HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction


Two World Trade Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
New York Projects & Construction Forum

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3541  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2015, 9:15 PM
Juanses Juanses is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 26
I am a fan of the playful, less monolithic and stairway to heaven symbolism this tower adds to Gotham. Yes the original was more sexy but so what... We have enough sexy going on Uptown at 57th St...

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3542  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 10:23 AM
artspook's Avatar
artspook artspook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: manhattan
Posts: 644
NYGuy - you really can't see how Foster's design is better ? . .
I respect your viewpoint - but I'll tell ya' how . . or give it a try 'cause I care . . I have no illusions of changing your mind . . It's just a strong gut feeling - which is hard to put into words . . . Hope this doesn't sound dreadfully pretentious.

I ask What do people see in the Ingels version ? . . other than that's the one on the table and they really don't care . . Maybe it's just their impatience . . even fear that nothing will get built if this one doesn't.
Look at Hunser's comparison of the Northern facades (post #3390) . . .
It's a vertically designed subtle Foster tower with a crown . . .
vs. a horizontally designed behemoth flat-top Ingles tower . . .

FOSTER's - north face . . . Vertical - Staunch - Elegant - Imposing . . .
1- astute vertical cleft up center of building-face gratifyingly divides sense of obese bulk
. . . (looks less wide therefore proportionally taller) . . .
2- The side of the structure isn't boringly flat . . . because the two vertical flanks on either side of the central vertical crevice . . angle slightly back . . receding towards the outer edges . . These 2 different planes will subtly reflect light differently.
3- for an overall dignified restraint (minimalistic aesthetic) . . the shaft's vertical planes are wisely unbroken from top to bottom . . to emphasize the structure's visual verticality - and magnify the other few but significant architectural gestures mentioned here . . . (Our eyes are not distracted or diverted sideways by interruptions or horizontal forms) . . .
4- the most dramatic gesture - the sharply sloped crown- is aptly positioned to respectfully defer to Tower One & the memorial by sloping away from them - rather than to fall in towards and crowd them as the Ingles top box does . . .

INGELS' - north face . . . (I'll wisely forego my 4 adjectives here) . . .
These boxes aren't like Calatrava's sophisticated hip contemporary cubes stacked at 80 South St . . Nor are these steps the "site-specific-solution" steep verticals of 111 W57th.
This simplistic configuration is ill proportioned broad-bottomed bulk . . hardly the proportion of grandeur the site deserves after the iconic twins. The boxes and steps and overhangs and horrendous horizontal lines - visually deemphasize exciting vertical skyscraper momentum . . They fight the aesthetic of the building's best feature - it's great height.
What it says to me is - Hey look steps! . . Boxes get smaller as you go up the stack - 'till you get to the insignificant "nothing-to-look-at" flat no-crown box . . It's an unsightly embarrassment . . . Hardly NY sophistication.
Viewed from the North and East the boxes appear to be toppling stupidly into the site that they ostensibly honor . . . At many other sites it would be fine.

Unfortunately when viewed from the North - this broad busy horizontal mess clashes with New York's downtown skyline. "Stairway from hell invades 911 Memorial" (strident - sorry) . . . I'll save my hot air to critique the southern facades at another time. Thanks.
__________________
artSpook
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3543  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 2:11 PM
Kurtz's Avatar
Kurtz Kurtz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Roma(Rome)
Posts: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by artspook View Post
NYGuy - you really can't see how Foster's design is better ? . .
I respect your viewpoint - but I'll tell ya' how . . or give it a try 'cause I care . . I have no illusions of changing your mind . . It's just a strong gut feeling - which is hard to put into words . . . Hope this doesn't sound dreadfully pretentious.

I ask What do people see in the Ingels version ? . . other than that's the one on the table and they really don't care . . Maybe it's just their impatience . . even fear that nothing will get built if this one doesn't.
Look at Hunser's comparison of the Northern facades (post #3390) . . .
It's a vertically designed subtle Foster tower with a crown . . .
vs. a horizontally designed behemoth flat-top Ingles tower . . .

FOSTER's - north face . . . Vertical - Staunch - Elegant - Imposing . . .
1- astute vertical cleft up center of building-face gratifyingly divides sense of obese bulk
. . . (looks less wide therefore proportionally taller) . . .
2- The side of the structure isn't boringly flat . . . because the two vertical flanks on either side of the central vertical crevice . . angle slightly back . . receding towards the outer edges . . These 2 different planes will subtly reflect light differently.
3- for an overall dignified restraint (minimalistic aesthetic) . . the shaft's vertical planes are wisely unbroken from top to bottom . . to emphasize the structure's visual verticality - and magnify the other few but significant architectural gestures mentioned here . . . (Our eyes are not distracted or diverted sideways by interruptions or horizontal forms) . . .
4- the most dramatic gesture - the sharply sloped crown- is aptly positioned to respectfully defer to Tower One & the memorial by sloping away from them - rather than to fall in towards and crowd them as the Ingles top box does . . .

INGELS' - north face . . . (I'll wisely forego my 4 adjectives here) . . .
These boxes aren't like Calatrava's sophisticated hip contemporary cubes stacked at 80 South St . . Nor are these steps the "site-specific-solution" steep verticals of 111 W57th.
This simplistic configuration is ill proportioned broad-bottomed bulk . . hardly the proportion of grandeur the site deserves after the iconic twins. The boxes and steps and overhangs and horrendous horizontal lines - visually deemphasize exciting vertical skyscraper momentum . . They fight the aesthetic of the building's best feature - it's great height.
What it says to me is - Hey look steps! . . Boxes get smaller as you go up the stack - 'till you get to the insignificant "nothing-to-look-at" flat no-crown box . . It's an unsightly embarrassment . . . Hardly NY sophistication.
Viewed from the North and East the boxes appear to be toppling stupidly into the site that they ostensibly honor . . . At many other sites it would be fine.

Unfortunately when viewed from the North - this broad busy horizontal mess clashes with New York's downtown skyline. "Stairway from hell invades 911 Memorial" (strident - sorry) . . . I'll save my hot air to critique the southern facades at another time. Thanks.
Come on..
the foster's was bulky without if and without but; it is useless "to climb on mirrors", the Ingels tower is much more elegant and more graceful.

For the rest, well.. no more coarse and kitsch giants zircons in face to the memorial and tower 1.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3544  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 3:35 PM
UTEPman UTEPman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 235
Elegant and graceful are not words anyone should use to describe this tower...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3545  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 3:56 PM
JR Ewing JR Ewing is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Ancient Egypt
Posts: 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunser View Post
Hopefully both 80 South and 125G are in the 1,300' - 1,400' range so the WTC isn't the focal point of Lower Manhattan anymore. And of course a 2,000 footer would be nice to dwarf them all.

EDIT:


Stunning!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3546  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 4:47 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,304
Yeah but the 2,000 footer should be 2WTC.

Since they seem intent on symbolism, 2,001'

So you've got the original WTC height in 1WTC with antennae to 1,776' and 2,001' in 2WTC.

Makes sense to me.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3547  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 6:05 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
Showed a friend of mine the renderings who's a grad in architecture from NJIT yesterday, and it ruined his day.

Although I told him to give it a chance but he seemed reluctant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3548  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 6:21 PM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,489
Hanging gardens my ass, they ALWAYS put trees and green shit on the renders to make it look pretty and eco-freindly. When the building is actually constructed it ends up being nothing but cold, concrete terraces. You should all know better.

They had the same "hanging gardens" in the renders with the Bank of America tower.
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3549  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 6:25 PM
Guiltyspark's Avatar
Guiltyspark Guiltyspark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 937
Quote:
Originally Posted by The North One View Post
Hanging gardens my ass, they ALWAYS put trees and green shit on the renders to make it look pretty and eco-freindly. When the building is actually constructed it ends up being nothing but cold, concrete terraces. You should all know better.

They had the same "hanging gardens" in the renders with the Bank of America tower.
Yeah, I will believe it when I see it. Tree roots are very destructive and require a lot of space below them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3550  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 6:32 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 45,696
They should put mini oil wells instead of trees for Fox. Hanging Gardens of Petroleum.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3551  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 7:35 PM
timpdx's Avatar
timpdx timpdx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 365
I say slap some supergraphics on this puppy and call it good

__________________
Travel, Scenic & Architecture Photos at: http://www.pixelmap.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3552  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 8:13 PM
Submariner's Avatar
Submariner Submariner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by timpdx View Post
I say slap some supergraphics on this puppy and call it good

I have such a patriotic erection right now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3553  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 8:54 PM
JR Ewing JR Ewing is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Ancient Egypt
Posts: 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
I guess it's time to change my lock screen!



No where in the city can one witness such architecture. I don't even think there is a tower at this height in the world that has such a feature that has both a series of cantilevers & setbacks that this tower will have.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3554  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 9:29 PM
Vertical_Gotham's Avatar
Vertical_Gotham Vertical_Gotham is offline
N40° 46.8925', W073° 57.3
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 300
Stairways to Heaven!



__________________
See my Hudson Yards Map
http://i.imgur.com/FVrYwpy.jpg
(Once in, Click image to enlarge)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3555  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 9:40 PM
stormkingfan stormkingfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: PhilaPA
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR Ewing View Post
Stunning!
/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3556  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 9:43 PM
stormkingfan stormkingfan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: PhilaPA
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by hunser View Post

wtf??.......
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3557  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2015, 11:51 PM
JR Ewing JR Ewing is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Ancient Egypt
Posts: 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vertical_Gotham View Post
Stairways to Heaven!



Beautiful!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3558  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2015, 2:38 AM
CoolCzech's Avatar
CoolCzech CoolCzech is offline
Frigidus Maximus
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,618
I'm genuinely bemused by all the negativity about this tower. It's a genuine 1,340 footer. It's massive & impressive in sheer scale. From the West it and the FT will strongly resemble a resurrection of the old Twins. From other angles it will be sui generis, cutting edge - everything the new WTC was criticized for NOT being.

Maybe the hanging gardens won't happen, like the radome on the WTC 1 spire didn't happen, like the WTC3 crossbeams didn't happen - like the Foster Diamonds won't happen. Practicality wins out when real money is involved. But believe it - the eastern view of WTC2 will become an instant NYC Icon.

Enough about who does or doesn't like the design... Any news on WHEN this thing gets under construction? I would imagine very, very soon...
__________________
http://tinyurl.com/2acxb5t


I ❤️ NY
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3559  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2015, 3:30 AM
The North One's Avatar
The North One The North One is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolCzech View Post
I'm genuinely bemused by all the negativity about this tower. It's a genuine 1,340 footer.
There it is again and the obsession with height, I'll never understand it, it's like the proverbial penis size of skyscrapers to you people. Height is nice, but it's not the end all be all, and it certainly doesn't magically make for great architecture, in fact it can make things much worse. (maybe this metaphor wasn't such a good idea )

Great design and architecture has absolutely nothing to do with height. Look at the Hearst tower, Look at Aqua, hell even 8 spruce street (ok those last two are actually quite tall but you get the point).

The previous design fit well with the site, it attracted attention but also didn't steal away the show, and the slanted roof was obviously unique and beautiful and complimented 1 WTC, the star of the site.
While you have every right to like this tower for its height and its supposed, uhhh... homage.. to the "original" twins (talk about living in the past), others have every right to hate it for it's bland, awkward and uninspiring design (especially when it comes to the street level).
__________________
Spawn of questionable parentage!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3560  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2015, 3:37 AM
Hypothalamus's Avatar
Hypothalamus Hypothalamus is offline
Homo sapiens sapiens
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: 3rd planet from the Sun
Posts: 1,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolCzech View Post
I'm genuinely bemused by all the negativity about this tower.
People had Foster's design subtly, hopefully ingrained in their vision of the new WTC complex for nearly a decade. People also quietly understood the vulnerability of the original proposal, notably after other significant architectural elements on other towers had been scraped or revised. That being said, faced with the reality that Foster's design is now not being realized, the psych will temporarily exist in a state of denial, possibly dismissing the change, regardless of how subjectively superior or inferior the new design may be.
__________________
“If I have done the public any service, it is due to my patient thought.” ― Isaac Newton

~ My Stamford, CT Thread ~~ My Danbury, CT Thread ~
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 > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:38 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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