Page 957 of 968 FirstFirst ... 457857907947953954955956957958959960961967 ... LastLast
Results 14,341 to 14,355 of 14513

Thread: WTC Tower One - by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill

  1. #14341
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    Why put those columns in front of those doorways? Doorways and entrances should not be hidden. That just shows lack of attention to details.


  2. #14342
    Build the Tower Verre antinimby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    in Limbo
    Posts
    8,976

    Default

    He compares this tower to the Shard in London. They aren't the same. This site is sacred. Thousands of people died here. People living in condos on this site just doesn't feel appropriate.

  3. #14343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antinimby View Post
    He compares this tower to the Shard in London. They aren't the same. This site is sacred. Thousands of people died here. People living in condos on this site just doesn't feel appropriate.
    Agree. Kimmelman always strikes me as an amateur (which is how he started in his gig, given he wasn't an architecture critic before being put in his current position).

    Moving past the bigger picture argument that the WTC site shouldn't be a live-work playpen for young professionals like Beaver House, I think Kimmelman is smoking something funny in particular in his Shard analogy. The Shard isn't exactly universally praised as a wonderful piece of architecture; and it certainly isn't clearly better than 1WTC. Both of them are immensely tall and reflective - and similar in key ways. I personally think 1WTC is more impressive and powerful and prefer by a wide margin it to the Shard.

    What a lame review.

  4. #14344
    Forum Veteran TREPYE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    2,200

    Default

    Spot on description of the stupid topping of this tower....

    "Counting the antenna is like counting relish at a hot dog eating contest.
    "

    Its not just an afterthought it is a poorly executed afterthought; its actually not even an afterthought.... its is bitter rancid relish that drags down the overall product.

  5. #14345

    Default

    I find myself agreeing with some of his points. The tower, I do really like. I saw it recently and it looks great from all over the city. However, it terms of an urban plan having a mix of uses on the site is very appropriate. Certainly no less appropriate than commercial and retail. It would bring life to the neighbourhood and vastly improve Lower Manhattan.

    That said, it is overall a rubbish review and extremely amateur.

  6. #14346

    Default

    His critique of the antenna is right. Everything else is wrong; and worse yet, a rehash of several Paul Goldberger pieces from when the design was first presented a decade ago. With some fluff about metamorphosis. But this sort of stuff is not new. I give credit to the Times; when they ran his review (at least online), they coupled it with a link to Her Eminence Ada Louis Hustable's review of the original WTC. It was a similar-sounding tongue-lashing from the Times Art Critic to the Philistines at the PA. (http://timesmachine.nytimes.com/time...T.nav=top-news) Some things never change.

  7. #14347
    NYC Aficionado from Oz Merry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,476

    Default

    Crikey!


    Whoa, the Burj Khalifa is Only the No. 5 Most Expensive Building

    by Amy Schellenbaum



    To supplement October's One World Trade Center architecture review for the Chicago Tribune, critic Blair Kamin tweeted out this chart published by the construction data miners at Emporis. According to the graphic, NYC's (lackluster?) One World Trade Center is by far the world's most expensive building, coming in at $3.9B, nearly double the second-most expensive buildings, Vegas' Palazzo casino and London's The Shard, which both cost $1.9B to build. Perhaps even more surprising, Dubai's dizzying Burj Khalifa, currently the world's tallest building, comes in at number five, or the same price ($1.5B) as China's glowing horseshoe Sheraton Hotel. [Twitter]

    http://curbed.com/archives/2014/12/0...e-building.php


    Cool shot from Fulton Street:



    One World Trade Center 'a bold but flawed giant'

  8. #14348

    Default

    Not sure of the point of that article is.There is nothing "surprising" about it. Sure, it cost more to build 1WTC than the Burj,; I imagine a sandwich or a hammer or a laborer also costs a lot more in Manhattan than it does in the middle east (and forget about China).

  9. #14349
    NYC Aficionado from Oz Merry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,476

    Default

    ^ Good point.

    I'd wager that Tower One would've cost more than $3.9b in Oz with the ridiculous cost of things here, especially labour.

  10. #14350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IrishInNYC View Post
    Not sure of the point of that article is.There is nothing "surprising" about it. Sure, it cost more to build 1WTC than the Burj,; I imagine a sandwich or a hammer or a laborer also costs a lot more in Manhattan than it does in the middle east (and forget about China).
    I don't think the sandwich or hammer analogies work as well as the laborer one... Cost of living in parts of the Middle East (ie Dubai) and China (ie Shanghai) are catching up or have surpassed the US in some case (maybe not NYC yet though). The difference is really in the labor laws, and in 1WTC's case, the ridiculously overdesigned safety measures.

  11. #14351
    Fearless Photog RoldanTTLB's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Broomfield, CO
    Posts
    2,910

    Default

    Eh, there's a bit of a gulf between all these arguments. From how this tower and the world cup construction are going, it's not just cheaper labor, it's slave labor, and I am struggling to support that. If that's what it takes to cut costs, that's a row too difficult to hoe.

  12. #14352

  13. #14353
    Forum Veteran TREPYE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    2,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Proballxx View Post
    the ridiculously overdesigned safety measures.
    Considering the locale, this is a very naïve statement.

  14. #14354

  15. #14355

    Default

    New York Times
    December 8, 2014

    The Opinion Pages | LETTERS

    Reflections on New York’s New Tower

    1 World Trade Center, From Different Angles


    Dongjae Krystofer Kim

    To the Editor:

    Re “A Soaring Emblem of New York, and Its Upside-Down Priorities” (Architecture Review, front page, Nov. 30):

    Michael Kimmelman’s panning of 1 World Trade Center doesn’t mention the tower’s most obvious quality. As the photograph demonstrates, it reads to the distant eye as a spire coming to a point, not as a sawed-off flat top. This is because of the brilliant use of inversely tapering triangular planes by the architect David Childs on a tower that starts and ends with square floor plans.

    This is important, because while it is mostly visitors and those who live or work in the area who will experience the tower’s interface at ground level, almost every New Yorker (and most visitors as well) will experience 1 World Trade from afar, and when lit in high contrast, it puts a pre-eminent point back in the downtown skyline.

    New York’s classic skyscraper era — the first half of the 20th century — created a dense, cresting forest of pointed masonry spires that became the most famous urban icon in the world. Then postwar corporate cost-cutting vandalized the view with blunt, amazingly banal flat tops. The apotheoses of that trend were the two towers destroyed on 9/11. The modernism taught in my architecture classes of the early 1970s took little account of cumulative effect on the modern cityscape.

    One World Trade Center is not physically a stepped-back mass like skyscrapers of the classic era. But its ingenious double inverse tapering makes it look like one while preserving the all-important marketability of the spaces inside.

    MATHEWS HOLLINSHEAD
    St. Paul, Dec. 1, 2014

    To the Editor:

    We cannot foresee what forces of change will take place in this area in the near or distant future. And even to plan for a typical mixed-use solution, as Michael Kimmelman suggests, would stifle development.

    A city grows unnaturally and always will, if it is to be vibrant. Accidents in terms of development are often the best things that happen. Just look at the theater district. Why not be patient to the new uses and forms that will evolve downtown?

    KEN BABITS
    Port Jefferson, N.Y., Nov. 30, 2014

    The writer is an architect.

    To the Editor:

    While reading Michael Kimmelman’s architecture review of 1 World Trade Center, I felt as if I were rereading unnecessarily abstract imagery from Ayn Rand’s novel “The Fountainhead,” disparaging what is otherwise a beautiful and iconic landmark in our city.

    I work at 222 Broadway, which is adjacent to the tower, and I think that the building is stunning: It glistens in the sun and twists upward in a wonderfully aesthetic spiral. It feels new and powerful, not in a corporate or a political way. If you asked others who work in the financial district, they would tell you that they are proud to be part of the area’s resurgence.

    I am sure that few if any talk about its architectural creativity. We are just happy knowing what it symbolizes.

    It needs to be tall. It’s an anchor on the island of Manhattan and helps New Yorkers in all five boroughs get their bearings. The height also represents our resilience and spirit; anything shorter than the original twin towers would have symbolized the wrong things. I say: Well done.

    ZACK PECKHAM
    New York, Dec. 2, 2014

    To the Editor:

    Re “How a Train Station’s Price Swelled to $4 Billion” (front page, Dec. 3):

    Given the architectural climate of unchecked egos and wanton disregard of the programs and budgets of clients, as well as Santiago Calatrava’s well-documented troubled history of burdensome projects, the overruns for the World Trade Center Transportation Hub should not surprise us. But time has shown that some projects, like the opera house in Sydney, Australia, can prove their worth in spite of immense hardship endured.

    I suspect that this particular Calatrava endeavor may ultimately prove to be one such example, a visible emblem of the triumph of brighter aspects of humanity — art, science and imagination — over the darker, stagnating forces of hatred and zealotry.

    In this respect, it is a purer statement than the new 1 World Trade Center, one that is less concerned with political or economic agendas, and more about those who will use the building or merely come to witness its beauty.

    LEO HANSEN
    Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Dec. 3, 2014

    The writer teaches architectural history at Florida Atlantic University and is the author of “Culture and Architecture: An Integrated History.”

Similar Threads

  1. New 51-story tower Downtown
    By NYguy in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: January 17th, 2006, 09:20 PM
  2. Renderings CIBC Tower
    By NoyokA in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: July 19th, 2003, 07:17 PM
  3. 3 Buildings From 1830's Threatened By a Tower - Downtown
    By Kris in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: March 29th, 2003, 11:08 AM
  4. A Home Depot in the Bloomberg Tower?
    By NYguy in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: March 15th, 2003, 03:16 AM
  5. Special Issues for Merrill, the Landlord
    By Edward in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 23rd, 2002, 12:04 PM

Tags for this Thread

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