NEW YORK | Twin Towers of the WTC | 1368/1362 feet | 110 FLOORS | 1972/1973-2001 - Page 27

Chapelo · #**521** Posted **Nov 13, 2012, 2:46 AM**

Another one of Yamasaki and Associates in their Troy, Michigan office with their model of the World Trade Center, 1971. Photo by Joe Vaccaro.

NYC · #**522** Posted **Nov 22, 2012, 1:42 AM**

Nice gallery of some WTC pics from construction to the mid-80s.
http://www4.uwsp.edu/geo/projects/ge...976/WTC004.htm

Yackemflaber69 · #**523** Posted **Nov 22, 2012, 9:29 PM**

nice pictures

NewYorkDominates · #**524** Posted **Nov 27, 2012, 6:10 AM**

The difference...

Found by Chapelo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8379824@N07/8197755444/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25763879@N07/8170541012/

Agnes Denes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gabrie...b_2164230.html

WorldTradeCenter · #**525** Posted **Nov 29, 2012, 1:06 AM**

I don't like the new building they built to the slight northeast of the WFC, it further damages the World Trade Center's dominance.

uaarkson · #**526** Posted **Nov 29, 2012, 12:38 PM**

Nah, it compliments it quite nicely.

DrNest · #**527** Posted **Nov 29, 2012, 2:13 PM**

I wasn't a big fan of that building at first, but now I've seen the skyline with it in in person I like it. Like uuarkson says, it compliments the WFC well.

Yackemflaber69 · #**528** Posted **Nov 30, 2012, 5:31 AM**

NYguy · #**529** Posted **Nov 30, 2012, 9:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chapelo

Another one of Yamasaki and Associates in their Troy, Michigan office with their model of the World Trade Center, 1971. Photo by Joe Vaccaro.

It's ironic that around the world, large towers are being built around large open plazas/spaces as the WTC was back then. Now New York has gone back to building they way towers should be built in cities, connected to the neighborhoods and streets like everything else.

Rich Taylor Jr

Yackemflaber69 · #**530** Posted **Dec 1, 2012, 12:13 AM**

love that pic

Chapelo · #**531** Posted **Dec 1, 2012, 12:51 AM**

Great picture, exactly one month before the South Tower was topped out (and became the second tallest building in the world).

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYguy

It's ironic that around the world, large towers are being built around large open plazas/spaces as the WTC was back then. Now New York has gone back to building they way towers should be built in cities, connected to the neighborhoods and streets like everything else.

Well said, and I think New York learned alot from the original WTC, and why the superblock was such a bad idea. There are some cities where the superblock can work, and can even be conducive to a vibrant streetscape, but not New York.

If the eastern side of the superblock hadn't been built (so in other words, only the Twins, buildings 3 and 6 would have been constructed), with Greenwich Street running through, I think it would have been a better-scaled urban plaza at the base of the towers, and as such, more integrated into the overall city. Of course, if the complex had been built in that manner, the mall wouldn't have been possible.

Chapelo · #**532** Posted **Dec 1, 2012, 3:13 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewYorkDominates

The difference...

Found by Chapelo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8379824@N07/8197755444/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25763879@N07/8170541012/

Nice! Here's the photos.

1998

Lower Manhattan Skyline. by Manhattan4, on Flickr

2012

The City of New York by beanhead4529, on Flickr

ThatOneGuy · #**533** Posted **Dec 1, 2012, 6:18 PM**

The Guardians, and then the Group of Mourners.

Matt · #**534** Posted **Dec 2, 2012, 4:14 AM**

I can't stay quiet while everyone bad-mouths the original Twins and says how much better this "new" skyline looks. I'm not going to demagogue or milk the events which got us to this point, but that was over 11 years ago and I posit that many readers/posters here are too young to remember (or not old enough to have fully appreciated) the original World Trade Center.

Having grown up in New York when the picture above was taken (1988), and having worked in Manhattan all throughout the 1990s, anyone who ever been even remotely in the vicinity of the Twin Towers CAN NOT DENY the sheer impact, feelings of power, awe, intimidation, and the sense of being overwhelmed as you saw those two monoliths soaring strongly above you. They didn't need froo-froo ornamentation, a sleek angled design, a spire or a radome to make their point - they did it with their pure size and mass alone. As boxy as they were, that was their charm. They achieved everything a skyscraper is supposed to achieve just on the merit of their size and monolithical presence. And during certain times of the day when the sun angle was right, seeing that 1,300' tall shadow that Tower 2 cast onto the side of Tower 1 was simply beyond describe. Long live the original World Trade Center!

Hurricanes · #**535** Posted **Dec 2, 2012, 4:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt

I can't stay quiet while everyone bad-mouths the original Twins and says how much better this "new" skyline looks. I'm not going to demagogue or milk the events which got us to this point, but that was over 11 years ago and I posit that many readers/posters here are too young to remember (or not old enough to have fully appreciated) the original World Trade Center.

Having grown up in New York when the picture above was taken (1988), and having worked in Manhattan all throughout the 1990s, anyone who ever been even remotely in the vicinity of the Twin Towers CAN NOT DENY the sheer impact, feelings of power, awe, intimidation, and the sense of being overwhelmed as you saw those two monoliths soaring strongly above you. They didn't need froo-froo ornamentation, a sleek angled design, a spire or a radome to make their point - they did it with their pure size and mass alone. As boxy as they were, that was their charm. They achieved everything a skyscraper is supposed to achieve just on the merit of their size and monolithical presence. And during certain times of the day when the sun angle was right, seeing that 1,300' tall shadow that Tower 2 cast onto the side of Tower 1 was simply beyond describe. Long live the original World Trade Center!

I agree with you 100%.

While the new building looks amazing, we should not downplay how amazing the Twin Towers were. Sure their design seems outdated compared to the new building. Yeah they were these big giant blocks sticking out of the ground with no real features to enjoy. But that is surely what made them seem like titans among mere mortal men.

I remember very little from my trip to NYC with my parents when I was younger. Yet one thing I do remember was standing between the towers, and looking up at the largest buildings I have ever seen(even to this day) in my life. To me they looked like to bad ass mothers.
-Joel

Roadcruiser1 · #**536** Posted **Dec 2, 2012, 8:24 AM**

To tell you the truth I still love the Twin Towers way more than One World Trade Center due to the fact I grew up under their shadow. One World Trade Center is just way too different. It's just glass. It has a unique shape, but it's just glass. It's going to go out of style sometime and then we will be back to square one. The original World Trade Center wasn't pure glass. It had aluminum siding and glass. It has flare and personality. These modern buildings today are just glass. I know I am going to be killed on a thread for this post but I don't care.

PMadFlyer · #**537** Posted **Dec 2, 2012, 3:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roadcruiser1

To tell you the truth I still love the Twin Towers way more than One World Trade Center due to the fact I grew up under their shadow. One World Trade Center is just way too different. It's just glass. It has a unique shape, but it's just glass. It's going to go out of style sometime and then we will be back to square one. The original World Trade Center wasn't pure glass. It had aluminum siding and glass. It has flare and personality. These modern buildings today are just glass. I know I am going to be killed on a thread for this post but I don't care.

I wouldn't be so worried. A lot of people, myself included, did not want a glass wall at first. Today, the finest office space is expected to have uninterrupted windows. But also, any kind of vertical line pattern would have been destroyed by the irregular shape of the building.

PZelda · #**538** Posted **Dec 2, 2012, 4:05 PM**

Plus -- the original Twin Towers' designs were thought up back in the 1960s... It's pretty easy for designs to quickly become outdated.

I never got to go to NYC prior to 2001, but I know I would have greatly preferred staring at the twins over the then-Bell building. The new 1 WTC is the same size the original twins were, and I've seen 1 WTC daily on my last couple visits to NYC... And I simply can't take my eyes off it whenever I see it in person. It's really, Really, REALLY freakin' massive. The latest pic NYGuy posted gives you a pretty good sense of the scale of the new WTC buildings. 4 WTC is, what, 400 feet shorter than 1 WTC? And it's effing ENORMOUS too. 7 WTC is literally next to 1 WTC, and the latter just DWARFS the former. Un-fucking-believable to witness for yourself.

I live in North Dakota... I believe ND is home to the tallest capitol building in the US (19 stories high), and it has *nothing* on 1 WTC, although I think the base of it is wider than 1 WTC is. You just feel so tiny next to it! And I know the original twins had that same effect on people.

I, myself, wasn't crazy over 1 WTC's design, but it's grown on me and I adore it. Simply stunning to view in person. It's so tall, the sky just swallows it right up. When I see skyline pictures with the new WTC buildings in it, I always think, "This just feels so... Right."

There's so much to look at!

NewYorkDominates · #**539** Posted **Dec 2, 2012, 5:13 PM**

Dp

sbarn · #**540** Posted **Dec 3, 2012, 3:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by PZelda

Plus -- the original Twin Towers' designs were thought up back in the 1960s... It's pretty easy for designs to quickly become outdated.

I never got to go to NYC prior to 2001, but I know I would have greatly preferred staring at the twins over the then-Bell building. The new 1 WTC is the same size the original twins were, and I've seen 1 WTC daily on my last couple visits to NYC... And I simply can't take my eyes off it whenever I see it in person. It's really, Really, REALLY freakin' massive. The latest pic NYGuy posted gives you a pretty good sense of the scale of the new WTC buildings. 4 WTC is, what, 400 feet shorter than 1 WTC? And it's effing ENORMOUS too. 7 WTC is literally next to 1 WTC, and the latter just DWARFS the former. Un-fucking-believable to witness for yourself.

I live in North Dakota... I believe ND is home to the tallest capitol building in the US (19 stories high), and it has *nothing* on 1 WTC, although I think the base of it is wider than 1 WTC is. You just feel so tiny next to it! And I know the original twins had that same effect on people.

I, myself, wasn't crazy over 1 WTC's design, but it's grown on me and I adore it. Simply stunning to view in person. It's so tall, the sky just swallows it right up. When I see skyline pictures with the new WTC buildings in it, I always think, "This just feels so... Right."

There's so much to look at!

Agreed. One World Trade looks enormous in person, particularly from the outer boroughs. I saw it recently from the Queens Midtown Tunnel approach and it blew my mind how massive it looks.