Final Freedom Tower design?

[nmainguy]

Here's a story with a slide show of the newest Freedom Tower design:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/28/nyregion...artner=homepage

It is definatly different from the original-infact they couldn't be further apart.

[brijonmang]

I do like this one the best though...

[jmancuso]

i like it! now, all we need to do is find a less cheesy name for it.

[Trophy Property]

i like it! now, all we need to do is find a less cheesy name for it.

It think that building looks much better than the others.

[mls1202]

I'm profoundly disappointed in the design. While I understand the need to address security issues, I feel that this is nothing more than a big box design with an antenna stuck on top that does not in any way blend harmoniously with the square top.

If you compare the architecture with the style of buildings going up in other countries (ironically enough, the middle east), it just looks boring.

I'm hoping that my opinion will change when I see fully realized renderings of the exterior, and not just elevations.

[Trophy Property]

I'm profoundly disappointed in the design. While I understand the need to address security issues, I feel that this is nothing more than a big box design with an antenna stuck on top that does not in any way blend harmoniously with the square top.

If you compare the architecture with the style of buildings going up in other countries (ironically enough, the middle east), it just looks boring.

I'm hoping that my opinion will change when I see fully realized renderings of the exterior, and not just elevations.

Call me a traditionalist, but I like square buildings. There is something about the simplistic look and feel that catches my eye. I can't really explain it. For instance, I am a big fan of Calpine Center and 5 Houston Center. Both are newer buildings and both are short in comparision to the Freedom Tower, but I think they look sleek and crisp (even if not really square). I guess the newness factor adds a lot to my outlook as well. I am excited to watch this project progress.

What scares the hell out of me is terrorist making this their #1 USA target. I know they are claiming it will be the safest building ever built, but that is not going to stop another airplane.... I prey my fears never come true.

[sevfiv]

i am at a moment of...blah...with this. maybe it'll grow on me.

maybe it's just the idea of building a super huge building that is blow-up ready.

at least they are assuring that the glass prism base will be made so the sun won't refract the light and blind drivers and pedestrians...

[brijonmang]

Call me a traditionalist, but I like square buildings. There is something about the simplistic look and feel that catches my eye. I can't really explain it. For instance, I am a big fan of Calpine Center and 5 Houston Center. Both are newer buildings and both are short in comparision to the Freedom Tower, but I think they look sleek and crisp (even if not really square). I guess the newness factor adds a lot to my outlook as well. I am excited to watch this project progress.

I THOUGHT I WAS THE ONLY ONE! Way to be thinking on the same page. I totally agree though, the old WTC buildings were awesome just as huge rectangular prisms...this building throws a little flare into it.

[Subdude]

I think all that has significantly changed from the last version of this is substituting the prisms for steel on the bottom section, and what looks like a pavillion anchoring the antenna.

I don't think the design is bad exactly, but it is not great either. It is hampered by trying to be too many things to too many people and having to lay on the symbolism a bit too thick; for instance, the insistence on a height of 1776 feet, and the design references to the old world trade center. Construction is being driven not by market demand, but by politicians who are intent on making some kind of "statement" with an office building. Inevitably, it is already assumed that the building will be unable to find sufficient tenants and will end up being used primarily as government office space, and extremely expensive government office space at that.

From a design standpoint I don't think a structure of this size should be a pure rectangular box. It would just be too stolid and lifeless, which was always a complaint about the old WTC. That said, this design isn't exactly lively either.

[TheNiche]

I think all that has significantly changed from the last version of this is substituting the prisms for steel on the bottom section, and what looks like a pavillion anchoring the antenna.

I don't think the design is bad exactly, but it is not great either. It is hampered by trying to be too many things to too many people and having to lay on the symbolism a bit too thick; for instance, the insistence on a height of 1776 feet, and the design references to the old world trade center. Construction is being driven not by market demand, but by politicians who are intent on making some kind of "statement" with an office building. Inevitably, it is already assumed that the building will be unable to find sufficient tenants and will end up being used primarily as government office space, and extremely expensive government office space at that.

From a design standpoint I don't think a structure of this size should be a pure rectangular box. It would just be too stolid and lifeless, which was always a complaint about the old WTC. That said, this design isn't exactly lively either.

I'm in complete agreement about the governmental influence and ramifications. I also think that if the City of New York, State of New York, and Federal Government put too many of their resources into one building, you're just inviting another terrorist attack. I mean, its one thing for terrorists to take out a building with a lot of big businesses that will be hurt, but not wiped out by the loss of their NYC divisions. In the larger economy, where most of the affected businesses were already in industries with nearly perfect competition, the effect on the economy is really minimized considering how much life is lost.

But if this building was wiped out with all these government offices from all different levels located there...where's the redundancy? Even if they only put in the "non-essential" government offices, for instance, the sanitation department, the port authority, USPS, health and human services, etc., can anyone imagine what would happen if all those services stopped functioning in a city as dense as NYC?

As far as the design is concerned, I do think that the big ring on the roof is a little bit over the top...my mind goes to Jetsons architecture. But the basic design appears solid and strong...almost impenetrable despite its imposing stance relative to everything else on the skyline. I think that that is what we need as a symbol at this particular location. Even though I personally liked the previous design more, it did look fragile...and that just wasn't the right design for the right location.

[houstonmacbro]

I'm profoundly disappointed in the design. While I understand the need to address security issues, I feel that this is nothing more than a big box design with an antenna stuck on top that does not in any way blend harmoniously with the square top.

If you compare the architecture with the style of buildings going up in other countries (ironically enough, the middle east), it just looks boring.

I'm hoping that my opinion will change when I see fully realized renderings of the exterior, and not just elevations.

i gotta agree with you. i think it is a terrible design. and the name sux too.

[DJ V Lawrence]

I'm profoundly disappointed in the design. While I understand the need to address security issues, I feel that this is nothing more than a big box design with an antenna stuck on top that does not in any way blend harmoniously with the square top.

I remember hearing the same complaints about the original twin towers when I went to NYC in '99. If you remember, the towers didn't neccesarily match with the designs of the other buildings around it. What made the buildings majestic was the size and dominance of the buildings to the skyline.

I do think this design matches more with the NYC skyline than the original renderings. I understand what they were trying to do with it, but it didn't make sense. This one does.

What scares the hell out of me is terrorist making this their #1 USA target. I know they are claiming it will be the safest building ever built, but that is not going to stop another airplane.... I prey my fears never come true.

...which makes me question the amount of tenants at the upcoming Freedom Tower. Will occupancy still be as high as before if the tower will alwayz be seen as a high-risk terror threat?

[North Texas Native]

Trump was right the other one was down right ugly. It was a building trying to pose like the Statue of Liberty? Now that was dumb. I do like this a lot better . It would be cool. If this building could be a twin also. I hate too bring this up but to be honest would I or any one of you work thier ? I think I would think about 9/11 to much always wondering if another plane in Washington is being hijacked? How does one guard this building post 9/11? Freedom Tower does sound silly.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/28/nyregion...artner=homepage

It is definatly different from the original-infact they couldn't be further apart.

[Subdude]

I'm in complete agreement about the governmental influence and ramifications. I also think that if the City of New York, State of New York, and Federal Government put too many of their resources into one building, you're just inviting another terrorist attack. I mean, its one thing for terrorists to take out a building with a lot of big businesses that will be hurt, but not wiped out by the loss of their NYC divisions. In the larger economy, where most of the affected businesses were already in industries with nearly perfect competition, the effect on the economy is really minimized considering how much life is lost.

But if this building was wiped out with all these government offices from all different levels located there...where's the redundancy? Even if they only put in the "non-essential" government offices, for instance, the sanitation department, the port authority, USPS, health and human services, etc., can anyone imagine what would happen if all those services stopped functioning in a city as dense as NYC?

As far as the design is concerned, I do think that the big ring on the roof is a little bit over the top...my mind goes to Jetsons architecture. But the basic design appears solid and strong...almost impenetrable despite its imposing stance relative to everything else on the skyline. I think that that is what we need as a symbol at this particular location. Even though I personally liked the previous design more, it did look fragile...and that just wasn't the right design for the right location.

The Jetson-like roof is the only part I really like, but I'm partial to that style.

Initial tenants for the building have been announced. Sure enough, it's all governmental agencies. US Customs will take up a quarter of the space, and the NY State Office of General Services will take another big chunk. Nothing all that essential. It just seems ridiculous to build something of this size just for government offices. It certainly won't be any cheaper than their current locations. What an amazing boondoggle this one is.

Freedom Tower tenants article

And yes, the name is silly.

[CincoRanch-HoustonResident]

I actually liked the design Donal Trump had. It had the orginal tower design. The orginal tower sites were right next to the new buildings.

[YakuzaIce]

So are there many differences in this rendering and the one released a year ago? It seems the ring at the top is thicker. Also I remember they said the spire was still conceptual at the time, so is this the final version? I'll get an older rendering in a second.

Ok here is a small ugly version.

Full version here.

http://www.renewnyc.com/images_WMS/freedom...5_RGB-wmark.jpg

[DJ V Lawrence]

So are there many differences in this rendering and the one released a year ago? It seems the ring at the top is thicker. Also I remember they said the spire was still conceptual at the time, so is this the final version? I'll get an older rendering in a second.

Ok here is a small ugly version.

Full version here.

http://www.renewnyc.com/images_WMS/freedom...5_RGB-wmark.jpg

The color of the building just doesn't seem to go with the buildings around it.

[TheNiche]

The color of the building just doesn't seem to go with the buildings around it.

That probably has more to do with the artist's use of the surrounding skyline at sunset as a background. Then the artist probably superimposed a rendering that had already been drawn using the environmental assumptions of clear skies and a sunny day.

You'll notice, for instance, that although you can see where lights are on in office buildings around the subject, the subject is opaque.

The completed building will probably blend in a great deal more than shown in this rendering. Even if it didn't, I think that it makes for a great signature peice on the skyline.

[Captain Impossible]

This current design is growing on me. It feels less heavy and ultimately more attractive. I still think there could be some improvements, but overall it is a good design. However, that masonry base bothers me to no end. It makes it feel more like a missile silo or a fort, and less like a part of the urban fabric. Just because it's part monument doesn't mean they have to cover the bottom in an inaccessible block of stone that doesn't have any human scale.

[KAHLA FAN 101]

It looks okay but why are they farther apart.

[Subdude]

The designs have been unveiled for the remaining buildings at the old WTC site.

Designs Unveiled for Freedom Tower

[Guest Marty]

I think all the state capital cities should a have a San Jancinto style monument to honer 911.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I am so beyond ready for this project to finally get going. The longer that site remains void, the longer the bastards that conspired to knock those buildings down can claim a victory.

[Guest Marty]

We should rebuild the towers across the street where those three building are' and build the freedom tower!

[Montrose1100]

This design looks worse then the more symmetrical one they had. Perhaps it is just the illusion of the rendering, but this design looks like the top won't be a perfect square.

When this rendering came out (previously posted above), I truely believed there was a god in heaven. I prayed for that horrible "garden" spire crap they spat out to not be the final rendering. And this one represents the previous WTC.

Personally nothing would look better then if they just rebuilt them, but maybe taller (and of corse added with slightly modern construction methods then the 60s) and safer. Perhaps at 1,776ft. instead of the 1,450ft. they were at.

[Subdude]

Looks like the "Freedom Tower" may be ready for life support.

Freedom Tower Still Not Soaring

Observers are expressing doubts over the price tag of projects at the World Trade Center complex

by Kevin Lerner

As work on the Freedom Tower

[Vertigo58]

My question is : Will we see the day when this thing ever gets off the ground? I think the article explains though. Maybe not in our lifetime. As someone mentionend at the beginning of this topic that present name needs to go, very silly. Sound's too 70's.

[Subdude]

If the project is sold to a private developer it would seem that there would be a good chance the dumb name could go.

[mrfootball]

"Freedom Tower"...a bit ironic.

[Captain Impossible]

"Freedom Tower"...a bit ironic.

i don't see how it's ironic. i do see how it's very poorly named. who came up with such a lousy sounding title?