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 > Highrise Construction

    

Four 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
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 3:16 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 33,835
Smile NEW YORK | 150 Greenwich St. | 977 FT / 297 M | 72 FLOORS





Mr. Maki’s Tower 4 at 150 Greenwich Street, between Cortlandt and Liberty Streets, is the most understated of the lot, with a sheer curtain wall. The 61-story tower rises for most of its height as a parallelogram and then, nearly 700 feet in the sky, it becomes a trapezoid, reaching an overall height of 946 feet, with no antennas. The upper part of the facade inclines toward the towers to the north and is meant as a unifying gesture.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 4:32 PM
Jularc's Avatar
Jularc Jularc is offline
Time/Space
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,364
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 5:02 PM
sfcity1 sfcity1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 144
This one is pretty good, but I don't like it nearly as good as the others. The best part about this building is that it blocks out the one liberty plaza eyesore, and that says alot.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 5:21 PM
Kngkyle Kngkyle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,241
Extremely sub-par for the WTC complex.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 7:25 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Hazy
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,214
Such a underrated building. NYguy posted these pics:





__________________
Strobe
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 7:27 PM
STERNyc's Avatar
STERNyc STERNyc is offline
Landmark Restored
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,407
A big, boring box!
__________________
Somewhere between Child's clarity and Libeskind's dazzle lies the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 7:44 PM
Scruffy's Avatar
Scruffy Scruffy is offline
low-riding
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bronx
Posts: 1,963
yeah but do you realize how fning huge this tower is. This tower looks like it could eat the new goldman sachs tower and still have room left over. check out how it dominates liberty plaza who is in itself very girthy
__________________
My name is Steve
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 7:47 PM
STERNyc's Avatar
STERNyc STERNyc is offline
Landmark Restored
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scruffy View Post
yeah but do you realize how fning huge this tower is. This tower looks like it could eat the new goldman sachs tower and still have room left over. check out how it dominates liberty plaza who is in itself very girthy
All the more reason why greater thought and effort should have been put into the design.
__________________
Somewhere between Child's clarity and Libeskind's dazzle lies the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 7:52 PM
Dac150's Avatar
Dac150 Dac150 is offline
World Machine
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NY/CT
Posts: 6,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by STERNyc View Post
All the more reason why greater thought and effort should have been put into the design.
Well maybe by keeping the building plain will expose the sheer size more. If you add alot of detail that could take the focus of the magnitude. To me thats what the Twins stood for "simple and plain, but elegant and huge". Maybe thats what this tower is representing. May sound like boul shit, but that's the vibe I get when looking at this tower.
__________________
"I'm going there, but I like it here wherever it is.."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 8:01 PM
Stratosphere's Avatar
Stratosphere Stratosphere is offline
Try to reach this high!
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Posts: 1,068
Thumbs down

An extremly bland and boring box. I'm stunned by the architect's lack of creativity and sense of style.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 8:12 PM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: AUSTIN
Posts: 36,320
It's ok, I wish it had a little more zing to it. Compared to the other towers it's boring and seems out of place.
__________________
I like the Raleighs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 9:14 PM
Stephenapolis's Avatar
Stephenapolis Stephenapolis is offline
The True Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 8,565
This tower would be criticized in just about every city on Earth. So it seems right for it to be criticized in NYC. It is not a terrible design, just a very bland one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 9:17 PM
TREPYE TREPYE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThreeHundred View Post
Such a underrated building. NYguy posted these pics:

The worst 950 foot tower I have ever seen....how BORING.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 9:38 PM
Thskyscraper's Avatar
Thskyscraper Thskyscraper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 655
It may not be the best of the New WTC complex, but it's not terrible either. I like it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 9:41 PM
CoolCzech's Avatar
CoolCzech CoolCzech is offline
Frigidus Maximus
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,598


In fact, this design is quite elegant and harmoniously proportioned. The quality of the facade will make or break this tower, and I predict that the Japanese penchant for extreme quality in the details will produce what might well turn out to be, artistically, the most admirable tower in the entire WTC.

In comparison, Rogers's tower seems overly detailed and desperate for novelty.
__________________
http://tinyurl.com/2acxb5t


For the First Time in My Life, I'm Proud of Wisconsin!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 10:12 PM
H-man H-man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 132
i like the blandness of this tower it has a quiet elegance, i think anymore "look at me" towers would have overwhelmed the site
__________________
coolness
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 11:07 PM
CGII's Avatar
CGII CGII is offline
illwaukee/crooklyn
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: rome
Posts: 8,481
I have a feeling that this will be one of the more interesting of the WTC towers for its simplicity, proportions and its detail. I think you're all cutting it a bit too much scorn.
__________________
disregard women. acquire finances.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 11:11 PM
JMGarcia's Avatar
JMGarcia JMGarcia is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 3,717
As CoolCzech says, the detailing and facade materials will make or break it.

Its nice to see a building that's not too intricate or showy in its massing at the site. It fits better with the FT than either of the other 2 designs do IMO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 11:11 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Hazy
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,214
^I agree. Compared to Tower 3, this has a much more regal and classy design.
__________________
Strobe
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2007, 11:13 PM
Aleks's Avatar
Aleks Aleks is offline
cookies, skittles & milk
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,175
i dont like it and in my opinion i dojnt think it fits in with the rest of the complex
they need to redesign this tower again in my opinion
way 2 fat!!!
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 > Highrise Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:25 AM.

     

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