NEW YORK | What do you think of the new WTC?

[Otie]

Share some of that smoking sh*t!

[The Grand Architect]

Originally Posted by Matt

I don't know if anyone's noticed this, but there is an incredible way the buildings are arranged in the complex that causes some meaningful interplay. Has anyone picked up on this?

I don't know about the arrangement of the buildings, but the designs of the buildings do convey messages and meaningful interplay. One of the most notable ones is the slant and slope of the 2WTC's diamonds which, at the correct angle, reflects the sunlight from the 9/11 pools. Another (and most obvious) is the height of the 1WTC at the parapets, which is equal to the original Twin Towers, and the attenna reaches 1,776 ft, which represents the year 1776- the year the US was born.

Oh, and here's another one of my renders:

[Bill Ditnow]

Originally Posted by HyperPower

This picture clearly represents what a half/a*s job has been done with the WTC site. Not only are we building only one tower that could rival either of the twins but it isn't even complete eleven years later.

Agreed. These side-by-side images sum up the utter failure to creatively re-imagine Lower Manhattan after 9/11, and the utter banality of the new One World Trade. A missed opportunity if ever there was one. It would be interesting if one of the artists here would put in how the skyline would have looked with Norman Foster's iconic kissing towers, for instance.

[marvelfannumber1]

Originally Posted by HyperPower

This picture clearly represents what a half/a*s job has been done with the WTC site. Not only are we building only one tower that could rival either of the twins but it isn't even complete eleven years later.

Oh yeah because the old WTC went up sooo quickly.

Project start: 1962 Project end: 1974

P.S That is not counting WTC 3 And 7

T_T

[jd3189]

Originally Posted by marvelfannumber1

Oh yeah because the old WTC went up sooo quickly.

Project start: 1962 Project end: 1974

P.S That is not counting WTC 3 And 7

T_T

Actually well into the 80s if you include the old 7 WTC, but yeah. This project is going to take a while to get done. Lower Manhattan, unlike Midtown, is solely a business district and isn't that much attractive. It took the former WTC 20 years to actually be a full and active area so it will take the new version around the same time.

[StarScraperCity]

Originally Posted by Bill Ditnow

Agreed. These side-by-side images sum up the utter failure to creatively re-imagine Lower Manhattan after 9/11, and the utter banality of the new One World Trade. A missed opportunity if ever there was one. It would be interesting if one of the artists here would put in how the skyline would have looked with Norman Foster's iconic kissing towers, for instance.

It would have looked awful. That was easily the most overrated design in the entire competition, and that's saying something. None of the designs were particularly good. As conventional as it is, we're lucky to be getting what is going up there now.

[-Filipe-]

Originally Posted by HyperPower

This picture clearly represents what a half/a*s job has been done with the WTC site. Not only are we building only one tower that could rival either of the twins but it isn't even complete eleven years later.

oh, idk maybe because its not done yet? you compare a completed picture of the world trade center before, and one half under construction..real smart

[rack776]

I wish people would stop bitching about how long it is taking to build, yeah the political hacks have screwed up some of the project but think of it this way,
It has been said the new WTC site is like building Central Park over an archaeological dig and forensics investigation,
then building Grand Central Station under it, while the trains are already there and running on time and you cannot disturb anything in the process....
throw in all the political & ecconomic bull shit and its amazing to me anything has been built at all.

1. They had to remove all the destruction & excavate a cemetary just to begin the project.
2. They had to repair all the underground damage to all the things you dont think about under a city, phone lines, gas pipes, and oh yeah a friggin subway transit hub.
3. The construction could not disrupt every day life for the city, trains had to still run, construction was planned arround the city.

This CAN NOT be compaired to some cheap hotel in Dubi or China built on virgin ground.

Give the designers & workers a break already. Its been a Hell of project to plan.

[RockMont]

Originally Posted by rack776

I wish people would stop bitching about how long it is taking to build, yeah the political hacks have screwed up some of the project but think of it this way, it was described as the most complicated building project in history because-
1. They had to remove the destruction & excavate a cemetary just to begin the project.

2. They had to repair all the underground damage to all the things you dont think about under a city, phone lines, gas pipes, and oh yeah a friggin subway transit hub.

3. The construction could not disrupt every day life for the city, trains had to still run, construction was planned arround the city.

I forget who said it but it has been said it is like building central park first with grand central station under it while the trains are already there and running and you cannot disturb anything in the process.

Give the workers a break already. Its a Hell of project to plan.

[uaarkson]

Foster's design was hilariously awful.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by Bill Ditnow

Agreed. These side-by-side images sum up the utter failure to creatively re-imagine Lower Manhattan after 9/11, and the utter banality of the new One World Trade. A missed opportunity if ever there was one. It would be interesting if one of the artists here would put in how the skyline would have looked with Norman Foster's iconic kissing towers, for instance.

I hate being reminded of this, but unfortunately the truth hurts. I look at pictures of the twins and how massive and powerful they were, then look at the smaller buildings that were put in their place. (1WTC is the only one that's as tall as the twins and the tapering makes it less powerful and large) This doesn't mean it's not a nice building, but it doesn't really replace the old WTC for me. We are still not sure if the other towers will even be built, and if they are maybe it will be as good as the old WTC just by quantity, but not really quality. So many corners have been cut making this new project which is just beyond disgusting. I still look forward to seeing the new towers finished (hopefully 3 and 4 get built too) but it's sad (and also a good thing) that the WTC won't have much time as NYC's tallest building.

[NYC GUY]

^^^
I get what u mean that it may not be the tallest in NYC for that long (unless the spire is counted) but thats also a good thing. It's like hey look we rebuilt the World Trade Center! but no were not stoppin there were building taller buildings all over the city!

[uaarkson]

I really wish you guys would quit it with these posts, at least until towers 2 & 3 are topped out. Of course the new world trade center doesn't stack up to the old, it's not even halfway done.

Four one-thousand foot buildings standing in a row. Really try
and think about that for a second. I'm not even talking about the design here. It absolutely will be more "powerful" than the twin towers.

[NewYorkDominates]

Originally Posted by rack776

Give the designers & workers a break already. Its been a Hell of project to plan.

Yet,most of the people in here don't know that the original WTC was planned as early as 1943 but were put on hold for 6 years until 1949,after years of where to put the tower the final agreements were reached in 1965.Construction of Thr complex didn't finalize until 1987.Almost 45 years since its inception.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

I really wish you guys would quit it with these posts, at least until towers 2 & 3 are topped out. Of course the new world trade center doesn't stack up to the old, it's not even halfway done.

Four one-thousand foot buildings standing in a row. Really try
and think about that for a second. I'm not even talking about the design here. It absolutely will be more "powerful" than the twin towers.

Well, that's debatable since tower 1 is the only one that stacks up to the twins in size, but it isn't even really as tall (top floors/occupied floors etc. are lower). I'm not saying that it won't be impressive in it's own right, but on a world scale the twins were something else, the new complex.. well the buildings may be a little better looking some may say, but the essence of power just isn't really there for me.. even if all four towers are built (But I have no reason to think we will see towers 2 and 3 in the near future, so let's just say it's towers 1 and 4 for now)

Again, there is nothing wrong with this new complex, it's actually quite amazing, but when you compare it to the twins, it's just kinda unimpressive for me, what irks me is that there wasn't even an effort or public interest to go bigger or be better, it's self deprecating.

I get what u mean that it may not be the tallest in NYC for that long (unless the spire is counted) but thats also a good thing. It's like hey look we rebuilt the World Trade Center! but no were not stoppin there were building taller buildings all over the city!

Yea, I kind of see it as an embarrassment for the PA, they first said the WTC will be the tallest building in the world back in the early 2000's and now it won't even be the tallest in NYC let alone USA. (The antenna will not be counted and even if it were it is not legit)

The PA and the people behind this certainly deserve the embarrassment and much more but the USA and American public don't, that's the sad part.

[Zapatan]

Originally Posted by NewYorkDominates

Yet,most of the people in here don't know that the original WTC was planned as early as 1943 but were put on hold for 6 years until 1949,after years of where to put the tower the final agreements were reached in 1965.Construction of Thr complex didn't finalize until 1987.Almost 45 years since its inception.

Yes but they actually succeeded in making the WTC something new and great. NYC has already been here before and needed something better, a taller more interesting building perhaps. But alas it never happened due to stupidity and selfishness.

Like I said, the truth hurts, I'm not trying to be a downer, but I can't help feel this way

[NewYorkDominates]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Yes but they actually succeeded in making the WTC something new and great. NYC has already been here before and needed something better, a taller more interesting building perhaps. But alas it never happened due to stupidity and selfishness.

Like I said, the truth hurts, I'm not trying to be a downer, but I can't help feel this way

The truth?The truth is you're not going to satisfied with anything that aren't the Twins because of your deep obsession.Anyways,how is that the new WTC will not be as powerful or more than the previous one? Four towers that reach the 1,000' mark.I call that powerful.I take it,you are just making assumptions based on your obsession with the Twin Towers.I take that back,it's your obsession with height that gets you.You're always like,"Why isn't America building bigger?"..."What happened to America,they once had the tallest buildings?"

[Dense_Electric]

Originally Posted by Zapatan

Well, that's debatable since tower 1 is the only one that stacks up to the twins in size, but it isn't even really as tall (top floors/occupied floors etc. are lower). I'm not saying that it won't be impressive in it's own right, but on a world scale the twins were something else, the new complex.. well the buildings may be a little better looking some may say, but the essence of power just isn't really there for me.. even if all four towers are built (But I have no reason to think we will see towers 2 and 3 in the near future, so let's just say it's towers 1 and 4 for now)

You're looking for a way to write 2 and 3 out for the sake of your own argument. When everything is said and done, this complex will be more massive than the original when finished (height isn't everything, you know). We're looking at five (or six if you count 5, though that one would be reasonable to leave out for now) skyscrapers vs the original three. The fact that 2 and 3 might not be built for a few more years doesn't mean they won't.

[mousquet]

Some gorgeous posts lately in this thread...

Some shocking too.

Originally Posted by HyperPower

This picture clearly represents what a half/a*s job has been done with the WTC site. Not only are we building only one tower that could rival either of the twins but it isn't even complete eleven years later.

It's not just 2 but 4 supertalls that will sit there soon. Only Chicago can reasonably claim to rival NYC's skyline made of quality buildings.
How dare you? you're blind, sutpid proud moron.

[yankeesfan1000]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

I really wish you guys would quit it with these posts, at least until towers 2 & 3 are topped out. Of course the new world trade center doesn't stack up to the old, it's not even halfway done.

Four one-thousand foot buildings standing in a row. Really try
and think about that for a second. I'm not even talking about the design here. It absolutely will be more "powerful" than the twin towers.

Agreed. Plus, I'm not sure how many of the people who are labeling this complex as unimpressive actually ever got to go to the original WTC, because at street level it was honestly post apocalyptic. These comparisons of old v new always overlook the old complexes biggest fault which was the plaza was always empty. It was a cold, barren, concrete bunker that seemed to resist any sort of vitality.

Say what you will about the design of the new towers, or their heights, but the new complex will be so far ahead of the old one in terms of street activity and street vitality with shops, restaurants, landscaping, and trees, that it easily makes up for any perceived shortcomings with design or height, which I think are ridiculous.