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 > Global Projects & Construction > Supertall Construction

    

One World Trade Center in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • New York Skyscraper Diagram
New York Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #20961  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 5:52 PM
1Boston's Avatar
1Boston 1Boston is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Near Boston,MA
Posts: 265
I'm surprised Durst has the ability to change the design of the spire into an antennae especially so late in the construction progress. Can they just do that or do that have to request it, cause it seems like it affects a lot of things like the entire design and height of the building. If they can then the PA is gonna have to stop advertising the "symbolic 1776'" thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20962  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 6:18 PM
SoaringSkylines SoaringSkylines is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: 900 Biscayne Bay; Miami
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1Boston View Post
I'm surprised Durst has the ability to change the design of the spire into an antennae especially so late in the construction progress. Can they just do that or do that have to request it, cause it seems like it affects a lot of things like the entire design and height of the building. If they can then the PA is gonna have to stop advertising the "symbolic 1776'" thing.

Agreed. The building TECHNICALLY isn't even going to be 1,776 ft. Please correct me if I am wrong, but the precise measurement on the ground around the base to the very tip top tip of 1WTC, it will be 1,787 feet. (I'm even hearing 1,792; including the lightning rod).

THEN AGAIN, that may change now since apparently it's okay to do sudden changes to the architecture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20963  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 6:30 PM
rjb001's Avatar
rjb001 rjb001 is offline
Eagle Scout since 9/28/09
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten View Post
Does this affect the final height?
The is the one question I'd like to know the answer to. They're not also making it slimmer, are they?
__________________
Pshh... What dark ages?!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20964  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 6:33 PM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by marshall View Post
I agree, I mean, what's next? First off, let me say that I actually like the design for 1wtc (as envisioned by SOM and Childes) but it seems like things keep moving in the wrong direction..There was a huge opportunity to build a truly great, evocative, and cutting edge new World Trade Center. The powers that be apparently decided to go the cheap route, cutting corners whenever possible. Well guys, this is NOT the building to do that on!I actually made my peace with this building and it was growing on me, but if they actually change the spire it will look ridiculous. The proportions will be totally wrong. It will look like a skyscraper with a really bad haircut if they give it a skinny minny antenna. I guess at least it will still have the indoor observation decks, which will be nice, and the building will be the same height as the old towers...But they need to leave the design ALONE!!!!
Like someone forgetting to put bathrooms in the Memorial Plaza? Clearly a bunch of amateurs are designing everything. This spire redesign should not come as a surprise to anyone, by the way! The Port Authority has been trying to cheapify the project from the beginning! We're lucky to be getting a tower at all, there were far worse, and probably cheaper, proposals for rebuilding the site. An antenna would be a huge downgrade for sure. My issue is that this could mean the tower losing its 1776 ft height, meaning it would be even less out of contention for world's tallest building. What a total disgrace.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20965  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 6:47 PM
CarlosV's Avatar
CarlosV CarlosV is offline
Bionic Boogie
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 3,821
^^^
FYI, it was decided "to respect the memorial plaza" that no toilets would be build above ground. they will be located in the museum below (for a price).


DSC_0077 copy by Ceva321, on Flickr
__________________
I Love NY
September 11, 2001 Never Forget
Save water, shower with a friend!
SSP member since 2003
Please do not use any of my photos or videos without my permission. thanks
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20966  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 6:56 PM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlosV View Post
^^^
FYI, it was decided "to respect the memorial plaza" that no toilets would be build above ground. they will be located in the museum below (for a price).
First I've heard of it, and I've been following the project for 5 years now. Second, that doesn't make any sense, where are people supposed to go to the bathroom?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20967  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 7:10 PM
dchan's Avatar
dchan dchan is offline
Mandate...get it on.
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Fresh Meadows, NY
Posts: 2,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
First I've heard of it, and I've been following the project for 5 years now. Second, that doesn't make any sense, where are people supposed to go to the bathroom?
This isn't a large park, nor is it an isolated park in the middle of nowhere. For example, right across West St. is the Winter Garden, which has excellent bathroom facilities.
__________________
I take the high road because it's the only route on my GPS nowadays. #selfsatisfied

Come and visit the Manchester Pub today!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20968  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 7:11 PM
sterlippo1 sterlippo1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of Boston, Massachusetts
Posts: 1,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
First I've heard of it, and I've been following the project for 5 years now. Second, that doesn't make any sense, where are people supposed to go to the bathroom?
in the museum below
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20969  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 7:21 PM
aquablue's Avatar
aquablue aquablue is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,093
If they change the spire, I'd be very upset. For one thing, it would show that NY really doesn't give a shit about aesthetics, just business. A site like this is so visually important. Putting dollars over aesthetics is just philistine behavior.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20970  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 8:11 PM
NYC GUY's Avatar
NYC GUY NYC GUY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 547
What exactly is the radome of the spire?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20971  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 8:13 PM
NYC GUY's Avatar
NYC GUY NYC GUY is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 547
1 WTC seeks broadcast antenna to lure stations
Share

The Associated Press
Published: Tuesday, Mar. 6, 2012 - 6:14 am
NEW YORK -- Officials at the 1,776-foot World Trade Center tower want to install a broadcast antenna in an effort to attract radio and television stations currently broadcasting from the Empire State Building.

The senior vice president of the Durst Organization, Thomas Bow, tells the Wall Street Journal (http://on.wsj.com/xupqXR) the development firm wants the tower to become the premiere broadcast facility in New York City, just like the original towers had been before the terrorist attacks in 2001.

A spokesman for Malkin Holdings, an owner of the Empire State Building, declined to comment.

Durst says it expects to be able to take in about $10 million a year in rents and fees from potential broadcasters.

The tower is currently under construction. It's expected to be completed at the end of 2013.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/06/431...#storylink=cpy

Found this article online.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20972  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 8:19 PM
gramsjdg's Avatar
gramsjdg gramsjdg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by lake of the nations View Post
No it doesn't.
Yes it does. CTBUH defines a spire as an architectural feature. The radome on the ANTENNA MAST is what makes it a spire as the radome is an architectural feature. In removing that element the spire is no longer a spire but an antenna mast, therefore the height of the building without the radome is 1368 ft.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20973  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 8:24 PM
Yankee fan for life's Avatar
Yankee fan for life Yankee fan for life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brooklyn new York
Posts: 287
What the wall street article is saying is that a interior antenna will be installed and the outer cone casing will be thinner and less conical then the original design and from what,i am hearing through the grape vine is that the Radome will be removed.

Last edited by Yankee fan for life; Mar 6, 2012 at 8:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20974  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 8:37 PM
cadiomals cadiomals is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 85
If it ends up looking like the ugly thin needles on top of the New York Times, Conde Nast and Bank of America buildings, I'm gonna be pissed. I never bought into the whole 1776 feet tall hype in the first place but this definitely will not count. At least the radome spire was actually a spire, noticeable and somewhat artistic. This will be nothing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20975  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 8:52 PM
Yankee fan for life's Avatar
Yankee fan for life Yankee fan for life is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Brooklyn new York
Posts: 287
Can some one show me where does it define that the criteria for a spire must have a Radome casing because the only purpose for a Radome is for structural, weatherproofing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20976  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 9:16 PM
marshall marshall is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 291
So, if they make the spire into a skinny antenna, will that decrease the height? Will it still be 1776 feet? Personally, I always thought that arbitrary 1776 height figure was stupid anyway, I mean, the real measure of height is a building's structure, not the antenna or spire on top..Thats where the real height comes from..Also, 1wtc will only be the same height as the old twin towers if the parapet is on the roof, not the roof slab itself...If they were going to keep changing the design like this, why even bother? Personally, among the final WTC designs, I was in favor of Norman Foster's "Kissing Towers" it was much taller and more interesting architecturally....I like 1wtc, but the spire is SUCH an integral part of its design because of how it tapers, they need to leave the damn thing ALONE!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20977  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 9:28 PM
SoaringSkylines SoaringSkylines is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: 900 Biscayne Bay; Miami
Posts: 182
Will someone please provide us with renderings NOW with what it "may" look like?

Like if it DOES happen, give us a speculation picture of that ugly skinny stick at the top.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20978  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 9:47 PM
Towersteve Towersteve is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by BStyles View Post
Well this was a troll-ish remark. We're already at the top and yet people want more and more...sheesh. It amazes me that after a decade, there's still an argument left. Get up with the times, people, the proposals are in the past. We have bigger things to worry about, so please, take your concerns to an appropriate thread.

Hearing things through the grapevine does not count as official information, especially from a group of journalists who don't know any better. You're better off awaiting official reports when NY Guy posts them.
This seems on topic to me. He mentions the spire revision proposal and the buildings design. I understand why it's annoying to bring up the design at this point but I don't think it makes someone a troll. I would feel like its a bait and switch if they change the spire at this point. But until such a decision is made (not proposed) I am not that concerned about it. Have a good day everybody.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20979  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 9:49 PM
marshall marshall is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 291
Quote:
Originally Posted by BStyles View Post
Well this was a troll-ish remark. We're already at the top and yet people want more and more...sheesh. It amazes me that after a decade, there's still an argument left. Get up with the times, people, the proposals are in the past. We have bigger things to worry about, so please, take your concerns to an appropriate thread.

Hearing things through the grapevine does not count as official information, especially from a group of journalists who don't know any better. You're better off awaiting official reports when NY Guy posts them.

Okay first off, it was not a trollish remark, I was making a point relevant to the last few comments regarding the spire that they should NOT consider changing the spire design, period! I'm sure I am among the vast majority who have followed 1wtc who think they should not change the design anymore. As I stated, I'm fine with 1WTC if they just leave it alone, and not change the spire. Hopefully they won't. Period.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20980  
Old Posted Mar 6, 2012, 9:58 PM
Roadcruiser1's Avatar
Roadcruiser1 Roadcruiser1 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,091
To stop the arguments in this thread I decided to do a research on masts. Technically even if the radome is removed and the spire is made skinny it would still be a mast. From what I read as long as a mast on a structure is held up by stays or guy wires it is a mast and therefore would be part of the structure. Therefore One World Trade Center is 1,776 feet high when complete.

To prove it.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mast

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_masts_and_towers

Quote:
The terms "mast" and "tower" are often used interchangeably. However, in structural engineering terms, a tower is a self-supporting or cantilevered structure, while a mast is held up by stays or guys. Broadcast engineers in the UK use the same terminology. In US broadcast engineering, a tower is an antenna structure attached to the ground, whereas a mast is a vertical antenna support mounted on some other structure (which itself may be a tower, a building, or a vehicle). Masts (to use the civil engineering terminology) tend to be cheaper to build but require an extended area surrounding them to accommodate the guy wires. Towers are more commonly used in cities where land is in short supply.
Look at Otie's picture. Credits to Otie of course. The mast is held up by guy wires. As long as it is held up by those wires it counts as part of the building. Correct me Otie if I am wrong since I just read this up online. I only study buildings so I am not an expert on masts.

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 4:55 AM.

     

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