Page 111 of 116 FirstFirst ... 1161101107108109110111112113114115 ... LastLast
Results 1,651 to 1,665 of 1735

Thread: 200 Greenwich Street - Proposed WTC Tower #2 - by Norman Foster

  1. #1651
    Forum Veteran Tectonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,673

    Default

    I get the need for the redesign. It's an interesting ugly design but it just doesn't seem to work here. Hey the spire/antenna didn't turn out so bad, so let's see.

  2. #1652

    Default

    The Architect's Newspaper
    June 12, 2015

    Bjarke Ingels Mum on Whether Two World Trade is a Staircase for King Kong

    By HENRY MELCHER



    The biggest architecture news this week was obviously the unveiling of Bjarke Ingels’ design for Two World Trade Center. The dramatic departure from Norman Foster‘s original proposal envisions the tower as a series of stepped volumes that gesture toward One World Trade. But does the step-ladder design—easily climbable by giant monsters like King Kong—pose a safety risk for New Yorkers? One petitioner is pleading with Ingels to change the design.



    Shortly after the scheme was unveiled, AN sat down with Ingels to discuss the project, Foster’s previous design, and the World Trade Center redevelopment thus far. We failed to ask the architect if the new building would just be “a staircase for monsters” as concerned citizen Caragh Poh puts it in her Change.org petition that urges Ingels to reconsider his supposedly monster-friendly design.

    “Though you have designed this building with wonderful reasons in mind, such as completing the framing of the memorial, bringing an even more enhanced skyline to the beautiful city of New York, creating a physical symbol of healing and togetherness, there is one glaring oversight,” she wrote. “Your building makes it easier for King Kong to climb.”

    Poh readily admits that she does not have the solution, but suggests turning the building upside down might do the trick.



    But maybe Bjarke Ingels doesn’t want a solution—could this have been all part of his plan? Hear us out: Back in 2011, Bjarke dressed up as King Kong for Halloween with BIG’s Daniel Kidd going as the Empire State Building—and there’s photographic evidence. With this eery reality now staring us in the face, we decided to reach out to BIG to see if Two World Trade Center was, indeed, tailor-made to be a staircase for King Kong.

    We’re waiting to hear back.



    As of press time, 30 concerned people had signed the petition. You can view the petition and sign for yourself here.



    Copyright © 2015 | The Architect's Newspaper, LLC

  3. #1653
    Senior Member treebeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    38 park row nyc
    Posts
    197

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STR View Post
    You fix one of the two problems: the inappropriateness of building a tower that looks like it's about to fall over, on the one place on earth most famous for towers that fell over.

    The other problem, which Foster managed exquisitely, and Berg botched horribly, and you seemed to miss, was breaking up the bulk of FAT tower. the 2WTC site is almost 400 feet across W-E. Foster's tower was over 230 feet wide on that axis, but the massing disguised that. This one...well...look at this shit. "Clumsy" would be an understatement. It manages to be worse than the Metlife building.
    All three of your options are better. The third. right most, is my pick of the three I really hate this design even though I'm happy "something" is going up

  4. #1654

    Default

    After years of hoping that something would be build on this location, from this day forward I hope they will never remove the fences around the lot. Thought it would be bad, never thought it could be this bad. Even a box would be better. 432 Park Avenue would have been less out of place on this location. Speaking of which, I've been marveled by the fact that people love the design of 432 Park. So i'm sure that there will be people that love this..... attempt of a design.

  5. #1655

    Default

    I have not yet spoken to anyone who likes this tower, both architecture enthusiasts and non-enthusiasts. This is the type of design you'd expect from a mediocre 2nd or 3rd year studio project.

    The terraces will never look that green from the street, I'd love to see a rendering without the forrests hanging from the sides. That's what it'll ultimately look like if built. I'm holding out hope that this design gets shit on so much that it's scrapped entirely. With the WTC site, anything is possible.

  6. #1656
    Fearless Photog RoldanTTLB's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Broomfield, CO
    Posts
    2,910

    Default

    So, as anyone on here familiar with my posts must know, it's rare that I am outright negative about a building. That said, this is rather awful. On one hand, the renderings are overly harsh, and I actually think it will probably come out better in some cases so long as the glass is high quality. On the other hand, just about everything about this tower is wrong.

    How come the other 3 towers 'face' the memorial, but this one 'backs' to the memorial? I mean, the major setbacks on everything else (even the chamfer on 1WTC) are oriented towards the memorial, yet this building rises straight up on that side. I don't generally feel like a building needs to respect its surroundings when it's solo (I don't have any issue with a modern townhouse in the middle of a row of historic ones), but this case seems rather unique to me. All the buildings really should interact positively with the memorial.

    How come this tower has serious external greenery where the others don't?

    How can we expect this tower not to be V/E'd to be significantly worse similarly to the 3 towers already built/under construction?

    What does this all mean for the PAC and a potential Tower 5?

    This is all a rather bitter pill to swallow.

  7. #1657

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RoldanTTLB View Post
    How come the other 3 towers 'face' the memorial, but this one 'backs' to the memorial? I mean, the major setbacks on everything else (even the chamfer on 1WTC) are oriented towards the memorial, yet this building rises straight up on that side. I don't generally feel like a building needs to respect its surroundings when it's solo (I don't have any issue with a modern townhouse in the middle of a row of historic ones), but this case seems rather unique to me. All the buildings really should interact positively with the memorial.
    Not sure if anyone agrees with me, but I'm kinda glad the tower "turned its back" on the memorial. I actually feel that the best looking angle is that corner. It at least has the look and feel of a tower. Those overhangs and "terraces" are fugly. The whole Tribeca inspiration is a crock, IMO.

  8. #1658

    Default

    The views from 1 wtc >east are toast with this guy. Its as if this building cantilevers in order to block views from the deck..

  9. #1659
    Forum Veteran TREPYE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    2,200

    Thumbs down

    ^Ugh, one more reason to hate this poorly pixilated pile of excrement that they are passing off for a skyscraper. Its presence and mass makes the Observatory even worse than it already was, there goes the view of the Downtown Bridges! This is beyond disheartening... makes me want to give up following architecture in this city. Changing always for the worst, always devolving, always uninspiring, always Murphy's Law in 90% of major projects.

    I hope I am wrong but there is no way Rupert tells the architect to go back to the drawing board. In a twist of poetry this detestable tower will stand as is, representing the most detestable person in the corporate media landscape.


  10. #1660

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Enigmatism415 View Post
    Since the current design is obviously inappropriate for the complex, I offer three modifications to the right of it:

    I like the sleeker verticality of the third "conservative" mod. It probably wouldn't work with their open floorplate concept though.


    BTW, I think this is the first time I've seen a desire for a design to be value engineered at WNY. :-D
    Last edited by Music Man; June 15th, 2015 at 10:35 PM.

  11. #1661

    Default

    Smithsonian.com
    June 16, 2015

    2 World Trade Center and the Promise of Green Skyscrapers

    New renderings of the tower show impressive sky gardens—a trendy feature that's difficult to pull off

    By Emily Matchar



    The architecture world has been buzzing about the newly unveiled renderings for 2 World Trade Center, the skyscraper that will complete the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site. Danish architecture firm BIG, led by starchitect Bjarke Ingels, plans to build the 1,340-foot tower as seven separate stacked boxes. The bottom of the building is slated to become the headquarters for Rupert Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox and News Corp, while the upper floors will be leased to various tenants.

    The renderings, first revealed in Wired magazine, include plenty of attention-grabbing features: an indoor basketball court, a running track, a penthouse screening room. But the most noteworthy, perhaps, are the tiered green courtyards. Each box of the tower is smaller than the one beneath, lending a stair step appearance to the building. On each “step,” BIG intends to create a green plaza of grass and trees. Each plaza will represent a different biozone, ranging from tropical to arctic, though the plans are still very much in the conceptual stage. If completed according to plan, it will be New York’s—and likely America’s—most noteworthy “green” building.



    As evidence about the importance of green space to human flourishing mounts—studies have shown proximity to greenery improves both physical and mental health—incorporating parks and other green space into building design has become one of the hottest trends in architecture.

    BIG has worked on other green-topped buildings. In Taiwan, the under-construction Hualien Resort and Residences rooflines follow the silhouettes of nearby mountains, topped with a strip of greenery. Plans for an energy company’s double tower headquarters in the Chinese megacity of Shenzhen show green roofs and interior green spaces.

    Several other noteworthy buildings incorporating sky gardens have opened recently. In Milan, the Bosco Verticale (“vertical forest”), a pair of residential towers in the city’s Porta Nuova district, opened their doors last fall. Designed by Italian architect Stefano Boeri, the buildings incorporate some 800 trees and thousands of plants on concrete balconies, creating private gardens for residents. The trees, watered by recycled graywater, are meant to reduce energy costs by providing a natural barrier to harsh sunlight. The buildings won the 2014 International Highrise Award, a prestigious architecture prize.

    Malaysian architect Ken Yeang has several high-profile green towers, including Singapore’s 15-story Solaris Building, with a ribbon of greenery winding all the way to the top, as well as a roof garden and green terraces.

    In Shenzhen, French architecture firm Vincent Callebaut has proposed a series of “farmscrapers”—Jetsonian towers of egg-shaped pods incorporating both living space and food-producing green space into each level of the building. The vastly ambitious plans include fruit trees, grape arbors and veggie beds. Grasses would help act as natural filters for the towers' graywater. The buildings have yet to get beyond the conceptual stage; a number of other proposed green skyscrapers in China haven't progressed either.



    Pulling off sky gardens is difficult. It's easy to put trees and shrubs in an architectural rendering, but financial and logistical concerns frequently get in the way of turning them into actual living gardens.

    A few years ago, writer Tim De Chant begged architects to stop putting trees in skyscraper renderings. The problem, De Chant said, is trees don’t easily grow on skyscrapers due to weather extremes. He’d seen “one too many sketches of a verdant vertical oasis but too few of them actually built.”

    London’s 20 Fenchurch Street skyscraper (dubbed the “Walkie-Talkie” for its bulbous, top-heavy shape) was in the news recently as an example of a green building that failed to live up to its renderings. The building’s developers had promised a top-floor sky garden open to the public, billing it as “the UK’s tallest public park.” Indeed, including a park in the plans was part of what allowed the building to be built at the edge of a conservation area. But when the garden opened earlier this year, critics lambasted the space as looking like an airport terminal or a hotel lobby, with a few plant beds surrounding restaurants and bars. Even more galling to detractors, the “public” park is only open to the public by booking three days in advance, only for groups smaller than six, and only before 6 p.m. In the evening, it’s only open to patrons of the floor’s restaurants and bars.

    "If people [are] expecting to visit it as an alternative to Kew, then they will be disappointed," said the City of London’s former chief planner Peter Rees, quoted in the BBC.

    Ingels could face more problems than just pure logistics in turning his renderings into reality. The previous design slated for the space, by venerable British architect Lord Norman Foster, was nixed, reportedly because Rupert Murdoch’s son and heir James thought it was too conventional for a media company headquarters. The new renderings may please the Murdochs, but whether the rest of New York is happy with the design will be another question. Other buildings that surround the plaza have had their ambitious designs slowly eroded by the drip drip of financial concerns, structural challenges and city regulations. The original plans for 1 World Trade Center included sky gardens above the 64th floor, but those visions gave way to the NYPD's demand for better bombproofing and other concerns. Over the many years from conception to construction, the wildly original design gave way to something much more conventional.

    Ingels will face demands from the public, who may be leery of a skyscraper on the Twin Towers site that appears to lean to the side, from city regulators and from his financial backers. Only then will the task of attempting to make the sky gardens a reality begin.

  12. #1662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigMac View Post
    Smithsonian.com
    June 16, 2015

    2 World Trade Center and the Promise of Green Skyscrapers

    New renderings of the tower show impressive sky gardens—a trendy feature that's difficult to pull off

    By Emily Matchar



    The architecture world has been buzzing about the newly unveiled renderings for 2 World Trade Center, the skyscraper that will complete the redevelopment of the World Trade Center site. Danish architecture firm BIG, led by starchitect Bjarke Ingels, plans to build the 1,340-foot tower as seven separate stacked boxes. The bottom of the building is slated to become the headquarters for Rupert Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox and News Corp, while the upper floors will be leased to various tenants.

    The renderings, first revealed in Wired magazine, include plenty of attention-grabbing features: an indoor basketball court, a running track, a penthouse screening room. But the most noteworthy, perhaps, are the tiered green courtyards. Each box of the tower is smaller than the one beneath, lending a stair step appearance to the building. On each “step,” BIG intends to create a green plaza of grass and trees. Each plaza will represent a different biozone, ranging from tropical to arctic, though the plans are still very much in the conceptual stage. If completed according to plan, it will be New York’s—and likely America’s—most noteworthy “green” building.



    As evidence about the importance of green space to human flourishing mounts—studies have shown proximity to greenery improves both physical and mental health—incorporating parks and other green space into building design has become one of the hottest trends in architecture.

    BIG has worked on other green-topped buildings. In Taiwan, the under-construction Hualien Resort and Residences rooflines follow the silhouettes of nearby mountains, topped with a strip of greenery. Plans for an energy company’s double tower headquarters in the Chinese megacity of Shenzhen show green roofs and interior green spaces.

    Several other noteworthy buildings incorporating sky gardens have opened recently. In Milan, the Bosco Verticale (“vertical forest”), a pair of residential towers in the city’s Porta Nuova district, opened their doors last fall. Designed by Italian architect Stefano Boeri, the buildings incorporate some 800 trees and thousands of plants on concrete balconies, creating private gardens for residents. The trees, watered by recycled graywater, are meant to reduce energy costs by providing a natural barrier to harsh sunlight. The buildings won the 2014 International Highrise Award, a prestigious architecture prize.

    Malaysian architect Ken Yeang has several high-profile green towers, including Singapore’s 15-story Solaris Building, with a ribbon of greenery winding all the way to the top, as well as a roof garden and green terraces.

    In Shenzhen, French architecture firm Vincent Callebaut has proposed a series of “farmscrapers”—Jetsonian towers of egg-shaped pods incorporating both living space and food-producing green space into each level of the building. The vastly ambitious plans include fruit trees, grape arbors and veggie beds. Grasses would help act as natural filters for the towers' graywater. The buildings have yet to get beyond the conceptual stage; a number of other .
    I love this tower.

  13. #1663
    Forum Veteran Tectonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,673

    Default

    Shocked.

  14. #1664

    Default

    I love this tower.
    That makes two...you and Rupert?!

  15. #1665
    Fearless Photog RoldanTTLB's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Broomfield, CO
    Posts
    2,910

    Default

    Side thing, while I don't like this, it's not clear to me what 'views' from the observation deck this will actually be blocking. While the tower has a cantilever, it actually is not cantilevering over the street and the post office, it just starts at the south side of the base and cantilevers over the north side. I mean, just from looking at the map (https://goo.gl/maps/ygZgr) this might hurt the view of the Brooklyn Bridge, but it's unlikely to block the other two. It also cantilevers out of the way to preserve the view of downtown Brooklyn. I imagine the only thing it really blocks is is the view of NYbG. And while that's certainly a nice tower to have a view of, it's not exactly a long running icon.

Similar Threads

  1. Greenwich Village Preservation Watch - Be on the alert!
    By OKoranjes in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: June 24th, 2015, 04:17 AM
  2. Greenwich Street 'Restoration'
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: December 21st, 2013, 06:05 PM
  3. 165 Charles Street @ West Street - by Richard Meier
    By ASchwarz in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: June 8th, 2010, 06:36 PM
  4. 497 Greenwich Street - Condo
    By Edward in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: February 3rd, 2006, 05:44 PM
  5. Director's Guild of America Tower -110 West 57th Street
    By londonlawyer in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: July 18th, 2003, 12:37 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