Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Duetsche Bank Tower- why couldn't they save it?

  1. #1

    Default Duetsche Bank Tower- why couldn't they save it?

    On another site I'm on, the subject of Duetsche Bank Tower came up, with somebody wondering why it couldn't be saved post 9/11. It wasn't just the structural damage- the building held up okay despite that. But what really did it in?

    I suspect part of it was time. It was left open to the elements and festering for so long that the original damage was compounded by mold, exposure, and probably some other nasties. I also suspect money- they didn't want to pay to demo out the interior and start from scratch.
    So what really conspired to kill off that little black skyscraper?

  2. #2

    Default

    from wikipedia:
    The collapse of 2 World Trade Center during the September 11 attacks tore a 24-story gash into the facade of the Deutsche Bank Building and destroyed the entire interior of the structure.[citation needed] Steel and concrete were sticking out of the building for months afterward. This was eventually cleaned up, but due to extensive contamination it was decided that the 41 story ruin was to be taken down. After the 9/11 attacks, netting was placed around the remains of the building. The bank maintained that the building could not be restored to habitable condition, while its insurers sought to treat the incident as recoverable damage rather than a total loss.[1] Work on the building was deferred for over two years during which the condition of the building deteriorated.

    also more than 300 human bone fragments were discovered in the ballast gravel on the roof.

  3. #3

    Default

    I suspected that the deferred work was part of the problem. A shame, really.

  4. #4
    Crabby airline hostess - stache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Nairobi Hilton
    Posts
    8,511

    Default

    This building site is being treated as part of WTC in order to satisfy the demand that total square footage of the final rebuilding will match that of the original towers. It is my personal opinion if this requirement could have been satisfied some other way, the old steel structure could have been repaired and the mechanicals etc. could have been replaced.

  5. #5

    Default

    I was present when we dug/broke/blasted the old DB basement out of the ground for the VSC. We were in the basement at the 292' level and you could see where pieces of the south tower had penetrated the ground just outside the DB footprint, traveled 3 or 4' through the soil and hit the DB basement wall, blowing huge chunks of concrete into the basement. It's hard to imagine the force needed to do that, some of the steel fragments on the outside of the wall were little more than chips, having practically disintegrated then they hit.

    Point is, anything coming down off the south tower and hitting the north and west facades of the DB would have torn through the building like a hot knife through butter. It's a testament to the structure that it didn't collapse.

  6. #6

    Default

    ^Yeah, it's amazing that it held together as well as it did. What a shame it couldn't be saved. Something that tough deserved to live

  7. #7

    Default

    It would have been difficult to attract tenants.

  8. #8

    Default

    Amanita, just as we differ on One Penn Plaza, we seem to differ on this tower as well. I tend to like bulky 20th century office monoliths, even the uglier ones, yet, due to its massing, I've always hated this one, even as an 11 year old in 1999. Despite its actually respectable height, it was always so stubby that I kept wishing that somehow, some way, there would be a way to demolish this one and replace it with something better, but I knew that such a new and spacious office tower won'd be demolished for at least the next 100 years. Of course, during that time I've never guessed that it would meet its end under such tragic circumstances, and I would've never wanted to see it go out in such a way, with such a loss of life (several dead in the tower and a few more dead during demolition). However, architecturally speaking, I felt very little, if any, remorse for this tower, though I did like its sleek back facade. Of the structures lost on 9/11, the Twin Towers' majesty speaks for itself; the WTC lowrises were sprawling and dull despite nice finishes; WTC Marriott was a sleek, stylish tower that was perfect for its location; 7WTC had its flaws and was a bit quirky, yet its pink granite facade always made it one of my personal favorites; as for DB, architecturally, I was almost glad it's getting a replacement. However, I know what it feels like to like a tower that most others hate (e.g. XYZ buildings), so I'm sorry about how this loss made you feel. I remember when right after 9/11, the officials were afraid that One Liberty Plaza or Three WFC were going to collapse. Now those were the couple that I was really worried about.

  9. #9

    Default

    With the Deutsche bank tower, it wasn't so much its looks that had me wishing they could save it- it was more the principal of the thing- hadn't we lost enough skyscrapers thanks to 9/11?
    People were looking at the wound in its side and crying "It's a reminder of 9/11!" Well, fix it, and it wouldn't be!

    I liked the WTC too, the hotel and 7 WTC included. 7 was quirky enough to be interesting, and the hotel fit its site perfectly. I'm glad that One Liberty and 3 WFC stayed standing, I remember giving hugs to those two skyscrapers the last time I was in town, kind of my way of saying "Glad you're still here!"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software