HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #281  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2012, 9:00 PM
Dense_Electric Dense_Electric is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Ditnow View Post
As I see this go up every day, the more disappointed I am. It's exactly what the NY Times architecture critic wrote seven years ago when the final design was unveiled: a giant paperweight with a toothpick stuck on top.

Intended to evoke an obelisk, it is monstrously overscaled. The giant over-eleongated triangles that make up its facets are utterly boring, and provide no sense of a "twist" in the building, as I think was intended. From a distance, these facets are hardly noticeable anyhow, which means it looks much like one of the original twins but without the other. But the twins were iconic precisely because there were two of them and because of their stripped-down modernism, without hokey elongated triangles and gimmicks like toothpick spires to gussy them up.

If and when the other towers, equally mediocre, are finished, the result will be complete visual discordance. There is no relationship among the towers, though that was striven for. But the striving was unsuccessful.

This is what happens when you let politicians, a greedy and philistine leaseholder and his mediocre house architect drive the reconstruction of a site that demanded greatness and got dross.
Yeah, we get it man, you don't like it. In fact I'm half-convinced you're just a very calm troll, because every single post you've made has been going on about how much you don't like the new buildings when everyone else here at the very least doesn't dislike it.

And that's fine, you're allowed to disagree, but don't you have something better to do than complain about it on the internet? Your incessant whining isn't going to change the design.

And in my opinion that's a good thing, because I happen to like this design better than any of the other ones that were submitted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #282  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2012, 10:56 PM
marshall marshall is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Ditnow View Post
As I see this go up every day, the more disappointed I am. It's exactly what the NY Times architecture critic wrote seven years ago when the final design was unveiled: a giant paperweight with a toothpick stuck on top.

Intended to evoke an obelisk, it is monstrously overscaled. The giant over-eleongated triangles that make up its facets are utterly boring, and provide no sense of a "twist" in the building, as I think was intended. From a distance, these facets are hardly noticeable anyhow, which means it looks much like one of the original twins but without the other. But the twins were iconic precisely because there were two of them and because of their stripped-down modernism, without hokey elongated triangles and gimmicks like toothpick spires to gussy them up.

If and when the other towers, equally mediocre, are finished, the result will be complete visual discordance. There is no relationship among the towers, though that was striven for. But the striving was unsuccessful.

This is what happens when you let politicians, a greedy and philistine leaseholder and his mediocre house architect drive the reconstruction of a site that demanded greatness and got dross.

This guy is way off-base. Need I remind you that when the Twins were built, many didn't like them either, and some even said they looked like the two boxes that the Empire State Building & Chrysler Building came in! But they grew on people. He's probably in the same class of people who only wanted to build a half-ass weak-looking park on the site, instead of rebuilding skyward. Get over it, 1WTC is a great building and will be just as iconic for the city as the twins were. WAIT until it's actually finished! Geez. You can look at all the renderings you want, but like it or not you can't appreciate a building or complex until they are actually completed. So some people need to stop with the Debbie Downer comments or just say nothing at all. Reserve judgment until the tower is completed. Then if you don't like it fine. But don't keep repeating the same tired objections. Way more people than not like 1WTC, and I'm sure it will be EXTREMELY popular tourist attraction. So deal with it.
And that's my take
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #283  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2012, 11:35 PM
chris123678's Avatar
chris123678 chris123678 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 473
Bill Dittnow

I don't think we should jump down his throat, he kinda makes a point in this way.

1. There is no relationship between each tower, they are all at odd angles and different shapes to each other. A spire, diamonds, bracing,setbacks, etc.

Since their is no relationship between each tower, it does make each tower have it's own unique look so I'll disagree with that. But in the skyline, it's going to look like alot of funny looking buildings.
Honestly, I don't think any of them represent the old Trade Center,and 93 percent agreed with that a while back. Maybe more people might be for the new complex now.

I understand where he is coming from, I think we could have done better with the site overall and I think everybody can agree, but still maintain a liking for it


But I'll reserve my comment for the site when it's done.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #284  
Old Posted Apr 24, 2012, 11:48 PM
marshall marshall is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris123678 View Post
I don't think we should jump down his throat, he kinda makes a point in this way.

1. There is no relationship between each tower, they are all at odd angles and different shapes to each other. A spire, diamonds, bracing,setbacks, etc.

Since their is no relationship between each tower, it does make each tower have it's own unique look so I'll disagree with that. But in the skyline, it's going to look like alot of funny looking buildings.
Honestly, I don't think any of them represent the old Trade Center,and 93 percent agreed with that a while back. Maybe more people might be for the new complex now.

I understand where he is coming from, I think we could have done better with the site overall and I think everybody can agree, but still maintain a liking for it


But I'll reserve my comment for the site when it's done.
Yeah I just hope people reserve their judgments until its actually finished and they can see it with their own eyes. The reality is, the Twins were lost, tragically, and there's no going back to what was. We just have to move forward. Any resemblance or rebuilding the twins would have been eerie and unsettling to many, given what happened there. I think it's better that they decided to start fresh with a new design, clean slate, while still paying homage to the past in subtle ways. Thats my take.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #285  
Old Posted Apr 25, 2012, 12:01 AM
NewYorkDominates's Avatar
NewYorkDominates NewYorkDominates is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 864
^+1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #286  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2012, 6:58 PM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSlippery519 View Post
Looks like they are rising again...really hope this gets a tenant before it's capped. I can live with #2 not rising now
Pardon my not understanding your comment; but I don't quite understand what T2 has to do with the status of this tower.

Moderators, please forgive what might be perceived as a deviation from the pending topic but........

Generally speaking, I'm completely stumped as to why some folks here are taking on this "oh well" attitude when faced with the lingering uncertainty over the WTC's full-scale completion. What *particularly* befuddles me is why said folks seem to harbor said attitude regarding T2, which by admission of said folks' majority is the one element of the complex that needs to rise first!


At the risk of further beating the dead horse, I'm not saitisfied with the idea that T3 and T4 somehow recreates a mini-Twins perception on the skyline...so let's just stop there while the economy struggles back to its feet, then we can watch "3" shoot up and that's the end of it.

No. Messrs. Silverstein and (Lord) Foster have spent too much time and capital--both human and monetary--to have their hopes to realize "2" wither on the vine...and *especially* because it's been pronounced by the "experts" the least likely to rise. Least likely in this case in no way translates to "not happening".

Both 2 and 3 will rise. Anchor tenants *at least*, as well as the financing that such occupancy will surely bring about, are there. I'm sure that many of us have heard faint whisperings of positive news on the economic front. Major players looking for space I'm sure have been hearing the same news and are IMO simply biding their time.

One more thing: How many *years* were we agonizing over whether 1WTC will *even get off the ground* with all the delays and personality clusterscrews...yet what are we on the verge of seeing being topped out and crowned with a beacon in the heavens??? And T4 is how close reaching its summit, too?? Should we not then learn to have just as much patience with what remains?

I'm gonna keep batting some of y'alls doubting Thomases about the head, neck and shoulders with this till y'alls get it.

Last edited by JayPro; Apr 28, 2012 at 7:11 PM. Reason: expansion
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #287  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 12:04 AM
MrSlippery519 MrSlippery519 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,076
Think you may need to relax...all I said was that I hope this tower continues rising....no mention of any of the other unrelated stuff you added in.

Lets keep this on topic...the towers will rise in time and that's all that matters.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #288  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 3:08 AM
JayPro JayPro is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Huntington, Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,047
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSlippery519 View Post
Think you may need to relax...all I said was that I hope this tower continues rising....no mention of any of the other unrelated stuff you added in.

Lets keep this on topic...the towers will rise in time and that's all that matters.
In what I just took three seconds to read above, you just recapitulated what I wasted half an hour posting the other day (beating a dead horse etc...).

I was perhaps awkwardly---but defitinely rhetorically---trying to understand what you meant by "I can live without tower 2".

No harm was intended. And maybe I should've thought the better of traipsing along the borderline of "Offtopica".

Anyway, I'm with you: Rise Tower Three. Even if Two somehow doesn't make it to upwards status, Three will be IMO just about enough to full the gap between 1WTC and Four. And it'll add a bit of cladding detail to an IMO otherwise plain-vanilla (but hella gleaming in the sun) complex.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #289  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 12:07 PM
MrSlippery519 MrSlippery519 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayPro View Post
In what I just took three seconds to read above, you just recapitulated what I wasted half an hour posting the other day (beating a dead horse etc...).

I was perhaps awkwardly---but defitinely rhetorically---trying to understand what you meant by "I can live without tower 2".

No harm was intended. And maybe I should've thought the better of traipsing along the borderline of "Offtopica".

Anyway, I'm with you: Rise Tower Three. Even if Two somehow doesn't make it to upwards status, Three will be IMO just about enough to full the gap between 1WTC and Four. And it'll add a bit of cladding detail to an IMO otherwise plain-vanilla (but hella gleaming in the sun) complex.
LOL Yes all I meant was this we already know #2 is being capped for the time being. All of the towers will rise in time, but with #3 already up 5 stories I just hope to see it continue on sooner than later.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #290  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 4:58 PM
Bill Ditnow Bill Ditnow is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 270
The Empire State Building may no longer be New York's tallest, but it's great architecture. As with the Chrysler Building and the Woolworth Building, I could look at it forever.

This 1 World Trade is a piece of crap. Unbelievable, that this was built, when Norman Foster's Kissing Towers could have been built instead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #291  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 5:12 PM
uaarkson's Avatar
uaarkson uaarkson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Back in Flint
Posts: 2,079
lmao, Foster's design really? talk about a monstrosity. It amazes me how completely different some people's views can be...

But can we keep this discussion in Buildings & Architecture?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #292  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 5:21 PM
NewYorkDominates's Avatar
NewYorkDominates NewYorkDominates is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Ditnow View Post

This 1 World Trade is a piece of crap. Unbelievable, that this was built, when Norman Foster's Kissing Towers could have been built instead.
There's more trash and garbage in this one comment than at my local dump.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #293  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 5:27 PM
Hudson11's Avatar
Hudson11 Hudson11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,037
those "kissing towers" would have been an abomination.



taller, but what an eyesore. It looks like it's ready to fall on the WFC


this is the design, this is whats being built, and this is what we should be discussing.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #294  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 5:52 PM
Yankee fan for life's Avatar
Yankee fan for life Yankee fan for life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brooklyn new York
Posts: 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Ditnow View Post
The Empire State Building may no longer be New York's tallest, but it's great architecture. As with the Chrysler Building and the Woolworth Building, I could look at it forever.

This 1 World Trade is a piece of crap. Unbelievable, that this was built, when Norman Foster's Kissing Towers could have been built instead.
Are you out of your mind the Norman Foster's Kissing Towers ,well you are entitled to your opinion .
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #295  
Old Posted May 3, 2012, 11:28 PM
Yankee fan for life's Avatar
Yankee fan for life Yankee fan for life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brooklyn new York
Posts: 287
Their is a lot of factors on why 1 wtc does not seem as tall as the twins the first is wtc 7 is 130 feet taller then the original wtc 7 which is right next to 1 wtc and ,don't forget the Goldman sachs building which takes some of the dominance away from 1 wtc second 1 wtc is right behind Two World Financial Center so it less accentuates 1 wtc height and , most of the pics on this forum is either taken form the dumbo area which we all know how much the beekman tower take the dominance away form 1 wtc or form jersey city from and upward angle which gives and illusion that 1 wtc is not that tall.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #296  
Old Posted May 3, 2012, 11:40 PM
TouchTheSky13 TouchTheSky13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankee fan for life View Post
Their is a lot of factors on why 1 wtc does not seem as tall as the twins the first is wtc 7 is 130 feet taller then the original wtc 7 which is right next to 1 wtc and ,don't forget the Goldman sachs building which takes some of the dominance away from 1 wtc second 1 wtc is right behind Two World Financial Center so it less accentuates 1 wtc height and , most of the pics on this forum is either taken form the dumbo area which we all know how much the beekman tower take the dominance away form 1 wtc or form jersey city from and upward angle which gives and illusion that 1 wtc is not that tall.
I agree, but many people including myself think it should have been taller. I think it would have been much better if they built two twin freedom towers that were 1776 to the roof and 2001 to the tip of the spire, resembling Trump's 1996 NYSE Tower proposal. But whatever I just want something to get built. Maybe if they want to make 1 WTC seem taller they can add more floors atop the communications ring that resemble the top floors of Taipei 101. That would be awesome.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #297  
Old Posted May 15, 2012, 10:04 PM
WorldTradeCenter WorldTradeCenter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Park Ridge, New Jersey
Posts: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd3189 View Post
I'm sorry if this also pisses people off, but from the start, I should have been a supporter for rebuilding the Twin Towers taller and better than before. If the change of the spire is actually going to be done, then I can't be happy with this tower no matter how new or advanced it may be. I always had a problem with 1 WTC, from the absence of an outdoor observation deck to the fact that it will be only 104 or 86 floors tall when the buildings before it were 110 floors each and also included an outdoor deck. The WTC was already good the way it was before 9/11. They practically took an idea for a taller proposal in Lower Manhattan and reverted to some mere replacement for what was there before, and if anyone is wondering what that proposal was, it was the NYSE tower, that would have went to 1,776 or more to the roof and 2,000 ft via a spire. It was suppose to succeed the Twins and become not only the tallest in the city and country, but it would have returned the WTB title to the USA if 9/11 never happened. When this building was first proposed, it was supposed to be the tallest in the world as well, but years of delays and retarded disputes have made it be only the 3rd tallest in the country and in the global stage, just behind some Chinese supertall nobody really knows about. This would have been taller than the Sears by rooftop if they just stayed with the spire and made a skypod similar to what's in the CN tower, and to a lesser extent, the 102nd floor of the ESB, which are both counted toward roof height. This complex was suppose to be ground breaking, but now it's just some cheap-ass crap you see around Times Square. I believe the reason why New Yorkers and Americans in general don't care anymore is because most of them still want the Twins to be rebuilt. They were the landmarks of Lower Manhattan and of NYC at the time, and now a underachiever is taking their place. 1 WTC will never be the WTB, it will never be America's tallest, and it won't even be NYC's tallest for a good amount of time. 432 Park will succeed it, but it's not worthy of hold that title. I truly want the Metlife North Building to be built to be the tallest in the USA by a good chunk, but not many see this happening. The way I look at it, the only thing to be happy about in the new WTC right now is the memorial plaza, but even that has its faults since the waterfalls flowing down to two pairs of holes seem to repeating the same action that happened on 9/11. Unless the spire is being built as planned, I deem this whole project a piece of shit compared to the original WTC. Too many great aspects were put down for nothing when they could have easily reconfigure the building, like they disappointingly did just now. I have lost hope and for the moderators that might delete this point because of my many references to the old WTC, so be it.The least they could have done with the spire is made it similar to the old one in the North Tower. The one they're trying to make us accept does not blend in with the bloody design of the rest of the tower at all. It's some skinny syringe that has no place in New York's tallest. Dunst would be shot dead. Yeah, I'm serious. This is an eyesore every person in the Tri-state area on this part of the Eastern Seaboard will have to look at and face every damn day. Again, if this is official, I could honestly care less now. I'm all for Twin Towers, either in this city or another somewhere else. Wouldn't even care if someone crashes a plane into this tower, as it isn't worth shit anymore to me. It isn't worth shit to anyone. Sorry to curse, but I know for a fact everyone is equally pissed off at this travesty. There is hope, but that would require many to care, and whenever I go to an article or a video with comments online for 1 WTC, barely anyone sees the importance of this tower. But, it's all good. I won't be looking forward for anything for this nation. As Zapatan said, America is just gonna fail one day because of the greedy bastards in Wall Street, and they have finally won in messing up 1WTC for the rest of us.


Had to rant. Because it bothers me that things could have went better after the recent height gain, but instead went bad. Hopefully that re-design SOM is doing will include something other than the radome, but that's slim. At this point until something good comes up, I don't give a damn.
I agree. I mean I started to follow it again(I had been swinging back and forth with hating it and wanting the former twins back and being excited for this) but this is an outrage. It's a bloated bureaucratic piece of crap purely based on cost and ignoring the values of this complex. I actually do like the NYSE Building plan and I hate what they did.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #298  
Old Posted May 21, 2012, 8:28 PM
nickguar nickguar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 33
An idea/question about the WTC site:

I think most of us initially wanted to rebuild Twin Towers, though with a different design (otherwise it'd have been like we were looking at a ghost). So we are a bit disappointed that the Twins were not rebuilt, as well as the change in the new 1WTC, the spire/antenna fiasco, the delays, the shortened height of 2WTC and 3WTC, etc.

But overall, I do like the four new buildings. But what is stopping a future developer from building a fifth tower, an exact replica of the new 1WTC (though without the spire/antenna)? This would salvage the site, IMO. It would bring the Twins back, though with the preferable design of the new buildings, and would nullify any sour grapes about the change in height or design. Hypothetically, the building (which would probably be named 2WTC--with the new 2WTC therefore being renamed, as well), could be constructed either immediately north of 1WTC, next to 7WTC, or atop the performing arts center that will be built between 1WTC and 2WTC, or, right next to the North Tower fountain, to the east.

Other than bureaucracy, what is stopping this from happening in the future?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #299  
Old Posted May 21, 2012, 8:32 PM
uaarkson's Avatar
uaarkson uaarkson is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Back in Flint
Posts: 2,079
That discussion has been had in this thread at least 100 times. Try common sense instead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #300  
Old Posted May 21, 2012, 8:34 PM
nickguar nickguar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by uaarkson View Post
That discussion has been had in this thread at least 100 times. Try common sense instead.
I'm not saying it's a realistic possibility. I wanted to know the logistics of it. Why not? If you can't direct me towards where that conversation was held, then why comment at all? That wasn't very helpful.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:06 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.