houstontexasjack Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 http://newyorkyimby.com/2015/06/interview-bjarke-ingels-on-new-design-for-200-greenwich-street-aka-two-world-trade-center.htmlThis looks sexy. No sky lobby. I was excited when 1 WTC got above ground level when I graduated. That site has really comeback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 people have been bitching about the loss of Norman Fosters design to BIG's design, but that just comes with job. Not to mention everyone was so in love with something that has been out there for people to look at for the last 6 YEARS! that many seem to have already taken ownership of it. It was very reminiscent of the discussions for the Hotel Alessandra site here in Houston. I loved Norman Fosters design as many did, but it was designed for a different set of uses, different program, and in a different time. Office spaces have changed drastically in the past 10 years. Plus I think Norman Fosters design would have competed a little to much with One World Trade. Honestly most people only liked it because of the diamond shaped crown.BIG's design is both understated and understands the sensitivities of the site and environment it is in. It pays respect to the ideals of how buildings are being designed today as well as respects the identity and towering presence of One World Trade. In a world were sometimes architecture has tried to be a little too flashy and a little too complex. Its refreshing that this is much more simple and clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montrose1100 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I'm just sad 1 WTC didn't get a twin. In that Adam Sandler movie with the remote time control, There's a shot of the Manhattan Skyline from Jersey, and it has two of the World Trade Center towers as twins. Looked pretty sweet.I agree with cloud about this building not competing. Looks cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 A great interview by YIMBY as they talked with Bjarke Ingels about the new design. Link below: http://www.archdaily.com/642282/bjarke-ingels-talks-about-two-world-trade-center/ Of course there was one question that was asked regarding the negative response to the new proposal, and while I thought Ingels should have really attacked on it, I think he handled it with class by sticking with his guns and talking about the building itself. Ingels honestly doesn't need to worry himself about the public because many have no idea the complications of the site and shift in focus in the use of the building. It needed to change and thats what Ingels stuck with.The best parts were his explanation of the concept. Most of the hate has come from smart-ass people comparing the building to just some building blocks that a child would make without trying to explore the purpose or what lies beneath. The building seems to have some very interesting touches that have yet to reveal themselves and thats what makes it interesting.The other part was his ideas for the terraces. Another critique has been how would nature be able to survive that high or how would it be comfortable to be on terraces that high. Ingels solution is have each terrace act like a different biome in a sense. As the building rises the terrace plant make up will adjust for the height. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumbleweed_Tx Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 it wouldn't have competed with 1WTC it would have been much better. now, it's the ugliest f**king thing I have ever seen, and doesn't fit with the original vision of the WTC. pardon my French. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luminare Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 it wouldn't have competed with 1WTC it would have been much better. now, it's the ugliest f**king thing I have ever seen, and doesn't fit with the original vision of the WTC. pardon my French. Oh...you mean Daniel Libeskind's "original vision" or YOUR "original vision"? You sound like someone who complains about a director of a movie not using the right batman or superman, or joker? Its like which one? Usually that complaint comes from that persons own idealized form of that character and nothing else. Same here. It sounds like you mean what you think the "original vision" was. I don't know if you bothered to glance at the diagrams, but each step in the concept was in line with Daniel Libeskind's "original vision" if that's even possible to say. Yes he master planned the area, but master plans are a road map for possible future which can change at any time. It isn't the bible or gospel. I mean in one of the diagrams it talks about the building conforming to Libeskinds "Wedge of Light" which by the way was one of the most important components of the design of the master plan. I say they followed the "original vision" quite well. I don't think they know what YOUR original vision or version you had for it. But you can go ahead and just spit profanities or maybe you can look at it a bit deeper and work on your terrible "French". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strickn Posted June 20, 2015 Share Posted June 20, 2015 In related news, B.I.G. has applied to be the new master planner for the Dallas Arts District. http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/2015/06/thirty-years-after-sasaki-plan-created-dallas-arts-district-a-call-for-a-new-vision-and-fast.html/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxman Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Wow, as if WTC 1 isn't uninspiring enough, they take what could have been a real AMERICAN landmark tower and turned into this piece of s**t?!?!?!?!?! ARE YOU F***ING KIDDING ME?!?!?!? This building has no character or imagination to it. It looks like a cheap knock off of the Georgia Pacific Tower in Atlanta. Whatever nut job came up with that needs to retire or quit. Seriously. They need to see this project as more than just office space. This needs to be a symbol of our enduring spirit of freedom and something really spectacular needs to rise here. NOT this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montrose1100 Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Wow, as if WTC 1 isn't uninspiring enough, they take what could have been a real AMERICAN landmark tower and turned into this piece of s**t?!?!?!?!?! ARE YOU F***ING KIDDING ME?!?!?!? This building has no character or imagination to it. It looks like a cheap knock off of the Georgia Pacific Tower in Atlanta. Whatever nut job came up with that needs to retire or quit. Seriously. They need to see this project as more than just office space. This needs to be a symbol of our enduring spirit of freedom and something really spectacular needs to rise here. NOT this.The previous design was glitzy but certainly not some iconic symbol of American Freedom. This is, after all, a skyscraper for office space. We have our American symbolism in 1 WTC. Even though you don't like it, doesn't mean it's not iconic or spectacular in other people's eye.We have a beautiful memorial for that awful day, but we are now living in a post terror society. Finally getting back to where we left off before that day (yes I know the Boston Marathon event happened and I'm not soon to forget it, but it was no where near the scale and shock of 9/11).Maybe about 10 years ago I'd agree with you that this should be a waving monumental middle finger to the rest of the world and a soaring design meant to be another beacon of hope and peace. But it's not. It's time to move on from that idea. Even the previous design didn't give me a feeling of patriotism. It was pretty. That's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.