World Trade Center Replacement

World architecture... what's happening generally....

World Trade Center Replacement

Postby GregF » Wed Jul 17, 2002 10:44 am

See that several proposals for the World Trade Center have been mooted...all much smaller, shorter and rather modest in scale and comparison.......what a pity......New York's famed skyline has lost that umph! it had.
User avatar
Old Master
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby trace » Thu Jul 18, 2002 12:30 pm

Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby Paul Clerkin » Thu Jul 18, 2002 6:24 pm

Ground Zero plans criticised for being 'timid'

The six blueprints for the redevelopment of Ground Zero were criticised for lacking imagination and being driven by “hard economics” rather than concerns for the area.

“These plans aren't broad enough, bold enough or big enough,” said Mitchell Moss, head of New York University's Taub Urban Research Centre.

He said the designs, which all include memorials and proposals to replace the 11 million square feet of office and retail space lost when the World Trade Centre, in New York was destroyed, were “remarkably timid”.
User avatar
Paul Clerkin
Old Master
Posts: 5430
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 1999 1:00 am
Location: Monaghan

Postby trace » Thu Aug 15, 2002 11:05 am

New York Times to unveil alternative proposals on September 8th:
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby notjim » Thu Aug 15, 2002 12:26 pm

They should build as tall again, there is no question, though obviously in a contemporary style, rather than a copy. They should include some accomadation this time, maybe for firemen etc who usually can't afford to live on the island and they should build replicas of the buddas into the side as a memorial. That's my opinion. What I am really looking forward to is the new times building off times square with the flexible wand stiking out the top.
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Postby MG » Fri Sep 27, 2002 2:17 pm

Foster and Libeskind on Twin Towers shortlist

The Lower Manhattan Development Corporation has shortlisted Foster and Partners, Studio Daniel Libeskind, New York-based Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, and three American-based teams for the rebuilding of the World Trade Centre.

The six candidates have been whittled down from more than 400 global practices that originally expressed interest in the scheme (AJ 26.9.02). Those rejected include Brits Zaha Hadid Architects, Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners, Marks Barfield Architects, John McAslan & Partners and Future Systems.

Each of the shortlisted practices now has two months to develop several different concepts for the site. Those administering the scheme said the final design might incorporate different ideas from several of the concepts.

The current competition was originally mooted because of public outcry from survivors, relatives of those killed and ordinary New Yorkers about the original designs proposed for the site. Among the many complaints included criticism that there was not enough land for a garden of remembrance.

The other Americans on the shortlist are an alliance called United Architects of New York, a collaboration of four practices calling itself TEAM and another group named THINK.

Construction on the site is scheduled to start on or around the second anniversary of the attacks.
Senior Member
Posts: 559
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2000 12:00 am
Location: London

Postby helloinsane » Mon Sep 30, 2002 4:43 pm

That list in full...

Meier, Eisenmann and Holl on one team? What fun!

Nice thought on the Buddhas, notjim, but the american public has beaten you to the punch (or is that to the kitsch?) on that one:

Proposal #13 sees your Buddha and raises you a Jesus, Mohammad (sic) and a few unnamed Native American gods.

Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 4:22 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Postby larry123 » Wed Oct 16, 2002 2:17 am

I know I'm gonna to be accused of extreme rightism, but we need a monument dedicated to capitalism. The terrorists targeted the WTC because it was dedicated to capitalism, and part of their objective(s) were to destroy the american economy. The people that died work in finance. Wouldn't they want something dedicated to capitalism? If i died in the WTC attack, i wouldn't want a memorial. I would want them to kill those SOB's. And i don't mean to seem insenstivie, but what purpose does a memorial serve america, not even in 50 years but now? I would rather have people going to work, making money for their families then walking past a deserted park every morning while collecting my welfare checks. We took for granted what we had already once (the WTC towerz). Why should we take for granted the economic superiorty NYC has over other cities in the world. What if one day Hong Kong over threw NY as the most dominant city in the world. Our currency is already lower then Euro. America represents capitalism and corporation. Sorry to bring all of you to that reality, but thats exactly what we stand for. I want to make the new towerz bigger then the ol' ones, more office/retail space and all that jazz, propose a no-fly zone over manhattan, and make the new site the capital/heart of the new economy, and most importantly, the heart of manhattan business. And so this site should rightfully be, to the victims, and to the new generation of Americans. However, I think we could maybe dedicate the lobby to the victims of 9/11, you know, have paintings of the WTC, phothos', etc. Come on people, lets choose prosperity over stupidity.
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 2:04 am

Postby AndrewP » Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:48 am

Check this out, from New York Times...

Mayor's Proposal Envisions Lower Manhattan as an Urban Hamlet


ayor Michael R. Bloomberg yesterday offered his vision of the future of Lower Manhattan: a collection of neighborhoods stitched together by large parks and broad pedestrian walkways, with a direct mass transit link to Kennedy Airport via a new tunnel under the East River.
Under Mr. Bloomberg's plan, Lower Manhattan would essentially be transformed from an ailing financial center with pockets of residential developments into an urban hamlet of housing, schools, libraries and movie theaters, as well as other businesses, some of which would benefit from a generous new federal tax package.

The plan calls for changing numerous streets, turning West Street, for example, into "a promenade lined with 700 trees, a Champs-Élysées or Commonwealth Avenue for Lower Manhattan," Mr. Bloomberg said to a riveted audience of business leaders and politicians. Along the East River, a new waterfront park would stretch to the South Street Seaport.
While many of the ideas have already been proposed by various governmental agencies involved in the rebuilding process, the mayor's plan pulled those elements together and added to them, creating one broad and hugely ambitious package with a $10.6 billion price tag.
"Moving forward," Mr. Bloomberg said, in a speech to the Association for a Better New York, "Lower Manhattan must become an even more vibrant global hub of culture, and commerce, a live-and-work-and-visit community for the world. It is our future. It is the world's second home."
Much of the $10.6 billion, however, is already coveted by other state agencies. Mr. Bloomberg said the plan would be paid for using $5.9 billion of the $21 billion that the federal government promised to New York City after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, as well as 9/11-related insurance money and the proceeds from the sale of development rights and from Liberty Bonds authorized for new housing downtown.
He said no additional money would be required to pay for the projects until at least 2009, and even then, if extra dollars were needed, only federal and state money would be required, not any new city taxes.
Mr. Bloomberg reserved only 20 seconds of his 31-minute speech to describe his ideas for the trade center site, saying simply that "the restored streets would be a memorial that would put a physical shape to our grief and to our hopes for the future, and give us somewhere we can come together to share our thoughts and reflections of how Sept. 11th affected our lives."
The mayor's plan is in many ways a direct challenge to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, which have led the rebuilding efforts at ground zero.
For example, Mr. Bloomberg began his remarks deriding the original World Trade Center, saying, "The twin towers' voracious appetite for tenants weakened the entire downtown real estate market," a clear poke at the plans released this fall by the development corporation, which called for substantial commercial development at the site.
Mr. Bloomberg also called for the remaining $1.3 billion from the development corporation's coffers, which the corporation — as well as the Empire State Development Corporation — has eyed for other uses. The mayor said nothing about burying West Street, which many transportation experts have called for as part of revitalizing downtown; Mr. Bloomberg's transportation proposal focuses principally on his dream to link Lower Manhattan to New York's airports.
Louis R. Tomson, the president of the development corporation and a close ally of Gov. George E. Pataki, said yesterday that the success of Mr. Bloomberg's plan would rely in part on getting the approval of agencies like the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which regulate much of the 9/11-related money sought by Mr. Bloomberg.
"The challenge will be how to reach agreement on husbanding the resources and applying them," Mr. Tomson said, "and how to do that in a way that meets the requirements of those who have the responsibilities to oversee these funds." Indeed, Mr. Bloomberg is most likely to ultimately find himself in a position of negotiating his vision with other state agencies.
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 2:56 pm
Location: Whitehall, Dublin

Return to World Architecture