Freedom Tower Redesign

[RodneyLester]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8398770/

I'm sure the redesign was a breeze with Revit...

[Steve Jager]

Anyone seen it? it's supposed to be out.

[RodneyLester]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8398770/

[cosmickingpin]

Is it me or do the designers of the 'Freedom Tower" have almost no "Freedom"? I know every big project has these twists and turns, but the name of this one holds a paticular irony it seems.

[daniel.hurtubise70031]

http://www.renewnyc.com/

Thanks to James for the linkT

[Les Therrien]

I like it better than the originally proposed Freedom Tower.
I would still like to see Trump's version built though.

[Steve_Stafford]

Identical titled threads merged...older one gets to host the newer...

[JamesVan]

So, anyone willing to venture a guess...

Are we salvaging the original Revit project or starting fresh?

[cosmickingpin]

Being as how we all recently talked about how Revit is short for "Revise It" I am going to guess A, revising the original.


So, anyone willing to venture a guess...

Are we salvaging the original Revit project or starting fresh?

[raeburnmark]

Ahhh! looks like the bureaucrats win again. The original design has been watered down to the point of being wishy-washy!!! gone is the dynamic asymmetry only to be replaced by a developers box. there is nothing wonderful about this "design", nothing visionary, nothing outstanding. I suppose it is only to be expected that in a country where economy rules everything that even the "most important commission of this century" should be an economical box with maximum leasable space and no real meaning for what it represents.

By the way, the spire just looks tacked on and as such is also meaningless. Tacked on for the sake of being the biggest. Bloody pathetic. I wish I could blame the designers, but I'm sure they have been forced into this position (I hope!).

I understand that the project has to be feasible but come on - how can this represent freedom. This is oppression of spirit and freedom at its worst.

[MartyC]

.......will rise from a base clad in shimmering metal chosen for beauty and blast-resistance...................

What Bullsh-t!!

Dumb-arse beaurocrats, dumb-arse journalist.

Sounds like David Childs sold out.

CheersM

[Mencken]

The darkness at ground zero just got a little darker. If there are people still clinging to the expectation that the Freedom Tower will become a monument to the highest American ideals, the current design should finally shake them out of that delusion. Somber, oppressive and clumsily conceived, the project suggests a monument to a society that has turned its back on any notion of cultural openness. It is exactly the kind of nightmare that government officials repeatedly asserted would never happen here: an impregnable tower braced against the outside world.
...
The temptation is to dismiss it as a joke. And it is hard not to pity Mr. Childs, who was forced to redesign the tower on the fly to meet the rigid deadline of Gov. George E. Pataki.

- NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF, The New York Times

pity, pity, pity

Once again, those who have the "gold" make the rules. But why do Architects have to enable this mush? I wonder if the folks at Autodesk who claim Revit will produce better buildings are re-considering their ties to the Freedom Tower project.

Just my $0.02

[bclarch]

Spiritless and boring. Looks more like a 2nd year design studio project. All the hallmarks of a building designed on a deadline.

[MikeJarosz]

Quoted without comment:

"Many critics and concerned citizens - myself included - were quick to criticize Mr. Childs and Governor Pataki when the initial plans for the Freedom Tower were scrapped a few months ago. This was because, according to all our experience with both men, there was every reason to expect that the radical structure designed by Mr Libeskind was about to be replaced by an equally objectionable banality. In the event, Mr Childs has come back with a design far better than I ever expected. In fact, it seems to be his and SOM's best in years."

James Gardner
Architecture Critic
The New York Sun

[raeburnmark]

It looks to me that The New York Sun needs a new architecture critic - maybe one with some sort of design education!!!!

I just read the entire article quoted by Ralph above - very interesting and worth a read. I particularly liked the references to the "tooth pick" on top and the fact that the author thought it looked like an obelisk shaped paperweight. I couldn't agree more.

As far as Trumps opinion - who cares? his design also showed no originality.

[madcadder]

I just went to SOM's website and looked at the siteplan. I thought it would be a bigger building taking up more of the lot(s). Now it just looks too small, like there should be two again to fill the space. Even better - build three.

[BillyGrey]

I for one would be honored to be involved in such a project.
To reduce it to a back-handed crit is superfluous in reality.

Considering all of the variables, what this project has been through to get to this point,
and grounding my point of view with an un-jaundiced eye, I have to ask in the face of all the contrary criticism, "What did you expect?"

"Not that" is not an acceptable answer...

After all, the WTC was attacked twice in less than ten years.

[jrocc858]

So when from recycling a students design to recycling SOMs unrealized NYSE design. While it lacks any of the poetry of Liebenskinds(sp) design I'm not overtly adverse to it, could almost argue its chysler-esque. That is until you hit the monstrosity at the base. That is nothing more than a brute manifestation of paranoia. This project is no longer a memorial but strictly a commercial development and exercisze in overt buerocracy.

[dgraue]

So, anyone willing to venture a guess...

Are we salvaging the original Revit project or starting fresh?

I'll bite. I'd guess you'd start fresh but bring in groups and families you could salvage from the original. It certainly seemed to go together quickly.

[pjensen]

piece of cake....

[MikeJarosz]

I just went to SOM's website and looked at the siteplan. I thought it would be a bigger building taking up more of the lot(s). Now it just looks too small, like there should be two again to fill the space. Even better - build three.

You are on to something here. Freedom Tower is the name the governor chose to label this project. But we have always referred to it in house as Tower One. Why? Because there ARE plans for Towers Two and Three.

200 feet square is not exactly a small footprint, incidentally.

[Phil Read]

It's not a concrete "base".

It's a extraordinary "plinth".

And knowing the people I've been fortunate to work with on this project I fully expect the plinth alone be nothing less than spectacular. :)

Be patient!

-Phil

[GuyR]

It's a extraordinary "plinth".

Phil, you could get a job as a G.Bush spin doctor :-)

It's a bomb blast bunker with style. Is that really what people coming to work want to be reminded of as they step through the doors?

Are we going to see people wearing bulletproof vests until they're within the safety of the 'bunker' in case they get hit by a sniper? Anyone would think this was a war zone...

Guy

[JamesVan]

It's a bomb blast bunker with style. Is that really what people coming to work want to be reminded of as they step through the doors?

Are we going to see people wearing bulletproof vests until they're within the safety of the 'bunker' in case they get hit by a sniper? Anyone would think this was a war zone...

If you work or live in downtown NYC as I do, you'd either come to accept the daily reality of streets patrolled by machine gun toting policemen (NY's Finest), retractible barricades, pickup trucks, photo ID's, canine units, etc. or you'd move to the countryside. If we can make the security requirements of the project as 'invisible' as possible, IMHO we've achieved something special. I for one would welcome the opportunity to work in such a safe environment. Being in a building right across the street from the NYSE on 9/11 was quite distressing. So is it a war zone?...personally, I still say yes; but I don't think I'd want to work in any other city.

[GuyR]

I for one would welcome the opportunity to work in such a safe environment.

Do the intelligence services honestly think they needs to try and blow up this particular building again? Why would they bother trying? Just go to the next neighbourhood and blow up a building there. It's about creating fear and insecurity .

So if this type of design is what's required for security reasons can we expect to see every building over say 20 storeys requiring bunker style lower storeys in case a truck bomb drives by?

Unless of course creating a permanent reminder of a 'potential' attack is the real goal ;-)

[Scott D Davis]

Concrete can be beautiful....open your mind and explore the possibilities. Maybe the SOM team will get inspired by concrete like THIS. (http://www.litracon.hu/)

[Wes Macaulay]

Here's your collective invitation to come to Vancouver, where if the ferries to Vancouver Island won't kill you, then nothing else will. And our buildings are easy to look at...

http://www.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2001/12/134710.jpg

[GuyR]

Here's your collective invitation to come to Vancouver,

I'll add Auckland to the invitation. Although we have been bombed!! As long as the French don't get pi**ed off with Greenpeace again you should be safe ;-)

Guy

[MartyC]

I'll add Auckland to the invitation. Although we have been bombed!! As long as the French don't get pi**ed off with Greenpeace again you should be safe ;-)

Guy


Yeah, fearless Auckland, the SkyTower only has a couple of bollards to stop the mobile bombs!! But just goes to show, you cant understimate the French! Are they selling Renaults and Citroens over there again?

It is amazing how so many have forgotten, or forgiven how the French Government came to Auckland and bombed a ship in the harbour, right in downtown! Forget about Al Qaeda, its the French you have to be worried about!!!! Ah mon ami, j'aime l'odeur du napalm le matin !!!! (Just kidding, love France, just have a prob with the politicians) :) :)

CheersM

[Joef]

I lived in Detroit in 1967 and after the riot everyone whose windows weren't already smashed bricked them up. It made already ugly neighborhoods even uglier. Architecture of fear. Not much different in NYC right now.

Joe

[cosmickingpin]

This being a "symbol" building I wonder what the enduring and endearing qualities of this symbol will become over time. Beside crashing an airplane into it, there are lots of ways to attack a building (chemical, biological, armed assault, but what about a sociologically or psychologically?), and as far as some extreme groups are concerned, this building might as well have a target painted on the side of it. I can see the defining qualities of the "freedom" tower as being an embodiment of the increasly engineered instability of contemporary global society, a tomb to enshine the passing of a bygone era. This building seems to usher in a new era of "homeland security" and new forms of social control, all design to protect and expand the status quo (of forever war, thin line starvation, brinkmanships of economic collapse) of the "new empire." The Security measures that will be in place to protect this building of a daily basis will be more dollars than any of us will see in our life times. Looks like a corporate penitentiary for the new era of global economic centralization, dominated by random conglomerations of corporations who owe their power base to random market place fluctuations. There will be no more Stalins or Hitlers, instead leaders will be chosen by random demographic shifts, and chaotic market place cycles, who find themselves strapped in at the helm of infinitely complex machines forced to rely of "expert" opinions as to what buttons to push and when to push them. There will be no more global conflicts, no more D-Days, or pearl harbors, instead, unilateral militariy actions and coalitions of the willing will dominate the bargaining table of peace. Peace will come to refer to that time period at the end of the fiscal quarter and the new destruction budgets are being revised.
Happy Fourth of July Everyone!

[Scott D Davis]

So they figured out how to stop the truck-bombs. Did they figure out how to stop airplanes yet?

To me, all of these 'security' concerns are fine and yes, we need to address them. But ultimately, where there's a will, there's a way.....if it's not a truck bomb, car bomb, airplane, missle, it will be something else. Yes, we can put 'some' protection in place, but there is no way to build a skyscraper that can be completely safe.

The only way to make a building that safe is to do something like NORAD, in Colorado Springs. Build a 'bunker' deep inside of a mountain, and put 6 foot thick steel blast doors on the entrance.

[bowlingbrad]

I agree with Scott. Even though SOM is trying hard, this building should be more about our country bouncing back from one of the most horrific attacks in history.

It will never be terror proof. Nothing will. Moreover, there will be beautiful details all over this building, from engineering innovation to finishes and materials. But, in my opinion, the design will be defined by different parameters than we, the American People, really expect. I am optimistic that we care.

And, another thing. How final is this design? It may change again. Good thing for Revit.

[JamesVan]

The only way to make a building that safe is to do something like NORAD, in Colorado Springs. Build a 'bunker' deep inside of a mountain, and put 6 foot thick steel blast doors on the entrance.
Yeah, but what happens when the aliens take out NORAD, too?
http://www.foxhome.com/id4dvd/html/index_flash.html

A similar situation of reference may be the recently opened Oklahoma Federal Building. It's designers had to deal with the same issues: See article (http://archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/031210oklahoma.asp)

[Wes Macaulay]

Cosmo, I share your cynicism over globalisation.

I hope the design and new security measures of the new building doesn't come off as a dare to those who might try to damage it. But it seems to work that way, doesn't it.

[neb1998]

Cosmo, I share your cynicism over globalisation.

I hope the design and new security measures of the new building doesn't come off as a dare to those who might try to damage it. But it seems to work that way, doesn't it.
Just like we have the tallest building in the world, it only remains as its peak till someone comes around and outbuilds it.

So now we have the safest building in the world, perhaps now it will become an icon of what safe architecture is till once again someone else takes it to the next limit and designs a "safer" building.

If you give a 5 year old a child-proof lighter, eventually they will find a way to burn the crib down.

[cosmickingpin]

lol I can almost hear a collective groan "Oh Wes don't encourage him" ;) If the hijackers intent on 9/11 was to create a climate of fear, and a willingness to sacrifice basic freedom for perceived security, then their attacks seem to retain a quality of success, this climate of fear is one the Geo-political leaders have not been able to resist exploiting for further their own particular agendas. The Freedom Tower runs the risk of becoming the "Feardom Tower." The Tsunami of Christmas last year was by far a worst human tragedy than 9/11 yet for some reason, does not inspire nearly as many bumper stickers in the US, nor a "War on Tsunami" and as you know we Americans can do anything right or get anything done without a "war" to guide us.



Cosmo, I share your cynicism over globalisation.

I hope the design and new security measures of the new building doesn't come off as a dare to those who might try to damage it. But it seems to work that way, doesn't it.

[MikeJarosz]

As this is a forum for professional architects, I expect that anyone reading this is well aware of what it takes to go beyond a mere design on paper and actually get a building built. The technical requirements of this project that must be solved would overwhelm most designers.

Of course, we could pretend this IS a second year design exercise ignoring 98% of the technical requirements and design it entirely as if appearance were all that mattered. Don't bother to read the book, just judge it by it's cover. I'm afraid too many architecture critics today take that approach.

Look at just a few of the hurdles we have had to overcome:

Remember that our original lobby design was entirely glass. But we have to face a security conscious community chorus singing in triple fortissimo. I suggest the disapproving critics discuss the base design with them. Yet, without the approval of the community this project cannot proceed. And the chorus of the Press sings next in this concert.

Our 70 foot deep foundations have to hold back New York Harbor and the Atlantic Ocean while allowing an existing 24/7 PATH train to operate safely under 1776 feet of concrete, steel and humanity. The structural engineers have done an amazing job. There is a beam in the basement that has a 17,000 kip tensile load. Or, can anyone guess how much a 1776 foot elevator cable assembly weighs? Now that it is unveiled, we can say that this project is a Revit Structure test site.

And here come the ornithologists...... (I'm not making this up! As a Boy Scout I had a bird watching merit badge.)

I don't need to say more. Handed this commission I firmly believe most architects would first attempt to simplify the program, and when that fails, walk away. But I believe we have met the requirements of our client and the demands of our critics with a design that is buildable despite the extraordinary conditions imposed on this project. After all, our design for 7 WTC is nearing completion directly across Vesey Street.

The alternative is to do nothing.

[neb1998]

As this is a forum for professional architects, I expect that anyone reading this is well aware of what it takes to go beyond a mere design on paper and actually get a building built. The technical requirements of this project that must be solved would overwhelm most designers.

Of course, we could pretend this IS a second year design exercise ignoring 98% of the technical requirements and design it entirely as if appearance were all that mattered. Don't bother to read the book, just judge it by it's cover. I'm afraid too many architecture critics today take that approach.

Look at just a few of the hurdles we have had to overcome:

Remember that our original lobby design was entirely glass. But we have to face a security conscious community chorus singing in triple fortissimo. I suggest the disapproving critics discuss the base design with them. Yet, without the approval of the community this project cannot proceed. And the chorus of the Press sings next in this concert.

Our 70 foot deep foundations have to hold back New York Harbor and the Atlantic Ocean while allowing an existing 24/7 PATH train to operate safely under 1776 feet of concrete, steel and humanity. The structural engineers have done an amazing job. There is a beam in the basement that has a 17,000 kip tensile load. Or, can anyone guess how much a 1776 foot elevator cable assembly weighs? Now that it is unveiled, we can say that this project is a Revit Structure test site.

And here come the ornithologists...... (I'm not making this up! As a Boy Scout I had a bird watching merit badge.)

I don't need to say more. Handed this commission I firmly believe most architects would first attempt to simplify the program, and when that fails, walk away. But I believe we have met the requirements of our client and the demands of our critics with a design that is buildable despite the extraordinary conditions imposed on this project. After all, our design for 7 WTC is nearing completion directly across Vesey Street.

The alternative is to do nothing.
Not sure anyone is questionong the capability or the motivation of SOM, just perhaps the intended and actual design.

[bclarch]

Don't bother to read the book, just judge it by it's cover. I'm afraid too many architecture critics today take that approach.Mike,
We do all understand that designs get driven by program requirements, technical requirements, site constraints, security issues, codes and a host of other influences. Unfortunately, on this project, three of the biggest influences are public opinion, politics and ego. Based on the postings to this forum we also know that the design team has invested a lot of time and effort into the project and can take great pride in the way that they have applied themselves to the task. However, that having been said, the following must also be said. Even if the design does an elegant job of meeting all of the programmatic and technical requirements, only architects and engineers will appreciate that. It's outward appearance is what the public will ultimately judge it by. The Edsel also had many technical innovations including the first push-button electronic transmission, but the public never fell in love with it and it suffered a quick demise as a result. Rightly or wrongly, the public has been told to expect a monument to America's greatness. The political significance that this project has been burdened with has been there from the start and can't be ignored. It is part of the program.

Even the statement above that I quoted from your post needs to be considered as it relates to the public expectations regarding this project. What sort of attention and / or criticism do you think this design would receive from the press, the public and other designers if it were just another building being built in Dallas?

[FK]

Question: are towers 2-whatever going to reflect the more symmetrical design, rather than the original Liebeskind's vision? The new design does not seem to fit with them.

[John Anderson]

It's not surprising that the design has turned toward being another out of scale massive expression of US corporate dominance. The focus surrounding this project and the matrix of national consciousness in which it exists is one of extreme protectionism which bleeds exclusivity.

The obviousness of the safety to be gained by building a collection of structures exemplary for their beauty, relationship to surrounding context and inviting, engaging and empowering of ALL people is as stunning as the inability of our culture to even approach that option.

[GuyR]

What happened to the wind turbines :-?

I'd have liked to see how you were going to isolate the turbines from structure.

Guy

[MikeJarosz]

What happened to the wind turbines :-?

I'd have liked to see how you were going to isolate the turbines from structure.

Guy

Gone with the wind.

They were originally up in the tensegrity-like tower structure, a natural vibration isolator.

[aggockel50321]

The obviousness of the safety to be gained by building a collection of structures exemplary for their beauty, relationship to surrounding context and inviting, engaging and empowering of ALL people is as stunning as the inability of our culture to even approach that option.

This project is just going through the vetting process that any other project goes through, only on a much grander scale.

In the end, whatever is built has to be functional, look good (by a majority of those polled by, say Bloomberg News), and once complete, collect enough revenue to pay for itself, and give it's stockholders a return that'll entice them to invest in it.

Not an easy task, given that it's being built in a place with most likely the highest building trade labor costs in the world, and the largest oversight bureaucracy ever assembled.

Now, if SOM could figure out a way to build the structure overseas in some third world country, using labor that's paid $40 per month rather than $40 per hour, then float it over here & stand it up, they might be able to put the wind chimes and all the other glitz back into the project...

[GuyR]

Interesting perspective:

"An Alienating Monument to Surrender"

http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=1489

[John Anderson]

Interesting perspective:

"An Alienating Monument to Surrender"

http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=1489
Ah yes. So if they add a white flag to the tower they might just have something there.

[marty_rozmanith]

Being the ****-poor architect that I am, I'd still have to agree with Jeff Speck of Metropolis. Besides - the windmills made it for me - really liked them.

[marty_rozmanith]

I cant believe it bleeped out the word p i s s in ****-poor

[Roger Evans]

What's the chances for Revit to be picked for the 2012 Olympics?

[Andrew Dobson]

Several of the Architects involved use AutoDesk software, I only know of HOK being interested in Revit. Foreign Office Architects has one of their buildings (Yokohoma Ferry Terminal) on the AutoCAD 2005 splash screen, so guess they use AutoCAD, Allies and Morrison (I think) and Foster and partners use Microstation. Dont know what other architects involved use.

[beegee]

I believe HOK are in the process of converting to Revit.

[MikeJarosz]

I believe HOK are in the process of converting to Revit.

I've heard that one too....... (from reliable sources)

[J. Grouchy]

I believe HOK are in the process of converting to Revit.

I'm curious to know how smoothly the transition occurs in the LARGE firms...and how it is phased in.

BTW - marty...has anyone ever told you that picture makes you (or whoever that is a picture of) look like David Lee Roth?
:-P

[cadkiller]

James;

So what is the answer to the poll you created?
It seems that most are saying to start from scratch.


Salvage the model http://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar2-l.gifhttp://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar2.gifhttp://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar2-r.gif 16 30.77%
Start Over Fresh http://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar3-l.gifhttp://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar3.gifhttp://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar3-r.gif 22 42.31%
Do something unexpected http://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar4-l.gifhttp://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar4.gifhttp://forums.augi.com/images/polls/bar4-r.gif 14 26.92%

[JamesVan]

I feel like I'm on "Millionnaire"...

Gonna have to go with the audience on this one: Start over from scratch (almost).

The new design is different enough to warrant a clean start. We're confident in our team's abilities with Revit now to even ponder such a decision. There were some quirky things we did with the first design that caused some problems in the Revit project, so we know what to avoid next time. All part of the learning process.

[Dimitri Harvalias]

So James,

now that the first scheme is basically useless to you and the client how about you offer it to the Autodesk folks to use as the basis for the 'large project' tutorial? ;-)

Kidding aside, I recall you saying that the whole was initially divided into several smaller portions and linked together to form the entire project. Were you able to salvage much of the sub-grade work that got you started in Revit or was that entirely scrapped as well?
On a building of this significance I'm certain that your offices are doing some sort of film documentary as you work through the design, production and construction process. I can hardly wait for the Discovery Channel series that will let us in on the role that Revit played.
Good luck.

[JamesVan]

Were you able to salvage much of the sub-grade work that got you started in Revit or was that entirely scrapped as well?

That's the "almost" part. The existing 'bathtub' and PATH trains will remain, so we will be reusing some of that content. We also will reuse many of the families we developed for FT v1.0.

[Brian Myers]

I don't believe the design of the building is all that bad, in fact, it's not bad at all. Part of the problem is the site upon which this project will be built (and the importance that brings) and the other part is the fact we were expecting an amazing design and architectural statement... and now (in my opinion) we get a good design and architectural statement.

In short: It's a bit of a let down and architecturally it likely could have been both safe and an architectural statement... now it's still a statement, just not on par with the original design. Of course we are aware of the opinions of 1,000 different people and organizations that are influencing the design so we're not criticizing the design team... I think we're all aware of the influence of a client and the community and how they effect the outcome of our original design regardless of the project.... and this project takes on a special significance.

Really in short: As designers we believe there may be a better design solution and unfortunately the design team likely didn't have the time and public/government support to really explore those options. For a structure being built as a "monument" that's the hard part for us to see. I think we'll enjoy the building when completed, but ultimately it will just be a fabulous, big building and not a fabulous great monument (something more special than the other "Super Structures" being built in other parts of the world).

[GuyR]

It's not going away... Here's your chance for greatness ;-) The chance to design the real solution for the twin tower rebuild.:roll: And it'll only cost you $50US for the opportunity.

http://www.teamtwintowers.org/pdfs/guidelines.pdf

[neb1998]

Wasnt the original design of the original structures actually hated as well?