redman Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 I will post below pics and descriptions of the seven WTC design proposals. Give me a few minutes to get it all posted, then vote on your favorite one. If you vote "None of the Above", then explain why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 Concept #1: Studio Libeskind Its plan includes one soaring tower that stands 1,776 feet tall, and features several smaller steel towers. Studio Daniel Libeskind of Berlin built the Jewish Museum in Berlin and is working on an extension to the Denver Art Museum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 Concept #2: Foster and Partners This contemporary design features a single tower, much taller than the World Trade Center twin towers. Foster and Partners, from London, were involved in the renovation of the German Reichstag building in Berlin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 Concept #3: Meier and Partners The United States' Richard Meier and Partners also designed the Getty Center in Los Angeles. This design features three buildings connected by a walkway and two buildings on the side connected by a walkway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 Concept #4: THINK Team THINK Team is an international group that includes U.S. designers. THINK Team built Tokyo International Forum. This design's two decorative steel towers are akin to twin Eiffel towers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 Concept #5: United Architects United Architects, which designed Yokohama International Port Terminal in Japan, chose several soaring towers fused together in quasi-helix-shaped buildings for its WTC site submission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 Concept #6: Peterson/Littenberg This WTC site plan was designed by Peterson/Littenberg. The husband-wife team is part of a group that worked on six original and rejected designs. The design features twin towers, each 1,400 feet tall, with a large promenade in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 Concept #7: Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill, based in New York, designed Manhattan's new Penn station. Its WTC site design has a cluster of nine buildings, each 1,100 square feet and about 80 floors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 I dont know how to copy and paste a picture, but my favorite would be the one almost at the end of this page. http://www.geektimes.com/michael/culture/memoriam/worldTradeCenter/stillStanding.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 It's very surreal looking at different buildings where the twin towers should be, and I'm tempted to vote for none of the above. But it really is time to move forward and pick something finally. I'd say #2 or #4. I like the idea of rebuilding even bigger and/or taller than before. I have to also say that I think #3 is absolutely horrid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefhogskin48 Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 Proposal #6 seems like clearly the best. First of all, why are all but two of the designs foreign? You'd think on a project like this only American architects would have an opportunity, quite frankly. Typical New York "multicultrualism". Also, why do so many architects try to be "uniquely creative"? Those are some horrible choices. I'd rather it be just a classic design that won't make a memorial into an eyesore, but I'm not holding my breath. Sometimes simple and austere is the best thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 I voted for #2, just because it's the cleanest design. I also like 4 and 5 (although you should note that 5 is decorative only and not an occupiable space). I agree with whoever said that #3 is horrific. And to the person wondering why there weren't more US architects on this, I'd point out that #3 came from NYC. Seriously, architecture on this scale is an international field. The original architect of the WTC towers was Japanese . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefhogskin48 Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 Yeah, now that I've had a chance to look again, #2 seems like the best. But why 4 or 5? Those look a little bizarre to say the least. One of the things I really like about Washington DC is its lack of "skyscrapers". It makes for a clean and classical skyline with lots of trees and open spaces, while still maintaining a decent amount of commercial space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 Thats a federal law. NO building can be taller than the Capitol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefhogskin48 Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 Originally posted by Kilmer17 Thats a federal law. NO building can be taller than the Capitol. I know, I think it's an excellent law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 I thought it also has to do with angle to important buildings. If you have a sky scrapper in D.C. then there are hundreds a windows a person could wait at to take a shot at the Prez. If you want to go on the roof of any building within like 2 blocks of the White House, You need to get permission 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted December 18, 2002 Author Share Posted December 18, 2002 Originally posted by chiefhogskin48 But why 4 or 5? Those look a little bizarre to say the least. I'm not sure I can explain #4, it just pleases my eye. The description's allusion to the Eiffel Tower is appropriate. It's hard to explain why the Eiffel Tower is good looking too, but it is. Ironically, when the French erected the ET right before the Worlds Fair in (I think) 1888, the Parisians were all up in arms about how ugly it was and how it was a blot upon their fair city. It wasn't even originally intended to be permanent. However, it's since become a primary symbol not just of Pairis but of France. As for #5, the helix shape has always been interesting to my eye. That, plus the uniqueness of the design, is why I like it. I have to say that I don't find much to like about #6, unlike many of my fellow voters I guess. It's just very plain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 For several of those proposals, especially #5, you're really not getting a good shot of what the proposal looks like. I peeped the live proposals from the architecture firms this morning on NY1, and they were accompanied by flying VR bits, views from the base of the buildings, views in the promenade, from the 60th-80th floors, etc. #5 seems a bit odd at first, but it really works from ground level, and has some neat features. The tic-tac-toe proposal struck me as really bad when I first saw it, but it grew on me, and their proposal for the development of the ground level is really nice, going all the way out to the edge of manhattan with these twin narrow park/promenades, culminating in a floating plaza. Also, all of the horizontal spaces in the tic-tac-toe design are intended to have gardens. In fact almost all of the proposals made multiple statements to intents for developing significant green areas, and "green" (environmentally friendly) features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 #6 is easily the least innovative of the designs, and no one up here likes it. The rub, however, is that the team behind it already has an advisory role with the lower manhattan development group, so some people think the fix is in. People are pissed, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted December 18, 2002 Share Posted December 18, 2002 Yeah. #6 seems rather unspectacular to me as well. I'd rather see big and bold myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brave Posted December 20, 2002 Share Posted December 20, 2002 I like #2. What would be perfect would be to have 5 buildings with two shorter on either side of a very tall one ... facing the Middle East. Kind of like a metropolic flip-off, if you will. :finger: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted December 20, 2002 Share Posted December 20, 2002 Call this round of designs the Emperor's New World Trade Center. They're *all* wretched. They're *all* ludicrous. Honestly, every one of them looks like a first-year achitecture student pulled an all-nighter trying out his new 3D design program. *Cool*, huh? People are walking on eggshells because three thousand people died, and I understand that, but that doesn't mean we have to condemn our greatest city to an architectural travesty that will dominate the skyline for decades until people get up the balls to tear it down. On to round three. And don't look back. We need a serious, clean, yet optimistic design -- a memorial park with the quiet, simple gravity of the Vietnam Memorial to honor the dead, and towers with the bold optimisim of our landmark architecture -- think Washington Monument, Golden Gate Bridge, Gateway Arch, Chrysler Building, etc. And it should not be taller than the original WTC. One way to honor the WTC dead is to leave the WTC towers forever as the tallest buldings ever to pierce the New York skyline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted December 20, 2002 Share Posted December 20, 2002 i like #3-really. think 6 is the best. #4 is hidious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted December 20, 2002 Share Posted December 20, 2002 I'm leaning toward go back to the drawing board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.