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
     
     
  #261  
Old Posted Feb 10, 2008, 2:51 PM
Ghost's Avatar
Ghost Ghost is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Finland
Posts: 251
Parts of _it_ has been removed!

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #262  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2008, 10:47 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
Parts of _it_ has been removed!
I can't believe that thing is gonna sit in the 7 WTC plaza. But anything to get it out of the way.

Quote:
By late February, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the site, expects to build a steel framework beneath the five-foot-wide staircase.

That will permit workers to isolate the stairs from the rest of the remaining Vesey Street structure....Besides the staircase, workers will salvage part of the plaza pavement. A plywood barrier and several columns from the subway station will be taken to Hangar 17 at Kennedy International Airport, where large-scale 9/11 artifacts are kept. The rest of the structure will be demolished.

Once the staircase is atop its steel cradle, it will be jacked up and rolled to Vesey Street. It will stand opposite the small park outside 7 World Trade Center until it is lowered by crane to the museum’s principal floor, almost at bedrock.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #263  
Old Posted Feb 11, 2008, 11:08 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
At this point what needs to be done needs to be done in order to get the show rolling. I can't say it's the most ideal location, but 2 WTC needs to get moving.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #264  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2008, 7:33 PM
CoolCzech's Avatar
CoolCzech CoolCzech is offline
Frigidus Maximus
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,618
Sort of off topic, but don't see anywhere else to post this:

THE NEXT PA FIASCO
BY STEVE CUOZZO


January 30, 2008 -- UNTIL a few weeks ago, the Port Authority was enter taining a pitch by architect Santiago Calatrava to add something new to the over-budget, behind-schedule "World Trade Center Transportation Hub" at Ground Zero.
Calatrava wanted to install a 110-foot-long skylight on the underground station's ceiling - a skylight that would pop up out of the earth in the 9/11 Memorial's northeast quadrant, wiping out landscaping long planned for the site.

Prodded by City Hall, the PA finally dropped the previously unreported idea after months of never quite saying yes or no. But its dithering raises the question: How many billions and how many years will it take to put a fancy roof over the heads of a relative handful of New Jersey commuters?

Here's another, given the MTA's Fulton Street Transit Center fiasco: How soon will the Port Authority's vastly more expensive "Hub" (reallyjust a new PATH terminal) meet its own moment of truth?


It's time for Gov. Eliot Pataki . . . oops, Spitzer . . . to quit presiding serenely and read the riot act to the PA - an agency he theoretically controls in Ground Zero matters. Otherwise, we may be in for a surprise like the one the MTA glumly gave us this week.

Despite PA propaganda to the contrary, the Hub project seems ever more unmoored. My sources say Calatrava is still proposing costly additions and alterations, even as the PA is fighting to cut costs.

The MTA this week admitted that it's given up building a "Grand Central of Downtown" at the Fulton site. The $900 million it's blowing on the boondoggle will pay for underground "improvements," but not the vaulted, glass-domed structure that was the scheme's public face for four years. Instead of a transit palace, we're stuck for the foreseeable future with a rat-infested empty lot.

Yet that's chump change compared to the PA project. First budgeted at $2.2 billion in 2004, its cost estimates now run at least $3.2 billion if it's built per Calatrava's vision.

Like Fulton, the PATH project is years behind schedule. Like the MTA, the PA is em- ploying "value engineering" - i.e., using cheaper materials and processes than first planned.

The marriage of a strong-willed "starchitect" and the plodding PA bureaucracy was unlikely to yield swift progress. But the new mess could push completion well beyond 2011, the PA's latest fallback target. Lower Manhattan Development Corp. chief Avi Schick has even floated 2013.

Calatrava is truly a great architect. But New Yorkers enchanted with the terminal's exterior design may be surprised to learn what's under its soaring roof: nothing. The vast, column-free, football-field-sized entry hall will merely be a void to walk through en route to the escalators (with a few stores around the perimeter.)

Planners have tied themselves in knots trying to build this so-called oculus - which features a retractable roof to let in sunlight - without bankrupting the PA.

Plus, the PA has grappled with Calatrava over "brainstorms" like the skylight, which would complicate both the terminal and memorial projects, as well as intrude on the work of memorial architects Michael Arad and Peter Walker.

The PA finally dropped the skylight for good only at the insistence of City Hall and Planning Commissioner Amanda Burden. But what's baffling is why the PA didn't just say no to Calatrava in the first place.

The PA claims to have everything under control. Yet nobody really knows when the project will be done, how much it will cost or what it'll look like. The original, bird-in-flight design has already morphed into what's been dubbed a "hulking stegosaurus." What next?

A few weeks ago, a PA commissioner, Bruce Blakeman, told trade paper Real Estate Weekly that major design changes (including ditching the retractable roof) were "being considered." (The PA later claimed Blakeman "misspoke.")

When the PATH design was first shown in 2004, it seemed a bold, visionary stroke. Yes, it was strictly optional - a utilitarian, underground PATH station would do fine for the 50,000 Jerseyans who'd ride it daily (vs. the 300,000 folks who get Downtown via subway). But $2.2 billion to pay for the Calatrava scheme was there, thanks to the feds and insurance money owed the PA.

And it was hard to argue with a vaulted grand pavilion with 150-foot high "wings" evoking a bird released into the air. But numerous Calatrava projects elsewhere have gone over-budget. And now the PA faces fast-inflating construction costs - a rate that goes up with each year the station is still waiting to come out of the ground.

Whatever the project's faults, no one wants to see it go the way of the Fulton Street Transit Center. Spitzer needs to step in now - and see to it that the PA knows exactly what it's going to build (and has the money to finish the job) before work actually starts.

Or Downtown might end up with not one but two empty lots for rats to roam, where transit riders were meant to soar.

*********************************

The thing might be completed by 2013??? Good God, why don't they just ditch the damned thing and partner with Westfield to help pay for a nice, modern station that uses all that empty space for retail space??
__________________
http://tinyurl.com/2acxb5t


I ❤️ NY
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #265  
Old Posted Feb 25, 2008, 8:57 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolCzech View Post
Sort of off topic, but don't see anywhere else to post this:
Post it here, the Calatrava PATH terminal.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #266  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2008, 6:38 AM
aliendroid aliendroid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 56
I think the renderings with FT are misleading. WTC2 building will look like a 1350 foot building to the roof and it will look about as tall as FT from the ground. From some angles it will look taller than FT due to it being more thin.

FT should be 1550' to the roof in order to make it as significant is it should look.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #267  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2008, 6:09 PM
gramsjdg's Avatar
gramsjdg gramsjdg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 755
I totally agree. Freedom Tower is much too close in height to 2 WTC, this is evidenced by the fact that the structural top of 2 WTC is higher than the (actual) roof of FT (1350 vs 1335). As far as I am concerned, the microwave dish apparratus that has become the "crown" on FT is not the "structural top" -only if they make it into an observation deck. Very dissapointing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #268  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2008, 7:48 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by gramsjdg View Post
I totally agree. Freedom Tower is much too close
in height to 2 WTC, this is evidenced by the fact that the structural top of 2
WTC is higher than the (actual) roof of FT (1350 vs 1335). As far as I am
concerned, the microwave dish apparratus that has become the "crown" on
FT is not the "structural top" -only if they make it into an observation deck.
Very dissapointing.
That doesn't make any sense. Why would you compare the "roof" of the
Freedom Tower to the "structural top" of Tower 2? Is there some deck up there
in Two we don't know about? The impact of both should be obvious from this rendering.

__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #269  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2008, 7:54 PM
gramsjdg's Avatar
gramsjdg gramsjdg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 755
I just mean that the structural top of 2 WTC actually looks like it is part of the building whereas the revised "crown" structure on FT looks like an add-on/afterthought. There is no continuity with the rest of the building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #270  
Old Posted Feb 27, 2008, 8:11 PM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by gramsjdg View Post
I just mean that the structural top of 2 WTC actually looks like it is part of the building whereas the revised "crown" structure on FT looks like an add-on/afterthought. There is no continuity with the rest of the building.
Still don't get it:

Quote:
this is evidenced by the fact that the structural top of 2
WTC is higher than the (actual) roof of FT (1350 vs 1335).
The top of the Freedom Tower facade is at 1,368 ft - higher that the highest point on Tower 2. You may not know it now, but the "crown" on the Freedom Tower will be much more integrated with the building. You'll get an understanding when a final rendering of the spire is released.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #271  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 12:52 AM
aliendroid aliendroid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Still don't get it:



The top of the Freedom Tower facade is at 1,368 ft - higher that the highest point on Tower 2. You may not know it now, but the "crown" on the Freedom Tower will be much more integrated with the building. You'll get an understanding when a final rendering of the spire is released.
All we are saying is that FT and 2WTC will look like they are about the same height for a tourist.
I like how in chicago you can see the roof of a taller building behind the roof of a pretty tall building due to the height difference. You will never have this effect with FT and 2WTC no matter how far away from them you go because they are about the same height.

The structural highest point on 2WTC is not like a spire, it actually adds to how high the building looks. 2WTC will not look like a 1250 foot tall building, it'll look 100 feet taller. FT will not look like a 1776 foot tall building, it will look like a 1368 foot tall building.

If they build the WTC complex exactly as planned I think it will be fantastic and world class. Probably better than anything that will be built in the world for decades because I think design > height. But if the FT were 1550' tall the step down effect from one building to the next would be awesome.

They should also go ahead and add 3 meters to 4WTC to make it an official supertall.


Right now Houston has more supertalls than NYC. Spires don't count so ESB is the only real supertall in NYC, while houston has 2 300m+ buildings to the real roof. I'd like to see 4 real supertalls buildt at the WTC in NY, a city of that size should have 20 supertalls by now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #272  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 1:00 AM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by aliendroid View Post
Right now Houston has more supertalls than NYC. Spires don't count so ESB is the only real supertall in NYC, while houston has 2 300m+ buildings to the real roof. I'd like to see 4 real supertalls buildt at the WTC in NY, a city of that size should have 20 supertalls by now.
I have to just read this and shake my head back and forth. No doubt that the person who wrote this is of young age, so I'll verbaly cut him a break, but regardless, this is just an utterly ridiculous post.

Aliendroid, take the time to scan through the entire New York sub-forum and embrace all the text. You'll learn quickly how and why what you posted is of such ridiculous thought.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #273  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 3:19 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dac150 View Post
I have to just read this and shake my head back and forth. No doubt that the person who wrote this is of young age, so I'll verbaly cut him a break
Yeah, I was about to comment, but I'll use your tactic. Probably just somebody fooling around anyway. No one can be that dense. Just too many ridiculous comments.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #274  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 3:47 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Meanwhile, just a sampling of the towers that have been revealed so far...




Larger pic
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #275  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 4:06 AM
StarScraperCity StarScraperCity is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYguy View Post
Meanwhile, just a sampling of the towers that have been revealed so far...




Larger pic
They said there would never be another skyscraper in New York after 9/11. They were full of crap.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #276  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 5:03 AM
philvia's Avatar
philvia philvia is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by aliendroid View Post
Right now Houston has more supertalls than NYC. Spires don't count so ESB is the only real supertall in NYC, while houston has 2 300m+ buildings to the real roof. I'd like to see 4 real supertalls buildt at the WTC in NY, a city of that size should have 20 supertalls by now.
you mean ones like this 305m 1,002ft building?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #277  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 5:05 AM
NYguy's Avatar
NYguy NYguy is offline
New Yorker for life
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Borough of Jersey
Posts: 51,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by StarScraperCity View Post
They said there would never be another skyscraper in New York after 9/11. They were full of crap.
And its not just New York. The skyscraper wave is almost everywhere now, new tallest either being built or proposed in a lot of places. I can't remember a time when it was ever like this.
__________________
NEW YORK is Back!

“Office buildings are our factories – whether for tech, creative or traditional industries we must continue to grow our modern factories to create new jobs,” said United States Senator Chuck Schumer.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #278  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 5:30 AM
aluminum's Avatar
aluminum aluminum is offline
I love boxes.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 637
Quote:
Originally Posted by aliendroid View Post
All we are saying is that FT and 2WTC will look like they are about the same height for a tourist.
I like how in chicago you can see the roof of a taller building behind the roof of a pretty tall building due to the height difference. You will never have this effect with FT and 2WTC no matter how far away from them you go because they are about the same height.

The structural highest point on 2WTC is not like a spire, it actually adds to how high the building looks. 2WTC will not look like a 1250 foot tall building, it'll look 100 feet taller. FT will not look like a 1776 foot tall building, it will look like a 1368 foot tall building.

If they build the WTC complex exactly as planned I think it will be fantastic and world class. Probably better than anything that will be built in the world for decades because I think design > height. But if the FT were 1550' tall the step down effect from one building to the next would be awesome.

They should also go ahead and add 3 meters to 4WTC to make it an official supertall.


Right now Houston has more supertalls than NYC. Spires don't count so ESB is the only real supertall in NYC, while houston has 2 300m+ buildings to the real roof. I'd like to see 4 real supertalls buildt at the WTC in NY, a city of that size should have 20 supertalls by now.
I totally agree with everything you said in the above post. I even agree with fact that Houston has more supertalls than New York right now.
Don't mind the New Yorkers, they have a right to love their city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #279  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 6:18 AM
aliendroid aliendroid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dac150 View Post
I have to just read this and shake my head back and forth. No doubt that the person who wrote this is of young age, so I'll verbaly cut him a break, but regardless, this is just an utterly ridiculous post.

Aliendroid, take the time to scan through the entire New York sub-forum and embrace all the text. You'll learn quickly how and why what you posted is of such ridiculous thought.
There's no point to fighting about this. We both probably would like to see 20 supertalls be built in NYC over the next 10 years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #280  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2008, 6:49 AM
Jobohimself Jobohimself is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 161
May I remind the participants of the pissing contest that a supertall is over 1,000 feet high?

I can count the amount of supertalls in Houston on one finger.
__________________
San Diego: The epitome of poor urban planning.
Visit the city of fleas! http://las-pulgas.myminicity.com/
http://las-pulgas.myminicity.com/ind
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 10:23 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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