daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

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



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 9th, 2012, 09:59 PM   #32081
spectre000
Moderator
 
spectre000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 7,904
Likes (Received): 5170

OMFG. Vomit.


World Trade Center’s Symbolic 1,776-Foot Height Is at Stake in a Redesign


"Left: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill; right: Durst Organization"

"Seventeen-seventy-six will never lose its place in the history books, but its claim to the record books has been undermined by a decision not to build a sculptural fiberglass-and-steel enclosure for the central mast atop 1 World Trade Center.

It is the addition of that mast that would elevate an otherwise 1,368-foot skyscraper into a 1,776-foot structure whose defining measurement was meant to express American spirit and resolve in the face of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, the private body that serves as a worldwide arbiter of building heights, will ultimately count or discount the mast in its height determination for 1 World Trade Center based on whether it is considered a functional antenna or a nonfunctional spire..."

"...“This definitely raises questions,” Kevin Brass, the public affairs manager for the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, said in a statement Wednesday. “Our criteria are very specific. We include spires and not antennas. If this is an antenna, it won’t be part of the height measurement. The cladding was an integral part of the design and made the extension part of the permanent look and feel of the building"..."
spectre000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:05 PM   #32082
Uaarkson
Sheet Metal Sketcher
 
Uaarkson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: East Side Flint
Posts: 2,527
Likes (Received): 1028

What a crime. Hopefully the questions raised by the CTBUH can convince Durst otherwise...
__________________
Manhattan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7S1MySJoFl8&hd=1 (HD)

Last edited by Uaarkson; May 9th, 2012 at 10:12 PM.
Uaarkson no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:08 PM   #32083
patrick989
Registered User
 
patrick989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 301
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Though eliminating the cladding will save about $20 million in construction costs, Mr. Durst said that what doomed the enclosure, known as a radome, was the prospect of maintaining such a complex structure — itself nearly as tall as a 40-story building — more than a quarter-mile in the sky.
Bullshit. If the ability to maintain the radome was going to be such an issue, I don't think it would have remained in the plans as long as it had. ******* cost-cutting scumbags! The top of the building is gonna look much crappier now, thanks a lot.
patrick989 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:14 PM   #32084
net222
Joined on a peculiar day
 
net222's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 126
Likes (Received): 120

Oh my god
net222 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:16 PM   #32085
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

Quote:
Originally Posted by spectre000 View Post
OMFG. Vomit.


World Trade Center’s Symbolic 1,776-Foot Height Is at Stake in a Redesign


"Left: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill; right: Durst Organization"

"Seventeen-seventy-six will never lose its place in the history books, but its claim to the record books has been undermined by a decision not to build a sculptural fiberglass-and-steel enclosure for the central mast atop 1 World Trade Center.

It is the addition of that mast that would elevate an otherwise 1,368-foot skyscraper into a 1,776-foot structure whose defining measurement was meant to express American spirit and resolve in the face of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, the private body that serves as a worldwide arbiter of building heights, will ultimately count or discount the mast in its height determination for 1 World Trade Center based on whether it is considered a functional antenna or a nonfunctional spire..."

"...“This definitely raises questions,” Kevin Brass, the public affairs manager for the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, said in a statement Wednesday. “Our criteria are very specific. We include spires and not antennas. If this is an antenna, it won’t be part of the height measurement. The cladding was an integral part of the design and made the extension part of the permanent look and feel of the building"..."
Many will disagree with me, but for me this is great news. The antenna is thinner than the spire would be which I always felt was way too fat for a building of this size. As to the official height getting shorter, I 100% don't care because I only accept roof and pinnacle height, both of which will stay unchanged
__________________
The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.
http://www.the-outbreak.com/
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:20 PM   #32086
NewYorkSkyline117
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Morris County
Posts: 1,091
Likes (Received): 243

It was never "too fat" it looked just right. that antenna is fugly to the max and they have got to be stupid not to see it...so it WONT be enclosed? and what about the beacon?!
NewYorkSkyline117 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:22 PM   #32087
fooddude
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: SF, NYC
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 15

Yup...the original thick spire looked proportionate and matched in color and aesthetics, and made the 1wtc look like a modern/futuristic ESB... now it looks like utter sh*t
fooddude no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:33 PM   #32088
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

The original spire was ugly, the new antenna is ugly too, but a bit less ugly than the spire was in my opinion. Now if they would scrap that thin steel stick completely I would be the happiest person on the planet
__________________
The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.
http://www.the-outbreak.com/
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:38 PM   #32089
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
Many will disagree with me, but for me this is great news. The antenna is thinner than the spire would be which I always felt was way too fat for a building of this size. As to the official height getting shorter, I 100% don't care because I only accept roof and pinnacle height, both of which will stay unchanged
Looks like we agree on something Kanto. I think it looks fine, and I also only go by roof height, pinnacle, and highest floor. I actually kind of like the thin antennae.
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:39 PM   #32090
spectre000
Moderator
 
spectre000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 7,904
Likes (Received): 5170

Quote:
Originally Posted by spectre000 View Post

World Trade Center’s Symbolic 1,776-Foot Height Is at Stake in a Redesign


"Left: Skidmore, Owings & Merrill; right: Durst Organization"
Here's the image and article link from the previous page in case people missed it.
spectre000 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:39 PM   #32091
NewYorkSkyline117
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Morris County
Posts: 1,091
Likes (Received): 243

well i heard there is still going to be encasing, not exposed steel. does anyone know if they will keep the beacon?!? please ANSWER!
NewYorkSkyline117 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:39 PM   #32092
babybackribs2314
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 560
Likes (Received): 545

http://newyorkyimby.blogspot.com/201...-redesign.html

The biggest take-away from all this:

Quote:
The contrast is clear, as the old spire was much bulkier and larger, with the new antenna plainly mechanical. Besides the change in function, the official height of the building will also be different. The Council on Tall Buildings defines spires as architectural elements, a category antenna do not fall under. Thus, the design change also alters the building's official height from 1,776 feet tall to only 1,368. The difference is trivial, but would make One World Trade's reign as New York's 'official' tallest very short, as 432 Park's official height will be almost 1,400 feet.
__________________
My blog with photo updates and development news: New York YIMBY

& follow YIMBY on Twitter! New York YIMBY Twitter
babybackribs2314 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:42 PM   #32093
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

Love the new design, it also is a lesson to everyone about how meaningless the CTBUH rules are. Roof height and pinnacle are what matters.
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:44 PM   #32094
BritneySpearsRocks93
Registered User
 
BritneySpearsRocks93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Commack, NY
Posts: 108
Likes (Received): 1

They just need to find a way to ensure the official height remains at 1776 or else this whole project is just gone to shit, way to many downgrades and redesigns, what a freaking joke this place has become.
BritneySpearsRocks93 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:45 PM   #32095
NewYorkSkyline117
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Morris County
Posts: 1,091
Likes (Received): 243

please stop saying you guys love the new design, i know you're all entitled to your own opinion, but you cant believe that's it actually going to look like that..they'll probably enclose it in something
NewYorkSkyline117 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:48 PM   #32096
NewYorkSkyline117
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Morris County
Posts: 1,091
Likes (Received): 243

so what's wrong with Freedom Tower...
NewYorkSkyline117 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:50 PM   #32097
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

The old spire was too wide, this new antennae is great. Also too everyone, stop freaking out, the height doesn't matter as long as it's as tall as the original WTC.

Quote:
but you cant believe that's it actually going to look like that..they'll probably enclose it in something
Its done, they said it would be hard to maintain the spire encasement, so it's an antennae now.

Quote:
They just need to find a way to ensure the official height remains at 1776 or else this whole project is just gone to shit, way to many downgrades and redesigns, what a freaking joke this place has become.
man, you sound like a child. What matters is that we are restoring the skyline, it's not a height contest.
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 10:57 PM   #32098
kingsc
Registered User
 
kingsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 2,761
Likes (Received): 199

I'm insulted by the design changing taking place with this tower. It took them 1 year to destroy everything I loved about this building.
__________________
My site
Entertainmentcove.weebly.com
kingsc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 11:00 PM   #32099
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

Quote:
Originally Posted by moochie View Post
I agree. I felt the spire looked a bit contrived as it was, and the antennae version looks more gritty, more "New Yorky" <cough> like the New York I loved when I was a youngster.

The 1776 foot height as well as the name "Freedom Tower", also a bit too contrived... as has been said a thousand times in this thread before..

edit - having said all that, I'd be fine if they encase the antennae. Either way is okay with me really.
Yeah, definitely love the antennae. It really fits NYC. It looks perfect now, and might pass ESB as my favorite NYC skyscraper!
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2012, 11:00 PM   #32100
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

Quote:
Originally Posted by BritneySpearsRocks93 View Post
They just need to find a way to ensure the official height remains at 1776 or else this whole project is just gone to shit, way to many downgrades and redesigns, what a freaking joke this place has become.
The whole official height measurement is nothing more than a source of deception. Thanks to it ordinary people have absolutely no chance of determining the true height of a building cause there is no diffarance in appearance between an antenna and a spire

Just take a look at these, pure deception


Note that this diagram made it into BBC News



__________________
The Outbreak: A free browser online strategy game. Build up your town and compete with other towns economicaly and militarily.
http://www.the-outbreak.com/
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
construction updates, development, ground zero, manhattan, new york city, nyc, port authority, supertall, world trade center

Thread Tools

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

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

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