New World Trade Center Site Design Concepts

[CHE]

I thought that you all would like to see the 7 new design concepts for the world trade center site. So here is the link.

 

LMDC

[dwright]

I think the Team design has more thought, Foster version is more a pure business concept, Team vision has a "community" feeling that I wish we had more in the US.

 

Regards,

 

David

[dwright]

BTW, I think the "#" is a terrible idea.. in my opinion...

[dwright]

I think the Team design has more thought, Foster version is more a pure business concept, Team vision has a "community" feeling that I wish we had more in the US.

 

Regards,

 

David

[Paul Griger]

the Peterson/Littenberg Architecture and Urban Design submission has a traditional feel that would be best suited in the area as it is now. It's not a "look at me" design. Although I usually find myself gravitated to that, I don't know if it's needed here.

 

the THINK Design submission is the best of the "forward thinking" designs submitted IMHO. I like the outdoor park area, the Glass Great Room, and the World Cultural Towers. Very nicely done. It maybe too much for the skyline, but I guess we'll see.

[matt_vinoir]

wow, some of my architectural heroes ( un studio meier, foa, shiguru ban) all producing a load of old rubbish!!

 

What are they thinking about!!

 

Personally the orginal buildings were far more beautiful, if they improve the structure i think it would be a more profound gesture to put them back up again.

 

All the architects left great big voids for the towers, i think rather that being a nice gesture its rather defeatist, but maybe thats just me.

[ingo]

Yes, i agree with you Paul. The PL concept is the only real architectural concept, and as this well integrated in the surrounding without killing it, the others are more like "built-everywhere" design. What is also sad to see that a formely great architect like Foster isn't even able to put together a decent presentation.

And i think its better not to talk about the Eisenman "concept", where Richard Meier delivered the squares/cubes and Eisenman puts them together as a graveyard style building.

 

ingo

[Christopher Nichols]

"Traditional" architecture is really a bad word. It is softening the issues... Let's call it what it really is... Post-modernism...

 

The architecture that will be there is architecture for the ages... and the ages will be changing. Just because the world is filled with conservatives does not mean that in 10 years it will be. I HOPE it will finally feel safe enough to embrasse the avant-gard.

 

The perterson/littenberg design is complete crap that is still holding on to 80's post-modernism. Foster, while avant-guard in the 80's is starting to show his style and is a bit dated.

 

If you really want to build something innovative, like nothing in the world has been seen, you have to embrasse the design by "United Architects." While I agree that even Decon will be old by the time this is built... It would still be a step forward.

 

On the other hand Matt, I know what you mean about your heros producing rubbish. Steven Holl's design always look like crap at first... it isn't until they are built that their beauty is seen. But I have to admit, that hope is thin on this design.

 

In terms of what is appropriate, I think few, if any, can make the call. We are back to the issue of the Piramids at the Louvre... at a MUCH larger and emotional scale.

 

[ December 23, 2002, 09:23 AM: Message edited by: Christopher Nichols ]

[John Dollus]

I think they should start over. Several are quite impractical.

[ingo]

Am i wrong or is this the second attempt already ?

 

ingo

[nisus]

Hi all,

 

As an architect I am very very very disappointed in the results of this 'creative' exploration. Even the great architects only make an almost non-contemporary - retro!- design and to say that this is the one project/building that the whole world (even non-architects!) will look at, it is really a missed chance for architecture to show off it's capabilities or to have an impact on everyones creative/artistic mind.

To be honest, this really doesn't look so different from all the crap that real estate companies are growing... Must be the money... or the global fame that makes them forget about their ideals? and suddenly... architecture/style is not so important anymore... not even for the great... just M.

 

rgds

 

nisus

 

ps: I bet many students would have a more interesting approach to this site...

[nisus]

Ow yeah... When tearing something down, one should always give a better alternative...

 

I suggest to build the old towers again... or twice as high as they were... or 3 times as high... or 4x :-p

 

rgds

 

nisus

[dwright]

Well, let us all remember that this is the US, not Europe, I wish we had more acid design work as in London, Paris and other cities. South American cities have more interesting architecture than here in the US were the economy is so strong (even with such recession)

 

I am amazed that local architects here in San Francisco (we I am located) are forced to implement the Victorian window everywhere (due to historical impact and preservation) to make garbage design that sucks (and they know it, most, hate it, not the old Victorian, the new forced Victorian window front), and they accept outsiders to do whatever they want such as the SF MOMA, that has nothing to do with the city, even that I agree with the design, that here it looks like amazing, and in European terms is very average, anyway this is my opinion.

 

Regarding the trade center attempts, I will not be that negative, compared to what has been done in the US, it is better than average, but we should not be average, we should move on without fear, and hopefully some new great buildings will be born.

[kid]

Grassland! Make the WHOLE site a public park/reserve. For even one person to make a financial/corporate advantage from this situation is dis-respectful to those who died...but making money is the American tradition, so the winner will be the one who comes up with the design which keeps the most people quiet and presents the greatest lettable floor space.

[nisus]

lol kid... to compensate between both ideas someone will propose a gigantic glass-cow soon!

[Paul Griger]

Christopher,

 

I think a few points made in your post are worth expanding on:

 

Originally posted by Christopher Nichols:

If you really want to build something innovative, like nothing in the world has been seen,…

I don’t know if this is everyone’s intent. Do you think that the families of the firefighters that died there have this as their main objective? IMHO, I feel that the majority of the “Joe 6-packs” here in the USA doesn’t want to, “build something innovative, like nothing in the world has been seen,”.

 

How about the rest of the world? Do they want to see a country that most people already hate build a piece of architecture in place of the WTC that says, “Look at me”?

 

Originally posted by Christopher Nichols:

In terms of what is appropriate, I think few, if any, can make the call. We are back to the issue of the Piramids at the Louvre... at a MUCH larger and emotional scale.

And this is an excellent point also. What is the purpose of this structure?

 

Is it a chance for renowned architects to sharpen their creative claws and have people around the world for ages to come discuss how bold and daring the architects, and for that matter, Manhattan was for constructing something with little relevance to the surrounding architecture at the time such as the Louvre Pyramids?

 

I don’t think that is what this exercise is all about. IMHO, I think it is a chance to pay homage to those that died in the WTC disaster, and a chance to show that the USA will not curl up in the fetal position and cry from this.

 

That is why I stated this:

Originally posted by Paul Griger:

the Peterson/Littenberg Architecture and Urban Design submission has a traditional feel that would be best suited in the area as it is now. It's not a "look at me" design. Although I usually find myself gravitated to that, I don't know if it's needed here.

So put any label that you want on it, “Postmodernism”, or “complete crap” as you so articulately categorized it. [And BTW, if you want to help someone see your point of view, instead of degrading their views it may have been more conducive of you to define what your view of Postmodernism is, or even cite some ideas of postmodernism that Robert Venturi covered in “Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture”, and then state how you felt the Peterson/Littenberg design exhibited the details of the postmodern movement, instead of phrasing it as you did.]

 

In the end I expect what will happen is what Kid stated in a tongue in cheek sort of way:

 

Originally posted by kid:

so the winner will be the one who comes up with the design which keeps the most people quiet...

Or maybe more accurately stated, the winner will be the design that will be the most pleasing to the majority of America, or more accurately classified as “middle-class America”. And middle class America cares about who is going to win the Super Bowl, who the “Bachelor” marries, and why their health insurance doesn’t cover anything at the doctor and other everyday “middle class” humble concerns of everyday life.

 

They don’t want to be educated on what Postmodernism and Avant-garde is.

 

IMHO it seems they want to heal from this and not make an architectural statement to the world. The world already feels [justified or not is not at debate in this topic ] that the USA is already pushing themselves around the world like the cock in the hen house. The world doesn’t need to see rise from the WTC ashes a bunch of bent phallic symbols soaring above the Manhattan skyline.

 

Please don't make the mistake of confusing the words “bold” and “innovative” with each other. These two words and their execution are not necessarily synonymous with each other. The design to replace the WTC should be innovative in its design. And there is a time and place to be bold. This isn’t it.

 

My $0.02 worth...

[mbr]

Paul,

I respect your opinion and do feel that there is some validity to your statements, but I also feel that the stance that we should just cater to what the average joe wants is a little dangerous. It is the visionaries, and those that are willing to sit and think that make the world a better place down the road, not the average joe. I personally feel that this is a phenomenal opportunity for architecture to gather respect and significance in the eye of the average person, esp. in America. After all, the reason that the average person does not understand, or care, about architecture is because they feel it is not relevant to their day by day lives. It should be relevant, and it should mean something. So I feel that the more education that the public undertakes, in the long run, cannot help but further new architecture and progressive designs. The world, particularly the US, is so complacent when it comes to architecture design. What it comes down to is effort and the willingness to learn. I think it would be a shame if we let this opportunity go by because the average person felt more comfortable with mediocrity. If that becomes the case then we become static and design/architecture becomes irrelevant to society. Then we will truly be headed down a dark path. Personally, I want to see the light!

Furthermore, if we let this mediocrity prevail then we will be back at the start with the first set of developer driven designs. It will, without any intervention, come down to creating spec office space for the owners to rake the cash in again. Personally, I want something better. Given a choice and a little thought, I think the average joe would too.

But that's just my 2cents.

[Christopher Nichols]

Well Paul... I will only respond because you asked me to. You are right about my bashing po-mo... I am tired of it. I am not sure what I hate more, the architecture, or the old farts with their bowties and Corbu glasses that call me a know-nothing punk. Having had to work for them in Texas, I was able to get away from them in California... Still being a little dissatisfied with it, I left the industry and now work at Digital Domain. I can at least do some interesting architecture there, where even the NIMBI's (not-in-my-back-yard) people can’t complain. The designs of the buildings in Minority Report and Blade Runner will always look cooler then anything built by the conservative majority. Since it lives in celluloid and not concrete, it will be save from the judgment of those who live in their two year old new-Edwardian homes with their neighborhood restrictions. A little aggressive, but I think you get my point.

 

One other note regarding the memorial: Please understand that what I am about to state is still with the greatest respect to those that lost their lives and their families. The memorial should outlast the grief. Currently, and understandably, we are still wrapped in grief over the events. That runs deep, and will last a while longer. The memorial IMHO should rise above the grief and show the growth and the ability of have a strong culture... and to REMEMBER what has happened as an opportunity and develop it. The towers came down because some maniac tried to destroy a symbol of capitalism and American culture. That culture has changed somewhat since it was built, but we can renew our faith in our way of life. When I remember the event, sure I want morn the lives, but I want to remember the fact that it was the time when we grew.

 

Like you said… Just my $0.02, but I hope you understand my points. Having freshly left architecture, I have lost my faith in the US to produce something notable and avant-gard.

[ingo]

I think this discussion shows why many well known architects said a clear NO when asked for working on that project. Whether you do one of these average glasshouse designs (for people, not for plants) or a more settled New York designs, like PL, you cant make it right. And since this is a private owned building site i think we see in the end a memorial plaza and the normal average office buildings around. And for the memorial i think the best symbol is a large oil pump.

 

Just my 2cents

 

ingo

[nisus]

Hi Paul,

 

I disagree with most of your statements because:

 

1)

Is it a chance for renowned architects to sharpen their creative claws and have people around the world for ages to come discuss how bold and daring the architects, and for that matter, Manhattan was for constructing something with little relevance to the surrounding architecture at the time such as the Louvre Pyramids?

 

I don’t think that is what this exercise is all about. IMHO, I think it is a chance to pay homage to those that died in the WTC disaster, and a chance to show that the USA will not curl up in the fetal position and cry from this.

Why does every designer/architect wants to build the tallest building on earth on that spot?

Not because they pay homage to the victims, but because they think of their prestige (and pockets to fill). The 'pay homage'-thing is but a fake reason to sell their story. Men simply follow their hidden agenda and use ANY reason/attempt to bloom/reach their vision/goal. The homage thing - ow ow merci, rememberance, glory, anger, revenche - is just THE clue to get more votes... I would feel really abandoned/misused to see ANY building on this spot... but than again, I'm European, not American...

 

'Bowling for Columbine my friends, we don't fear!'

 

2)

Or maybe more accurately stated, the winner will be the design that will be the most pleasing to the majority of America, or more accurately classified as “middle-class America”. And middle class America cares about who is going to win the Super Bowl, who the “Bachelor” marries, and why their health insurance doesn’t cover anything at the doctor and other everyday “middle class” humble concerns of everyday life.

Who do you go and see when your ill? A doctor

Who do you turn to when you need a heart transplantation? A surgeon/heart-specialist

Who do you call when your house is on fire? The fire-department

Who do you go and see when you want to travel around the world? A travel agency

 

It's but so simple, every business has his own specialists... Then why would we ask joe-in-the-street about what to build as a monument/building?

 

I strongly feel that we are professionals in our world/field of education. We - architects - are the ones educated in architecture and therefore we should decide what will be build.

 

Personally, I don't feel any attempt to ask my butcher on any help when I need a heart transplantation nor will I turn to the fire department to ask about travelling around the world. Would you?

 

3)

They don’t want to be educated on what Postmodernism and Avant-garde is.

But joe-in-the-streets does want to see the latest fx-films, loves watching 'the making of' on dvd etc.? Do you really think he is not interested in the newest/hottest?

okay, I admit: only in what he knows/understands so even when his knowlegde is far away from what the specialist know, I think they do simply care... but as I said, he is not educated for this like he is not educated in a lot of things!

So let's take this chance to open up his narrow view on architecture as for now he only knows about life-style-magazines!

 

4) Eventually, I have one big issue about any building on a rememberance spot:

I think the idea to build something on a place to remember is truly rediculous because the best way to remember something is to keep it as it was during the event to remember and simply erect a statue of honor that marks the spot and the event. I feel this as an enforcement to forget, not to remember!

 

The 'professionals/first ones' are but toying with the mind of joe-in-the-street and by repeatedly make him say/forceing him to think "We need this" they reach their goal. For me this is but another example of 'Money rules Morality'.

 

Trying to persuade anyone to overbuild such a spot - even the highest tower on earth (just trying to please so the fish will bite faster!) - smells like money / a hidden agenda / a bad joke!

 

I'll make just one sharp - sarcastic - parallel/example to state my point of view on this :

 

Let's tear down the demolishion camps of Treblinka, Auschwitz, Dachau, Sobibor... and replace them with a shopping centre to remember the victims and families of the 6 million jews that died into those camps. It will once again be a great place! One will be able to shop/leisure in an historic area where one can try ones new clothes on in true old historical gas-chambers!

Let's forget that bad event and turn it into a happy place! Ow... and don't forget to spent your money on useless souvenirs because we love you(r money!) It's a true new vision waiting for mankind to erect... and here it is today:

 

Demolishion Camps Shopping Malls

"Remembering the 6 Million Dead Jews from WOII"

Because We Care for Your Family!

 

Do you understand how silly this how idea is?

 

rgds

 

nisus

[ingo]

Do you understand how silly this how idea is?

 

rgds

 

nisus

Well, thats what currently happens in Afghanistan, so who cares about them ? Not to forget other countries in the Near East or in Vietnam for example.

 

And instead of talking about architecture they first should find out what really happend at the 11.9. instead of letting the big propaganda machine do their work.

 

ingo

[Paul Griger]

Hi Christopher, mbr, ingo, nisus,

 

I haven’t had the chance to go through all of your responses thoroughly yet, too busy. But I wanted to thank you for well-founded and respectful responses. I look FWD to seeing different viewpoints on this matter and opening my mind to other ideas!

 

I’ll respond when I get a chance to do so after a through review of your postings

 

Thx

[Christopher Nichols]

Originally posted by ingo:

Well, thats what currently happens in Afghanistan, so who cares about them ? Not to forget other countries in the Near East or in Vietnam for example.

More Tibetans died in the 60s from the Chinese then the Jews from WWII... don't see any memorials there... Why? It is about Money... Holocost Museums, just like movies like Shinler's list, make a lot of money... Not many Tibetans out there with loads of cash... The WTC will make money... It may seem sick, but that is what keeps the capitalist motor running. And it is a good thing.

[ingo]

Just curious to know, how about the responsibility of architects when something like 911 happens ?

I mean there died 3000 people on a small place. How many people could still be alive now when they haven't build those skyscrapers, but instead a more human scale architecture ? That is one reason why many architects dont want to work on something for ground zero.

[Christopher Nichols]

You COULD use the argument that the architecture killed, but you could also say the opposite easily.

 

First the potential deaths could have been much higher. The planes where nearly empty, and over 50,000+ people could have died from the crash. So the lost of life was only 5% of what it could have been. It took an hour for the building to fall... that saved a LOT of lives.

 

Now you ask yourself, if the buildings were not there it would never have happened... maybe not, it may have happened in some other way... The FBI/CIA foyled a plot about 5 years ago to blow up most of the bridges and tunnels in NY... I think that Stalone movie was about that.

 

On the other hand, the WTC area was a very important place which provided a uniting place for businesses to trade and grow. You could easily argue that the economy was able to grow due to the density of the demogaphics of the high finance companies... this is before internet, etc... they had over 10 million square feet of space in a small urban footprint. That economic growth is important. My old company, Gensler, had 27 clients that had offices at ground zero. It was SO important, it was symbolic, which made it a target... same as the pentagon...