New Freedom Tower unveiled for NYC

[nbcrusader]

why must we name everything "Freedom"?

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.

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

The other thing with the new design, I wonder who they're going to get to rent the upper stories? Will anyone want it? I know that a lot of the original Freedom Tower was what some might consider "wasted space," but that was using the mindset that no one would remotely want to rent the upper floors anyway. I'm curious as to why they changed their minds.

Melon

If U2 rent it they can put a nice Vertigo/target logo on their part of the building.

 

[u2bonogirl]

freedom tower? Corny
Kinda like freedom fries.
Why must it be enormous?

 

[karls77]

Hmmmm..... It looks Ok but not as good as the original Liebeskind proposal. From what I've been hearing though he's had some trouble with the port authorty's architect and they had to change the building due to safety issues. It's imposing but doesn't really make a statement, have any real visual interest or make me want to see it in the flesh.

 

[Irvine511]

Because French Tower would upset people

okay, that was pretty funny.

 

[cujo]

Excuse my cynicism...

Considering the amount of hype and publicity surrounding the original competition, and the initial apprehensions of the design community towards participating, the outcome for the Freedom Tower project is nothing more than obvious filler. There seems to be no apparent developed parti (other than an object in a field of objects), and no respect for remembrance precedent (like that of the Vietnam War Memorial and Oklahoma City Federal Building Memorial- two of the more interesting examples of contemplative public repositories). An element of interaction and humility exists within predecessor American memorial sites that is vacant in the depicted renderings, none of which imbue a sense of the ground level, walking treatment... or how the large structure actually complements the other World Trade Centre Memorial constructs. OMA and many prominent international firms refused to put any effort in the competition design, because it was a foregone conclusion that the political pressures would dilute the product (an assumption that looks to be accurate).

This building stands to be nothing more than a shameless rip-off of some Daniel Libeskind, Frank Gehry, glass shard, sculptural, phallic lighthouse. If it was commentary or parody of the contemporary skyscraper/city, then maybe the formal gestures would make sense with the overplayed tectonic of torsion. However, there seems to be no layers of meaning to the aesthetic. It's just big and shiny.

In the end, it does not matter what is there. The place itself resonates enough loaded experience that even the most inane of structures would typify the sentiment. It is disappointing that the literal default became the final manifestation, and the end result is simply an exercise in the current fad of torquing the shit out things. Who uses glass anymore? Van der Rohe and Johnson have expired... let's move on.

/rant

 

[BVS]

Extremely boring and uninspiring. But then again most architecture is these days.

 

[cujo]

Just the mainstream stuff.

 

[u2bonogirl]

I still remember the first townhouse development I ever saw
Then i realized I was going to be living in it
I was like, whats with all the things sticking out of the sides of the houses?
Ahhh, bay windows you say

french tower

 

[ouizy]

Very intersting, but the current design does not torque.

Cujo - you must be either an architect, architectural student, professor or other position in the field - no one else speaks that way.

I am curious about your "Who uses glass anymore" statement. What did you mean by that. Most current architectural projects use glass as a main medium, and even are pushing the limits as to what glass and curtainwall systems can do.

As I may agree with some of your statements, you have to understand the massive constraints and expectations this structure has to accomodate. Security-wise there are very few things that are do-able on that specific site, yet the expectation is for the building to be the biggest, best thing that has ever graced New York, quite a catch-22.

I enjoyed your commentary.

 

[cujo]

Verbosity comes with the territory.

Very intersting, but the current design does not torque.

That's the saddest thing of all. It's a neutered and flattened version of the reference visual... simliar to how the exposure of trusses and mechanical structure in Walmart is the pedestrian version of the Pompidou Centre.

I am curious about your "Who uses glass anymore" statement. What did you mean by that. Most current architectural projects use glass as a main medium, and even are pushing the limits as to what glass and curtainwall systems can do.

Indeed. I was rather vague with my statement there. Glass has always been the major accent piece for commercial skyscraper buildings, but the manner of its usage seems to be perpetuating an old language from another time. Sure the material is important for natural lighting, creature comfort, the open plan, and ideas of transparency, but there are examples of heroically tall buidlings that have used other characters to define their presence (i.e. Deco pieces like the Chrysler Building, and early Modernist works by Sullivan and Wright). I guess I was criticizing the lack of current innovative works with glass (from both a sustainability and design perspective)... other than folks, like Koolhaas, find different avenues for glass through a temporary inversion of the relationship between solid and void (see Seattle Library, similar to Van der Rohe's approach in some ways). The new CCTV Tower in Beijing will hopefully serve as both a testament to OMA's work with glass and the development of a different skyscraper typology.

As I may agree with some of your statements, you have to understand the massive constraints and expectations this structure has to accomodate. Security-wise there are very few things that are do-able on that specific site, yet the expectation is for the building to be the biggest, best thing that has ever graced New York, quite a catch-22.

There are horrible constraints, and in that regard I don't envy the clients or designers in the least. I was critiquing strictly from a design perspective (granted, the political and security climate is a design consideration). I suppose I was just looking for something more. There's no contesting that this Freedom Tower will attract visitors, but I think that is more a product of spectacle and location... as opposed to architectural merit.

I quite enjoyed your feedback. I prefer to maintain some anonymity, but if you're curious to know what I do, email at your leisure... trebek@gmail.com.



Edited to make sense... to someone I hope.

 

[deep]

can i add to the stupidity

ha ha.

I wonder if your dad actually knows any real live Muslims. Newsflash...they're people too and they're not all terrorists. Last time I checked my boyfriend wasn't a bastard or a terrorist.

 

[deep]

why must we name everything "Freedom"?


.

yeah,

let's call it the

"George W Bush - Bring it on! Tower"

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

Cujo, thanks for posting.

 

[DaveC]

Sticks out like a sore thumb in the rest of the skyline.

 

[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 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.

 

[angelordevil]

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]

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

 

[melon]

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

 

[angelordevil]

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!!!

 

[cujo]

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.

 

[verte76]

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.

 

[ouizy]

Were you the architect for the runner-up submission?

No, actually I

"...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.

 

[cujo]

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.

 

[ouizy]

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...

 

[Saget]

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

 

[DaveC]