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 11th, 2012, 04:59 PM   #32461
Valkyre
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 210
Likes (Received): 88

Seriously if they already decided to go with that ugly "copper looking" crappy antenna, I would prefer if they made it smaller, because the way it is now, it will look not only hideous, but at the same time RETARDED. And when I say retarded, I mean going into full retard mode... I kid you not.

Cut half of that piece of crap antenna because it really messes around with the rest of the building's architecture...
Valkyre no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 11th, 2012, 05:21 PM   #32462
babybackribs2314
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: New York
Posts: 560
Likes (Received): 545

Yesterday & full update:

http://newyorkyimby.blogspot.com/201...rld-trade.html

__________________
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 11th, 2012, 05:34 PM   #32463
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewYorkSkyline117 View Post
That "mile high tower" will never be built, at least in the next 50 years
It is being build as we speak
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C

patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 05:41 PM   #32464
cyberurban
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 571
Likes (Received): 31

If you don't like spire you can add more floors, however the spire looks better than under.
cyberurban no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 05:51 PM   #32465
SkyHighSevenNine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 20
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanto View Post
OMG, so much anger for an imaginary number. This building looks better without that ugly fat spire. The render Otie posted looks far better than renders with that hideous fat cheating stick
Obvious troll, you are obvious.
SkyHighSevenNine no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 05:57 PM   #32466
Valkyre
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 210
Likes (Received): 88

How about another question...

Say I am Conde Nast.... and I made an extremely big deal by leasing all these floors to the building that it was "supposed" to be the tallest building in the US. I am supposedly paying an amount of money based on such facts that increase the overall value and prestige of this building.

Now you come down and you tell me that that building that was supposed to be the tallest in the US and the one that was supposed to be a landmark considering the importance of 1,776 mark, is nothing like that anymore.

My question is... arent I, Conde Nast, entitled to withdraw my leasing contracts because the building I was presented with turns out to be different than the one we agreed upon? I am Conde Nast and I want it to be well known in the industry that my offices are in the tallest building in the US, a building that symbolises the American Indepence etc etc.

Now it is nothing of each...

In short I would be pissed if I was Conde nast....as long as they cared about such things to beggin with, and I am sure they did care. They must have wanted to be in 1WTC because of what the building represented as well as the office space they required...
Valkyre no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:11 PM   #32467
DinoVabec
Worldwide
 
DinoVabec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the clouds
Posts: 5,900
Likes (Received): 752

Good old fight about stating opinions. Haven't seen this for some time..And then I'm a bad guy.
__________________
There are two rules for success:
1. Never tell everything you know.
-Roger H. Lincoln

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
DinoVabec no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:13 PM   #32468
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 Valkyre View Post
How about another question...

Say I am Conde Nast.... and I made an extremely big deal by leasing all these floors to the building that it was "supposed" to be the tallest building in the US. I am supposedly paying an amount of money based on such facts that increase the overall value and prestige of this building.

Now you come down and you tell me that that building that was supposed to be the tallest in the US and the one that was supposed to be a landmark considering the importance of 1,776 mark, is nothing like that anymore.

My question is... arent I, Conde Nast, entitled to withdraw my leasing contracts because the building I was presented with turns out to be different than the one we agreed upon? I am Conde Nast and I want it to be well known in the industry that my offices are in the tallest building in the US, a building that symbolises the American Indepence etc etc.

Now it is nothing of each...

In short I would be pissed if I was Conde nast....as long as they cared about such things to beggin with, and I am sure they did care. They must have wanted to be in 1WTC because of what the building represented as well as the office space they required...
LOL, your Conde Nast could be called Condemn Mast

If I would be Conde Nast I wouldn't care what steel stick is above me. The building still is the super prestigious 1WTC I was promised, it still offers me the office space I was promised, and most of all, only skyscraperfreaks like us care how tall that building is. If it would be the tallest in the world then yeah, average people maybe would care, but tallest in America is just a title to somehow get rid of the frustration that the US is doing very badly in the skyscraperrace

And as to the point that it would cost only 20 millions, that's wrong. The initial cost would be 20 million but there would be a gigantic additional cost of maintaining it as well and that is the problem for Durst. He doesn't mind the 20 millions, he minds the maintenance costs
__________________
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/

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Kanto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:17 PM   #32469
LV994-CB
Lurking
 
LV994-CB's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southampton/Riga
Posts: 208
Likes (Received): 75



This picture pretty much sums up what I think. I'm not so much shocked by not having 1776 feet height but rather the aesthetic fiasco with the spire. IMO the spire at least made the building look like true landmark, but this naked skeleton copper antenna looks too cheap and out of place for this kind of building. From architectural masterpiece being reduced to good building with mismanaged parts. I already have seen this happening in my city but never thought it would happen with WTC. The spire DOES look worse and the change is significant because affects the whole appearance of the building, maybe even more than the base, although also the previous base design was much more fitting and aesthetic but spire in this case is something that couldn't be changed for the sake of it or at least changed to something more eye pleasing....
__________________
Wondering if I exist in a perpetual zero sum game
LV994-CB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:18 PM   #32470
yankee fan for life
Registered User
 
yankee fan for life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Brooklyn new york
Posts: 832
Likes (Received): 195

There still has not been an official ruling form The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat status on 1 wtc , i think its a little premature or bias for skyscraper city to down grade 1 wtc just yet, LV994-CB 1wtc antenna is not going to be copper that render is showing 1 wtc during dusk which gives it that appearance.
__________________
My heart beats for Brooklyn new york

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
yankee fan for life no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:27 PM   #32471
GeoDude
GeoDude
 
GeoDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 264
Likes (Received): 206

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valkyre View Post
How about another question...

Say I am Conde Nast.... and I made an extremely big deal by leasing all these floors to the building that it was "supposed" to be the tallest building in the US. I am supposedly paying an amount of money based on such facts that increase the overall value and prestige of this building.

Now you come down and you tell me that that building that was supposed to be the tallest in the US and the one that was supposed to be a landmark considering the importance of 1,776 mark, is nothing like that anymore.

My question is... arent I, Conde Nast, entitled to withdraw my leasing contracts because the building I was presented with turns out to be different than the one we agreed upon? I am Conde Nast and I want it to be well known in the industry that my offices are in the tallest building in the US, a building that symbolises the American Indepence etc etc.

Now it is nothing of each...

In short I would be pissed if I was Conde nast....as long as they cared about such things to beggin with, and I am sure they did care. They must have wanted to be in 1WTC because of what the building represented as well as the office space they required...
the change in the cost of the building is negligible, therefore rent is not going to change. yea it sucks, but its not like the building no longer has significance. it still stands on the previous site of the original WTCs and that is probably more important to any tenants (along with the security that went into it) than the height of the building. I really doubt Conde Nast cares.

in my opinion, i don't really mind the change. always thought it was kinda weird how the spire became fat at the midsection. i agree with someone earlier, its a bit grittier, and fitting for ny.

okay so its not the tallest building in the US. who cares? do you really think it means our country has failed at 'bouncing back' from the attacks. hell no! we are an amazing country, and like other people have said, the height of any building does not validate that. it is still a monumental achievement.

the only thing that really pisses me off is the management of this entire project. i think its bullshit that with just a couple floors left, THEN they decide to change it. if they didn't think it was going to be possible to maintain the spire, they should not have included it in the design in the first place. to me, its the principal of the matter that's the most disappointing
__________________

@Chaserino
Architecture & Travel

USA - Canada - Mexico - Costa Rica - Brazil - Peru - Australia - New Zealand - China - England - France - Netherlands - Spain - Italy - Germany - Monaco - Vatican City - Czech Republic - Hungary - Turkey - Denmark - Sweden - Morocco - Portugal - Switzerland - Greece - Austria - Liechtenstein - Cyprus - Croatia - Belgium - Slovakia - United Arab Emirates - Poland - Ukraine - Romania - Ireland - Malta - Vietnam - Myanmar - Japan - India - Slovenia - South Africa - Zimbabwe - Zambia - Botswana - Israel
GeoDude no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:29 PM   #32472
CF221
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Miami, Fl
Posts: 1,770
Likes (Received): 811

LOL at "premature"..... TO HELL with WTC1's "status".... thats what they get for half-assing and downgrading the quality of the originally proposed building not by very few details, but by MANY, and the most important!!! (Spire, Base, and plaza). Seriously, at this point, if they downgrade WTC1, then they deserve it. WTC1 was much more than just an office building, it was a symbol of reconstruction, was it not? -Then I think any other country would've given it much more respect when building it and not half-assed this project. Only in America do we let fools wanting to "diminish costs" completely alter the face of our most majestic buildings.
__________________
Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
CF221 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:33 PM   #32473
Kanto
Roof height crusader
 
Kanto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: S-4, Papoose Lake
Posts: 5,925
Likes (Received): 3546

Quote:
There still has not been an official ruling form The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat status on 1 wtc , i think its a little premature or bias for skyscraper city to down grade 1 wtc just yet, LV994-CB 1wtc antenna is not going to be copper that render is showing 1 wtc during dusk which gives it that appearance.
Iirc somebody posted a few pages ago a render which showed it would be gray, which in my opinion fits 1WTC better than the white of the old spire and does indeed have a rather brown appearance at dusk
__________________
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 11th, 2012, 06:42 PM   #32474
DinoVabec
Worldwide
 
DinoVabec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In the clouds
Posts: 5,900
Likes (Received): 752

image hosted on flickr

Brooklyn Bridge and WTC, cloudy night by BSEinBrooklyn, on Flickr
__________________
There are two rules for success:
1. Never tell everything you know.
-Roger H. Lincoln
DinoVabec no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:44 PM   #32475
Mercenary
Registered User
 
Mercenary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,782
Likes (Received): 201

I don't understand something.

Why the hell did they propose this spire cover in the first place when they knew it was unfeasible to repair and maintain it?

I mean, are these guys so stupid that only when the building is nearing its completion that they figure this problem out?
Mercenary no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:46 PM   #32476
CF221
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Miami, Fl
Posts: 1,770
Likes (Received): 811

Exactly... and this with America's "Premier Icon of Hope...." riiiiiiiiight. Seems personal fortune has more importance than symbolism and respect these days.
__________________
Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
CF221 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:56 PM   #32477
sundrop74
Skyscraper Aficionado
 
sundrop74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 146
Likes (Received): 68

This may have already been answered, but is the latest render correct in showing a cubed (square) base without tapered corners? If so, that is such an architectural tragedy.

I am still trying to wrap my head around the antenna/spire redesign. I guess I will reserve my judgment until it's finished. Maybe they should have went with a permanent color-changing spire like BofA.
sundrop74 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 06:57 PM   #32478
iloveclassicrock7
Vigilant Citizen
 
iloveclassicrock7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 1,311
Likes (Received): 246

After seeing that large render, I really am starting to dislike the new antennae
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
iloveclassicrock7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 07:00 PM   #32479
patrykus
Registered User
 
patrykus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,778
Likes (Received): 1794

For me this tower consist now of bits taken from three different towers. The middle part being the only originally designed. The base which would fit perfect box, but not being the complementary continuation of main part, and the spire which (without ring) would fit old twins with its rawness but no pure shiny glass body of 1wtc. I think the tower still looks acceptable but what's really important here is that only the original plan was the one that came out as an complete product of some sort of artistic process where each part was designed and thought in relation with other parts of the tower. What we have now is just the product of cost engineering (or hoverer it is called ) This tower is not really designed now if you know what I mean. Especially the spire/antenna which is just the stuff that supposed to be inside the original white spire. It haven't undergo any designing what so ever (only engineering). So objectively speaking whatever your taste is this tower has large chance of being uglier than it was since nobody really redesigned it but just parts of it were altered/removed with no respect to the rest of the thing. And thus people who like that random thing more than original complete project have very likely poor taste...
__________________
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C
PolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CComingSoon/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/CPolishTowersU/C

patrykus no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2012, 07:09 PM   #32480
Otie
Researcher
 
Otie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,117
Likes (Received): 2186

image hosted on flickr

'Lower Manhattan', United States, New York, New York City, Lower Manhattan, Sunset by WanderingtheWorld (www.LostManProject.com), on Flickr
__________________

ChuckScraperMiami#1 liked this post
Otie 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 12:49 PM.


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