Debate rages over whether the 125m spire counts as part of the building. Do you know your antenna from your radome? — guardian.co.uk
"This definitely raises questions," said Kevin Brass, the public affairs manager for the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, the body that passes official judgment on such things as whether your erection is tall, supertall or megatall. "Our criteria are very specific. We include spires and not antennas. If this is an antenna, it won't be part of the height measurement. The cladding was an integral part of the design and made the extension part of the permanent look and feel of the building."
1 Comment
On the original WTC, about 1350 ft each, I think the antenna(e) were excluded. I don't know about this spire, but it seems to utilize that element exclusively to make new One WTC look tall. Regardless, I think the clean geometry and subtle beveling of the elevations makes for a beautiful building.
I remember how, when the original WTC was up, I loved walking along the promenade on the palisades of New Jersey, just south of the GW Bridge, while visiting relatives in northern NJ. The shimmering WTC down the Hudson River was a sight to behold.
The saying is: never forget. On that infamous day, it was "innocence lost."
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.