HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted May 28, 2012, 4:15 PM
chris123678's Avatar
chris123678 chris123678 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by viewguysf View Post
I've never understood how they can claim to have so many floors when it isn't true--this needs to be called out for what it is. What it is not is the country's tallest building in any way IMO; that honor will remain with the Willis/Sears Tower with its true number of floors and roof height.
Please read Roadcrusiers explanation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted May 28, 2012, 7:09 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Twin Peaks, San Francisco
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris123678 View Post
Please read Roadcrusiers explanation.
Thanks chris. I can buy into some of that, but in fact, 1WTC will be judged by the same standards as other buildings. Some years ago, the Sears Tower was officially reduced from 110 to 108 real floors. As far as actual floor count goes, I've always thought it's irrelevant in relation to the actual height of a building--look at the Transamerica Pyramid for example. The 220' on top don't count as floors since they aren't; the building is 853' high but contains only 48 floors. There are many other examples of this around the world, especially concerning double height mechanical floors, etc., that aren't counted as more than one floor. 1WTC will have the roof height, but not the floor count and, unfortunately, the spire/antenna will probably not count either. If it did, then the antennas on ESB, Sears/Willis and the John Hancock Center should also be counted.

At any rate, the WTC comeback is a great plus and justifiable source of pride for NYC and the nation, despite the deficiencies and weirdness of 1WTC. Now, bring on 2 and 3 WTC!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted May 28, 2012, 8:38 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 13,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1 View Post
I am going to quote what I said on the One World Trade Center thread to make this clear.

"...One World Trade Center has a higher floor to ceiling ratio for each floor than the Twin Towers had. The Twin Towers each had a floor to ceiling ratio of about 12 feet. One World Trade Center has a floor to ceiling ratio of 13'4 feet. Another difference is the mechanical floors which are equivalent to two office floors in height. Put that together and One World Trade Center would have about 104-105 floors. It is still technically a building that goes over 100 floors. The floor count is different though, and I am sure that some of you are mad that we are getting 105 floors when the Twin Towers stood at 110 because it's a loss of 5 floors, but it is just as tall as the Twin Towers were."
That would be a bizarrely high floor-to-ceiling. You presumably mean floor-to-floor height.

Nobody measures buildings by floor-to-ceiling...it varies within each space, room to room and depending on beams, mechanical, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted May 29, 2012, 12:22 AM
chris123678's Avatar
chris123678 chris123678 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 471
One World Trade Center Has Many mechanical floors.
They take up much office space, but mechanical floors are very tall and as Roadcrusier said, are the equivalent to two office floors.

Remember- A few months back it took so long to get done those floors? Those were mechanical floors.

Floors 93-99 are Mezzanine floors.

Floor 20 starts the first office floor.
Floor 89 starts the last office floor.
There is a skylobby on one of the floors in between, but i can't remember.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted May 29, 2012, 1:10 AM
Jonboy1983's Avatar
Jonboy1983 Jonboy1983 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The absolute western-most point of the Philadelphia urbanized area. :)
Posts: 1,411
Floors 20 to 63 and 65 to 89 are office floors. Floor 64 is the sky lobby.

For the record, I don't think this building is "a piece of crap," at least not anymore...

I kinda think it would have been cool if SOM would have designed One WTC like they did with the 80-story China World Trade Center completed a few years ago. That's my only hang-up (orther than the obvious spire fiasco). All in all, I'm excited for this building.
__________________
Transportation planning, building better communities of tomorrow through superior connections between them today...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted May 29, 2012, 3:13 AM
Double L's Avatar
Double L Double L is offline
Houston:Considered Good
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,136
So what's the status of the spire change; is it official, is it under review?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted May 29, 2012, 3:34 AM
plinko's Avatar
plinko plinko is online now
them bones
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Santa Barbara adjacent
Posts: 6,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
That would be a bizarrely high floor-to-ceiling. You presumably mean floor-to-floor height.

Nobody measures buildings by floor-to-ceiling...it varies within each space, room to room and depending on beams, mechanical, etc.
How dare you get technical! I was going to suggest looking up the word 'ratio'. But why get the actual terms right when one can keep calling an 85 floor building a 104 floor building (or 105 or 108 or whatever)?

Why do we need this thread again? There's already a construction thread for this tower and this thread has offered nothing to the discussion of the merits of the spire (which we also have a thread for already).
__________________
Even if you are 1 in a million, there are still 7,000 people just like you...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted May 29, 2012, 6:25 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
El Barto
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: California/Argentina
Posts: 2,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonboy1983 View Post
Floors 20 to 63 and 65 to 89 are office floors. Floor 64 is the sky lobby.

For the record, I don't think this building is "a piece of crap," at least not anymore...

I kinda think it would have been cool if SOM would have designed One WTC like they did with the 80-story China World Trade Center completed a few years ago. That's my only hang-up (orther than the obvious spire fiasco). All in all, I'm excited for this building.

I think 90 is the top office floor.

The building is not a piece of crap, but compared to what it was with the spire (which made the building) it kind of is now unless something is done.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted May 29, 2012, 7:18 PM
chris123678's Avatar
chris123678 chris123678 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 471
Quote:
Originally Posted by plinko View Post
How dare you get technical! I was going to suggest looking up the word 'ratio'. But why get the actual terms right when one can keep calling an 85 floor building a 104 floor building (or 105 or 108 or whatever)?

Why do we need this thread again? There's already a construction thread for this tower and this thread has offered nothing to the discussion of the merits of the spire (which we also have a thread for already).

Ok, Not to be rude but I've explained why this thread is here on the other thread.
I created this thread because he construction thread is being overwhelmed with talk about the spire. I created this thread to talk about the design change.
The spire construction will always be in he construction thread.
But I created this for people to voice their opinions of the matter.

Next, it's not just about the spire,its about the safety and the base.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted May 31, 2012, 4:21 AM
Zapatan's Avatar
Zapatan Zapatan is offline
El Barto
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: California/Argentina
Posts: 2,021
I hope they at least paint over the antenna somehow, or fill it up with brodcast equipment to cover the skinny part.



Or Durst could die in the next month, that would be best of all...




.

Last edited by Zapatan; May 31, 2012 at 9:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2012, 7:40 PM
Guiltyspark's Avatar
Guiltyspark Guiltyspark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 692
Well I just got kicked over here from the 1WTC forum (I did not know this had its own forum) but there is now no way you can call this a spire. It is an antenna.

The CTBUH ranks the height of buildings using three different methods:

1. Height to architectural top of the building. This is the main criterion under which the CTBUH ranks the height of buildings. Heights are measured from the level of the lowest, significant, open-air, pedestrian entrance to the top of the building, inclusive of spires but excluding items such as flag poles or antennae.
2. To highest occupied floor: Height to the floor of the highest occupied floor of the building.
3. To tip of spire/antenna: Height to the tip of spire, pinnacle, antenna, mast or flag pole.

This building is not the nations tallest. Soon it will not even be New Yorks tallest. That is all there is to it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2012, 7:50 PM
Guiltyspark's Avatar
Guiltyspark Guiltyspark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 692
Why do we need this thread again? There's already a construction thread for this tower and this thread has offered nothing to the discussion of the merits of the spire (which we also have a thread for already).[/QUOTE]

We need it because when we want to talk about whether then antenna (yes, it is an antenna now, not a spire) should count as height, people say we are complaining and to go post on a a forum dedicated to this topic. This is not a welcome topic on the construction forum where all people want to do is look at the pictures carlos takes every day and debate the current height of the building and estimate the completion date.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jun 1, 2012, 9:38 PM
Dylan Leblanc's Avatar
Dylan Leblanc Dylan Leblanc is offline
Website Manager
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Victoria Canada
Posts: 7,896
I've seen this rendering of the new spire on SSC (the one on the right) but I have't found the full rendering posted anywhere. Does anyone have it?


http://xl.skyscrapercity.com/?page=b...erday=20120531
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2012, 9:38 AM
The_Architect's Avatar
The_Architect The_Architect is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,992
What a shame. That makes it look like the top of the Ostankino Tower..
__________________
Hope is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of our greatest strength, and our greatest weakness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 1:15 AM
ocman ocman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Paris
Posts: 1,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan Leblanc View Post
I've seen this rendering of the new spire on SSC (the one on the right) but I have't found the full rendering posted anywhere. Does anyone have it?


http://xl.skyscrapercity.com/?page=b...erday=20120531
The original chosen design was a nod of solidarity with the statue of liberty. The official first design shown above is an unfortunate "screw you!" to the statue of liberty. The last design is a "screw this. We just don't give a fk"

Last edited by ocman; Jun 3, 2012 at 2:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 1:25 AM
Hudson11's Avatar
Hudson11 Hudson11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan Leblanc View Post
I've seen this rendering of the new spire on SSC (the one on the right) but I have't found the full rendering posted anywhere. Does anyone have it?


http://xl.skyscrapercity.com/?page=b...erday=20120531



the New York Observer
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 2:06 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Twin Peaks, San Francisco
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,011
Thumbs down

The ring looks ridiculous now too--I didn't realize that they simplified it!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 2:51 AM
Hudson11's Avatar
Hudson11 Hudson11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by viewguysf View Post
The ring looks ridiculous now too--I didn't realize that they simplified it!
they didn't, it just doesn't have any equipment on it...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 3:20 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Twin Peaks, San Francisco
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 1,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson11 View Post
they didn't, it just doesn't have any equipment on it...
Thanks...I went to the main thread and read pages on this. It's painful to sort through the babble over there, especially people asking questions that have already been well explained, while others are talking about their dreams, discussing politics, etc., etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2012, 2:40 PM
chris123678's Avatar
chris123678 chris123678 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Philadelphia, Pa
Posts: 471
Spires can't be removed.
Antenna's can.
Since they don't plan to remove it, it's a spire. it may not look like one, but it is.
It's hideous.
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 9:34 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.