New Freedom Tower unveiled for NYC - Page 4 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-29-2005, 03:15 PM   #46
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ouizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: s p o r a t i c
Posts: 3,788
Local Time: 06:32 PM
Yeah Cujo I also appreciated your commentary. I had a motive for posting this in the first place and I will not mention what I do either (because I already have in here along the way someplace) but let's just say, I was very curious to see what the public opinon was.


I cannot email you because that would give away what I do, but needless to say I think your opinion is going to basically be the common one on this project.

Oh - and please do not ever mention Koolhaus again - his work is bunk.

Ha.
__________________

__________________
ouizy is offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 03:24 PM   #47
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
angelordevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Inside a sound
Posts: 5,827
Local Time: 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by DaveC
Sticks out like a sore thumb in the rest of the skyline.
The 'Freedom Tower' is a lame name...I can almost picture Paul McCartney singing his freedom song at the building's official opening...

Overall, it's a giant penis wagging in the wind, and highly symbolic of current American politics.
__________________

__________________
angelordevil is offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 03:27 PM   #48
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
angelordevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Inside a sound
Posts: 5,827
Local Time: 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by cujo
Excuse my cynicism...

This building stands to be nothing more than a shameless rip-off of some Daniel Libeskind, Frank Gehry, glass shard, sculptural, phallic lighthouse.

/rant
I just re-read Cujo's post....says it all
__________________
angelordevil is offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 03:38 PM   #49
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:32 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ouizy
Yeah Cujo I also appreciated your commentary. I had a motive for posting this in the first place and I will not mention what I do either (because I already have in here along the way someplace) but let's just say, I was very curious to see what the public opinon was.
I was just going to say. I thought you had mentioned what you do a long time ago.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 03:48 PM   #50
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
angelordevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Inside a sound
Posts: 5,827
Local Time: 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


I was just going to say. I thought you had mentioned what you do a long time ago.

Melon
What is it, what is it?



Were you the architect for the runner-up submission?

We must know!!!
__________________
angelordevil is offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 04:28 PM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
cujo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Province
Posts: 5,820
Local Time: 05:32 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ouizy
Oh - and please do not ever mention Koolhaus again - his work is bunk.

Ha.
YOU'RE BUNK.

No. I didn't mean that.

Let's thread it out. For serious. Old Chicago School style.


With regards to the Tower though, first impressions are basically meaningless, especially since there are no readily available renderings of the interior, and the only reference scale (that being the New York skyline and waterfront) makes it quite difficult to relate proportions and potential experience. How the spaces work on both the entrance and residence level is pure speculation... unless there are more perspectives lying around. If not, the firm responsible is leaving themselves open for blind criticism.

I thought it would be nice to cover my bases in case the final construction was amazing or something.

__________________
cujo is offline  
Old 06-29-2005, 05:23 PM   #52
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Because French Tower would upset people



The original design was more inspiring. Sticking a massive needle on top of a glass box just to reach 1776 feet lacks something.
That damn needle annoys me too. Why on earth does it *have* to reach 1776 feet? That's a bit too gimmicky for me.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 06-30-2005, 09:13 AM   #53
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ouizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: s p o r a t i c
Posts: 3,788
Local Time: 06:32 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by angelordevil
Were you the architect for the runner-up submission?
No, actually I

Quote:
Originally posted by Cujo
"...Let's thread it out. For serious. Old Chicago School style..."


Nice. Love it.

Quickly,

The 'needle' on the top of the building is not there to be representative, nor is it there simply to reach 1,776 feet. When the Twins came down the broadcast and communications antenna that came down with it was lost. These things are not simply for looks, but actually broadcast many of the networks to New York. That said, after Sept 11, the networks had to rent antenna space from New Jersey, and other new York buildings to be able to hit their audience.

The 'needle' is a new broadcast antenna being built for the New York TV and radio networks, and with today's wireless technology, there are other items that will be located up there. This is also true for satellite communications. You know those news trucks we see with the satellite dishes on top? Those don't always broadcast directly to satellites, but actually bounce the radio waves off of dishes on tall buildings.

Thought our heads were safe? There are more microwaves and radio waves flying around our cities than we know about.

Also true is the fact that there are a ton of new broadcast studios (cable and otherwise) that are broadcasting out of our skyscrapers. Basically a news truck will go to a news scene, beam the waves to a dish on a building where the studio is located, and then the studio broadcasts it out.

But I digress.

True, there have been no interior renderings released to the public, but one can only 'imagine' that this building will be very different than the last go around. The last version was 'in my opinion' a far superior design, yet one that was not realized. Ignoring all the bells and whistles, and having to imagine that the images released to the public were not the most 'updated' images, one has to believe that the sheer massing of the FT.01 was much more complicated (albeit expensive) than FT.02. The use of the expressed diagrid, the torquing of the floorplates, and the clarity of the glass base of the building were truly unique. The plain geometry of FT.01 would have made it a building years ahead of the other diagrid projects out there, specifically The Hearst Tower being completed now. But when the security concerns came in, basically there was not much left to do at that location in the masterplan than what we are being shown now, I assume.

With the renderings that were released, as well as the models being shown, I feel like the only dialogue can be about massing. The basic shape of the building and how it fits within its context. There will be so many changes to what we saw yesterday that it is not practical to criticize the images as a final result, and that is what I fear the public does.
__________________
ouizy is offline  
Old 06-30-2005, 12:23 PM   #54
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
cujo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Province
Posts: 5,820
Local Time: 05:32 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ouizy
With the renderings that were released, as well as the models being shown, I feel like the only dialogue can be about massing. The basic shape of the building and how it fits within its context. There will be so many changes to what we saw yesterday that it is not practical to criticize the images as a final result, and that is what I fear the public does.
Agreed. Please forgive my relatively neophyte diatribe before, but it must have been an expected outcome when you began by requesting opinions on a limited set of panels. If someone portrayed simply a series of massing models for a final design review, contextual fit and aesthetic intention would dominate the conversation, since there is nothing else to evaluate (some critics would most likely leave), would you not agree? Seeing as the firm is most likely well beyond the design development/permit phase, it's not inappropriate to judge them on what is there for viewing.

On a sidenote, your mentioning of the interesting floorplate arrangement is intriguing, and it reminds me of the slightly unconventional approach to Frederico Soriano's Torre Laminar. An innovative process towards office programming, in my opinion. Here's a link from El Croquis, if you're interested:

Torre Laminar

ouizy, I'm interested to know if there was much research done with regards to Minuro Yamasaki's original intentions for the Twin Towers, and if some of his ideas were used to generate the basic concepts for the Freedom Tower (I realize the two works arise out of different contexts, but some principles could potentially be derived). Yamasaki had a career filled with tragedy, and it is unfortunate that his legacy is manifested in two pieces that saw demolition. The other notable construct being the Pruitt-Igoe Public Housing project, of which its destruction is considered by many to symbolize the end of Modernism.

My birthday in fact.



Sorry to go off on a tangent there. The opportunities to discuss architecture here are few and far between. I will accept the label of bhatch. Nice stuff ouizy.
__________________
cujo is offline  
Old 06-30-2005, 01:07 PM   #55
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
ouizy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: s p o r a t i c
Posts: 3,788
Local Time: 06:32 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by cujo

ouizy, I'm interested to know if there was much research done with regards to Minuro Yamasaki's original intentions for the Twin Towers, and if some of his ideas were used to generate the basic concepts for the Freedom Tower (I realize the two works arise out of different contexts, but some principles could potentially be derived). Yamasaki had a career filled with tragedy, and it is unfortunate that his legacy is manifested in two pieces that saw demolition. The other notable construct being the Pruitt-Igoe Public Housing project, of which its destruction is considered by many to symbolize the end of Modernism.

Was the tower designed with a theme of tragedy?

hmmmmm....

Well, as I am not sure what was or was not done, I can only say that the Yamasaki plan (as I am sure you will agree) was a total failure.

As far as the buildings go, they were interesting to look at as objects, but when it came to renting them, no can do. The original idea was actually for a world trade center - various foreign companies actually working amongst each other doing business. That slid to the ownership of the Port Authority which at the time of the collapse actually had a ton of vacant real estate in those buildings.

Sure, as a floorplate the original towers were ideal, no columns, simple core, but as studies were done re: different uses (law firms, banks etc) it was commented that there was actually something to be said for having corridors within the space of a business, and not just open floor spaces and core.

In any event the plaza was a failure, and the surrounding 'mall' did not do much to bring people to the plaza. Aside from the plaza being a huge windtunnel, the megablock idea did not work, and was detrimental to downtown Manhattan.

If anything comes of the re-development process, we will at least get the city grid brought back to the site (except of course where the memorial will be). And Mr. Libeskind can call the leftopver spaces whatever he wishes (re:wedge of light etc.) but in the end they will be remnants from when the grid is re-established and will be beneficial to the area.

The only fear I have is that each structure (FT, PATH terminal, FMuseum even Towers 2-5) ends up being an object sitting an a tabula rasa making each city block different. That is not what Manhattan is about and hopefully in the end the masterplan works well with the grid. Otherwise we will have a site of trophy buildings from starchitects that have nothing to do with each other...

We shall see, but we shall see after about 20 years...
__________________
ouizy is offline  
Old 06-30-2005, 01:30 PM   #56
Babyface
 
Saget's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 12
Local Time: 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ouizy
Otherwise we will have a site of trophy buildings from starchitects that have nothing to do with each other...
I'm sorry, did you just shout China?

Oh yes, I went there Paul Andreu.

Definitely in agreement with all of your comments regarding the predecessor tower plans and the lack of activated public space in the plaza surrounds (as I much as I can speculate without actually having seen it personally). Reminds me of the Boston City Hall debacle, and the repulsive gathering space that was supposed to have enveloped the city with architectural love (who doesn't yearn to spend quality time with institutional bunkers?). Inarticulated concrete pads seem to have a less than inviting nature... in most instances... but landscape and social spaces are overrated.

Foreboding Neo-Classicism/Modernist tripe.

Edit: Shit. I am revealed. That's what I get for posting on lunchbreak.



~cujo
__________________
Saget is offline  
Old 06-30-2005, 02:04 PM   #57
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: illegitimi non carborundum
Posts: 17,388
Local Time: 06:32 PM
__________________

__________________
DaveC is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com