Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Diddle E. Squat
There was one interesting idea in the collaboration of architects in the NYTimes Magazine this weekend. That was preserving one footprint, while building on the other, a mix of respect to the loss and defiance to the attackers.

Actually what they proposed was keeping both foot prints clear, and building one tower with the ground zero boundry and one on the site of the Deutsche Bank building south of Liberty Street. Preserving one footprint is an interesting idea but I suspect both foorprints will be remain clear except for memorial space.

After second glances I think Zapata's scheme has some attractive qualities, but I think it's scuplural ala Frank Gehry for the sake of being 'look at me' architecture. Not completely appropriate for the site. I happen to like the memorial promenade with the water but I wonder how that could be achieved with a highway below it. I also think that the tower is too massive for the site. There also seems to be too much fragmentation between the tower and the complex of buildings at the base.

That being said, it certainly is one of the more sensitive schemes I have seen. As is the Pedersen scheme. However I believe both are fatally flawed.

26 posted on 09/09/2002 12:56:45 PM PDT by finnman69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: finnman69
Good points. I do wonder, though, if the new building(s) ultimately DO need to have a bit of uniqueness and boldness, so as to be an improvement, rather than simply a replacement. Of course that is a very fine line to tread.
28 posted on 09/09/2002 1:03:11 PM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson