|
Quote:
Better known as the 900 footer, 30 Park Place... http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=122343 |
I remember that when it was just a proposal! I didn't realize 30 Park Place was almost topped out. It fills in the gap between 1 WTC and the future 3 WTC quite nicely...until 2 WTC gets built.
|
|
Love those sunset pics!!
|
These are the best pictures i've seen yet. At sunset I think I finally see the architect's vision with the final simple wedge design!
Not to beat a dead horse but spire still makes me very very unhappy. |
Quote:
Hands down, the best thing about this tower is the way it reflects the light. |
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/30/ny...cess.html?_r=0
A Soaring Emblem of New York, and Its Upside-Down Priorities Flawed 1 World Trade Center Is a Cautionary Tale By MICHAEL KIMMELMAN NOV. 29, 2014 http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/...superJumbo.jpg http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/...superJumbo.jpg http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/...superJumbo.jpg |
I agree with a lot of the things that the author of that article had to say. However, I do not agree that the building looks the same from every angle. Due to it's shape this is completely false. From some angles it tapers to the top and from some it rises straight up. Also, we have already seen that due to its shape it plays with the light in really interesting ways at sun up and sun down. I could not agree more about the base and the antenna though. :yuck:
|
I personally think the base turned out a lot better than some were thinking.
|
I love the building for the most part. The base lightning still has me undecided how I feel. I just don't know if it transitions with the rest of the body of the building when it's lit. I don't know. Perhaps the lighting of the base should fade as it goes up
|
My only issue with the lighting is the dark spot one third of the way up the antenna.
|
I agree. They need to fix those particular light boxes.
|
Quote:
|
The NY Times article has some valid points, but all stuff we've heard before (should have been more open and residential in keeping with urban trends, Silverstein's greed, Pataki's lack of vision and self-interest, Durst's awful compromises, endless red-tape and bickering, etc). There's nothing particularly insightful and new (ironic because those are the same criticisms he makes of the tower). And you have to love his rose-colored view of the old WTC, talking about how the lines on them shimmered orange during dusk… lol, oh please. And I'm not sure what angles he's looking at, when he says the new WTC is static and never changes shape. That's one of its best points! It DOES look different from different angles.
I think everyone's in a rush to trash it. Could it have been better? Obviously. That goes without saying. Should it have been better? Of course. Could it also have been much, much worse? Yes. I agree with the architect quoted in the beginning who says "it's not so bad." I'd give the new One WTC like a B-. I think in 5 or 10 years we'll forget all the missed opportunities and flaws and it'll grow on a lot of us as it cements its place in the NY skyline. |
Almost every morning I drive into the city via the midtown tunnel, and in the early morning light it looks like a space station. Every morning.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 4:46 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Prev