Plans for rebuilding at the World Trade Center site - SEE HERE!

CNN ^ | 7/16/02

[Britton J Wingfield]

Everyone should kkeep in mind that the original WTC was considered an eyesore for most of it's existence.

[finnman69]

By placing the towers on the North and East edge of the site, you maximize the amount of sunlight that reaches the open areas of the site. Although it takes a large area, the #2 memorial plaza sceme which is walled in by low-'wall' buildings could be in itself a powerful memorial, especially when placed next to a few super tall buildings. It appears to keep Grennwich steet running through it. I think the least successful plans are the schemes like #6 which save the towers foorprints (cross shaped paths over them) as separate plazas. It breaks the site up too much.

[Baseballguy]

Its now Wachovia.....

[RoughDobermann]

[FreedomFarmer]

Build them back the way they were.

Snake Pliskin has to land on top of them in the future!

[Dead Dog]

I agree, and I would add, it should be built from the rubble of every Mosque in the world..and that silly rock they worship in Mecca.

[RoughDobermann]

See 64

[NYC GOP Chick]

In terms of the buildings and fitting in with what exists there now, I like 6 best. But, at the same time, it would be nice to have a large green space (such as in #1), not only as a memorial, but to provide open space for concerts and other large public activities (of the sort that the Islamics would like to put a stop to forever). I agree that none of them are really stunning, but they're a start.

And on nights that the park isn't being used for concerts and the like, other "public activities" will take place -- drug-dealing, public sex, roving gangs of teen thugs and so on.

Another interesting thing is that the WTC towers were so high that they cast a shadow over much of lower Manhattan. It appears to me that the shorter and more open design of these new towers will be fitting because it will make lower Manhattan feel lighter and more open, and will invite more people into the area - thus bringing back its life and activity, which is something else the Islamics hate.

Oh please. I live right there and that's just not true.

[RobRoy]

That's the best drawing I've seen on this thread!

NOW IS THE TIME!!!

[RightWhale]

I like #6 (bottom one)

If that's the choices, the bottom one is the least obnoxious.

[Omedalus]

It's magnificent. I'm gonna try to spread the word about this.

[NYC GOP Chick]

We need to put you in charge of the LMDC, which has unofficially been renamed the Leave Manhattan Destroyed Corp.

[Myrddin]

The planners and architects should be dressed in 50lbs of clothing and see how many stories they can ascend and do something useful.

I'm inclined to consider the consequences of losing electrical power for a prolonged period in a high rise building. No HVAC. No water (it is pumped to holding tanks at intervals from bottom to top to maintain water pressure). No lighting. No elevators. No refrigeration for perishable food. In short, uninhabitable. It is a recipe for a disaster that will unfold when power plant capacities are exceeded for want of insufficient new capacity or an act of terrorism that removes existing capacity. Cities built in the pattern of New York City will have to be abandoned in a prolonged loss of electrical power.

[Willie Green]

Do we have any vital stats? Which one results in the tallest building? That's the one I'm for. I believe in escalations, some a-hole knocks down your building that X stories tall it's your duty to replace it with something at least X+1 stories tall.

Why does it have to be the world's TALLEST building?
Why not build the world's DEEPEST?
Burrow DOWN 110 stories!
That way you could still have a memorial on the surface!!!

[CecilRhodesGhost]

This is great, at least the debate has been re-framed to fit the needs of the property-owners. The debate used to be "should the trade center be rebuilt at all? OR should the location be considered a memorial?" but now, thanks to this set of plans... the debate has been re-framed, and changed to "Which plan do you like best?"....

The 99 year leased signed in April 2001 to groups including Westfield America and Silverstein Properties are pushing hard to rebuild... so this set of designs help them re-frame the question. The issue now isn't "If" the place should be rebuilt... but "How?" it should be re-built. Bravo to Silverstein Properties and Westfield America on this move.

[alisasny]

None of them strike me well. I wish they would just build them back the same!

[pupdog]

No tax money or Port Authority subsidy should be involved. Private capital all the way.

Im with you all the way.

Going one step further, I'll gladly send a check to this project provided that whatever goes up fits the appropriate asthetic requirements (ie, really $*#$!@ big). Hmmm...maybe a bunch of us saying this might get their attention.

[AmericanInTokyo]

#5 works for me.

Also, it looks like the John Hancock Bldg. of Chicago is being shipped over, in some of them.

[GoreIsLove]

Then people working on the bottom floors will get the bends every day when they leave work.

[discostu]

Well you get some serious problems with extremely deep tunneling. And I'm not sure you could find enough people like me (with a serious dislike for natural light) to populate the thing. Maybe we should link this up to one of those hobbit hole threads.