME AN OBSERVATION DECK. NOW
Observation deck would not work because of the parapet that will be built.
The parapet stops at 1,368.
Roof Height is at 1,334. So You'd have 30 feet of parapet to look through
chris123678 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 31st, 2012, 12:04 PM   #20
chipz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 59
Likes (Received): 2

I wish they install the original spire,not that ugly antenna. Why they don't understand that it's an important. It's a lendmark. The original spire is so beautiful and innovative ,but not the antenna,it's just ugly.
chipz no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
skyscrapers.

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.1.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2013 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2013 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. (Resources saved on this page: MySQL 25.00%)

SkyscraperCity - In Urbanity We Trust

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu