SkyscraperCity banner

58241 - 58255 of 58255 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
5,845 Posts
does anyone have the links to the cams for the site?
Hey Sgt, do you mean these?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Does anybody know if the cladding of the spire - the radome - eventually is gonna happen?
Probably not. They added some communication equipment to some of the sections of the spire already. Some of this equipment protrudes far out enough that it would be in the path of the radome. So unless they plan on the spire being different then the original design then completion of the spire is probably no longer an option.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Probably not. They added some communication equipment to some of the sections of the spire already. Some of this equipment protrudes far out enough that it would be in the path of the radome. So unless they plan on the spire being different then the original design then completion of the spire is probably no longer an option.
Thanks for your answer. That decision was made because of the radome's expenditure, right? I'm just wondering; hasn't this scaled-down decision been met with heavy criticism? It just seems puzzling to me, since it's such an integral part of the tower's identity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
545 Posts
Of course it did. And the redesign once again jeopardized the definition as a spire that contributes to building height vs a mast or antenna that does not.

I don't suggest this as another opportunity to discuss whether people feel that it counts as spire or not. This thread already has hundreds of pages on that.

But regardless of whether you consider it an architectural spire or not, it remains a sad bit of value engineering on one of the most expensive buildings ever constructed at $3.9B. Penny pinching that did not even really dent that number by very much. But due to a dumb financial agreement resulted in immediate profit to the developer.

Though eliminating the cladding will save about $20 million in construction costs, some of which the Durst Organization will recoup as part of its agreement with the Port Authority, Mr. Durst said that what doomed the radome was the prospect of maintaining such a complex structure more than a quarter-mile in the sky.
But this is hardly the first such structure, of course. From this NYT article.

Jordan Barowitz, the director of external affairs at Durst, said: “When the building is complete in 18 months or so, there will be no broadcast equipment on the spire. It will be a spire, lit with LEDs. I don’t know how you could call that an antenna. It’s a spire from which broadcast equipment will be suspended.” He referred to the three steel rings at the base of the mast, which will contain communication equipment.
That is some verbal gymnastics right there. From the same article.

The spire was originally to be enclosed with a protective radome, described as a "sculptural sheath of interlocking fiberglass panels".[129][130][131] However, the radome-enclosed spire was changed to a plain antenna.[129] Douglas Durst, the chairman of the Durst Organization, stated that the design change would save $20 million.[131][162] However, the tower's architect, Skidmore Owings & Merrill, strongly criticized the change. David Childs, the lead designer, said, "Eliminating this integral part of the building's design and leaving an exposed antenna and equipment is unfortunate ... We stand ready to work with the Port on an alternate design."[131] After joining the project in 2010, the Durst Organization had suggested eliminating the radome to reduce costs, but the proposal was rejected by the Port Authority's then-executive director, Christopher O. Ward.[131] Ward was replaced by Patrick Foye in September 2011.[130] Foye changed the Port Authority's position, and the radome was removed from the plans.
From the Wikipedia page
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
452 Posts
Of course it did. And the redesign once again jeopardized the definition as a spire that contributes to building height vs a mast or antenna that does not.
So an antenna/spire is what makes this thing the tallest building in the Western Hemishpere? So if I wear a really tall hat does that make me taller? It is an embarrassment that 1 equally tall building is replacing 2 equally tall buildings and we are supposed to be amazed at this mockery. When did we become people that applauded mediocrity? When will the sheeple see what is really going on and strive for greatness?

Not to disrespect those who build One WTC of course with their blood, sweat and tears, like the Iron Workers etc. Just putting forward an inconvenient reality anno 2020 about the lower Manhattan skyline. At least for a foreigner that is.

They really need to build Foster's Two WTC design ASAP to level the inconvenience the spire/antenna of One WTC causes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Of course it did. And the redesign once again jeopardized the definition as a spire that contributes to building height vs a mast or antenna that does not.

I don't suggest this as another opportunity to discuss whether people feel that it counts as spire or not. This thread already has hundreds of pages on that.

But regardless of whether you consider it an architectural spire or not, it remains a sad bit of value engineering on one of the most expensive buildings ever constructed at $3.9B. Penny pinching that did not even really dent that number by very much. But due to a dumb financial agreement resulted in immediate profit to the developer.



But this is hardly the first such structure, of course. From this NYT article.



That is some verbal gymnastics right there. From the same article.



From the Wikipedia page
Thanks. I've read about the height definitions, but that doesn't interest me that much. It's more about the design and what it contributes to the tower. It seems to be such a sharp deviation from the original plan to not go with the cladded spire. How can anyone accept that kind of scale-down just before the completion? I mean especially considering the symbolic signifiance of this building's succes.
 
58241 - 58255 of 58255 Posts
Top