PDA

View Full Version : SOM officially withdraws from WTC



NYguy
January 22nd, 2003, 09:02 PM
Newsday...

SOM Architects Pull WTC Plan
*
By Katia Hetter

One of the seven architecture firms vying to design the future of the former World Trade Center tract has withdrawn, officials said Wednesday.

In a Jan. 16 letter released Wednesday, the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. accepted the withdrawal of the Skidmore, Owings and Merrill firm.

The firmís withdrawal comes as the public comment period on the proposed designs approaches its end on Feb. 2.

A source close to the review process said LMDC will name two finalists soon after the deadline and choose a winner two weeks later.

The Skidmore team was one of the seven teams to submit a total of nine designs in the competition.

ďIím disappointed that SOM [Skidmore, Owings and Merrill] made this decision, but we have the benefit of having so many good plans,Ē said LMDC board member Roland Betts, who chairs the site planning committee.

The trade center plan submitted by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill didnít re-create a traditional skyline icon to parallel the destroyed Twin Towers, but called instead for building nine 1,000-foot office towers over time.

With gardens and other public space above ground level, the towers would have about 13 million square feet of commercial space, more than the original trade center. The siteís northeast corner would contain the memorial.

Skidmore did not return a call for comment.

The final selection by LMDC must be approved by the Port Authority, which owns the trade center site.

NYguy
January 22nd, 2003, 09:24 PM
Who couldn't love this monstrosity...


http://www.lowermanhattan.info/rebuild/new_design_plans/firm_c/slides/images/Slide3.jpg


http://www.lowermanhattan.info/rebuild/new_design_plans/firm_c/slides/images/Slide17.jpg


http://www.lowermanhattan.info/rebuild/new_design_plans/firm_c/slides/images/Slide18.jpg


http://www.lowermanhattan.info/rebuild/new_design_plans/firm_c/slides/images/Slide19.jpg


Farewell SOM. *And may Peterson/Littenberg soon join ye....

amigo32
January 23rd, 2003, 01:21 AM
I could live without that hunk of ****!
Thank goodness, slowly whittling down the losers.

JerzDevl2000
January 23rd, 2003, 01:27 AM
*takes out a bottle of champagne and uncorks it*

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, all we need to do now is get rid of Mcgreevy, J. Lo, the Olsen Twins, rice cakes, and that damn "One Day in Your Life" song on the radio - one can only dream!

amigo32
January 23rd, 2003, 02:05 AM
Oh, yea!

Fabb
January 23rd, 2003, 04:51 AM
Only now do I realize that design was inspired by the Chase Manhattan bank bldg.
OK, I got their message.

NYguy
January 23rd, 2003, 10:07 AM
NY Times...

One Design for Trade Center Site Is Crossed Off After Firm Leaves
By EDWARD WYATT

One of the seven architectural teams that submitted new designs for the World Trade Center site has been eliminated from further consideration, rebuilding officials said yesterday. The decision followed the withdrawal of the architecture firm that was the lead partner in the effort, they said.

The elimination was a disappointing surprise to some members of the team, who thought they might be allowed to continue in the design study even without the architecture firm, Skidmore Owings & Merrill.

In a letter to the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation on Dec. 26, Roger Duffy, a partner at Skidmore, said the firm intended to withdraw from the design study in order to continue its work with Silverstein Properties, for which it designed the proposed new 7 World Trade Center.

In his letter, Mr. Duffy said Skidmore's withdrawal was "independent of the rest of our team." But in a reply dated Jan. 16, Louis R. Tomson, the development corporation's president, said Skidmore's formal withdrawal would remove the entire team and its design from consideration.

The letters were released yesterday by the development corporation. The team's design included nine skyscrapers of equal height and tried to create a "vertical city," with 32 acres of gardens and other public space.

One member of the team, which included six architecture or design firms and four artists, said Skidmore did not notify the other members of its intention to withdraw until after the designs were presented on Dec. 18.

The team member, the artist Elyn Zimmerman, said yesterday that she and others had thought the development corporation would continue to consider the design as part of the effort to create a site plan. "It's disappointing to feel like you've been arbitrarily taken out of the mix," she said.

Mr. Duffy and another team member took part in an architectural symposium last Thursday but gave no hint of the withdrawal. Mr. Duffy did not return a phone call seeking comment yesterday.

billyblancoNYC
January 23rd, 2003, 11:59 AM
This was the worst proposal anyway. *

It was a bit nerve racking, though, seeing as how SOM is such a corporate sweeheart. *Bad things could've happened!

NYatKNIGHT
January 23rd, 2003, 12:15 PM
They withdrew to save face, their plan was at the bottom of everyone's list: Remove it from contention before it starts further damaging any reputations and tell everyone it's because they want to concentrate on WTC7.

JMGarcia
January 23rd, 2003, 12:53 PM
I thought they withdrew weeks ago.

Agglomeration
January 23rd, 2003, 02:53 PM
Daniel Libeskind should also be taken off the list. His proposal for a 7-acre memorial 70 feet below ground and a lack of tall buildings other than a 1,776 foot garden tower, is completely ridiculous and an affront to the rebuilding process.

Fabb
January 23rd, 2003, 03:09 PM
I agree.
Unfortunately he has a strong support.

TLOZ Link5
January 23rd, 2003, 05:57 PM
Sad, really. *I was expecting so much more of SOM. *Childs pulled out on his own soon after the Dec. 18 presentations...at least he was allowed to keep his dignity.

Agglomeration
January 23rd, 2003, 07:22 PM
Libeskind is not getting any support from me. What more do you expect from a PC wacko who designed the Holocaust Museum in Berlin two years ago?

TomA
January 23rd, 2003, 08:14 PM
Libeskind only had clout because of the anti-rebuilding media (ie. New York Times.) BTW, I don't think his "tower" is all that safe. It looks too thin to be able to survive a plane attack, and it's mostly glass. And I doesn't fit in with the other buildings.

ASchwarz
January 23rd, 2003, 09:40 PM
Am I the only person on this forum that likes Libeskind?
Have you looked at his slides/statement on the LMDC website?
I'm not saying its a perfect plan, but it certaibly has promise.

Take a look at the street-level images. I would love to walk through such a complex a few years from now. In addition, Libeskind's plan would restore the skyline with the WTB.

DominicanoNYC
January 23rd, 2003, 09:44 PM
This was one of my least favorite designs for the WTC and in my opinion one of the worst designs from SOM. The history that SOM has had and this is what they contribute to the WTC plans. A large bundle of twisted buildings in the sky. I think SOM could have done better.

TLOZ Link5
January 23rd, 2003, 10:13 PM
Now that I've thought about it a bit more, the Meier/Eisenmann plan isn't all that bad. *The five connecting towers is somewhat ecovative of the freestanding remnants of the Towers' facades, but the rectangular shapes of the buildings were too unruly; however, that can be modified. *The red granite paving seems a bit tacky, but it's a quibble about a minor detail. *Still, I liked the concept of the rectangular parks marking where the shadows of the Towers stood just before they fell. *It has its faults, but all of the plans fall short in one way or another.

Agglomeration
January 23rd, 2003, 10:27 PM
I would like Libeskind much more if he replaced these misshaped glass cylinders with real building exteriors and raised them much higher. For now I have to take his plan, along with all the other plans, with a grain of salt. *

Eugenius
January 24th, 2003, 02:44 PM
Quote: from ASchwarz on 8:40 pm on Jan. 23, 2003
Am I the only person on this forum that likes Libeskind?
Have you looked at his slides/statement on the LMDC website?
I'm not saying its a perfect plan, but it certaibly has promise.

Take a look at the street-level images. I would love to walk through such a complex a few years from now. In addition, Libeskind's plan would restore the skyline with the WTB.If the WTB achieves that status by having a long spire attached to an otherwise shorter building, I see it as a cop-out. *Foster's design, while only 12 feet shorter, establishes the WTB with a broad thrust.

Kris
January 24th, 2003, 03:34 PM
Ag, how is a Holocaust museum PC?

The NY Times has not been anti-rebuilding.

Agglomeration
January 25th, 2003, 07:22 PM
The New York Times has been apathetic at best towards any idea of tall skyscrapers on site.

Kris
January 25th, 2003, 07:37 PM
That must explain why they organized a competition titled: Thinking Big.

You didn't answer my first question.

hkboy313
July 26th, 2005, 02:53 PM
why would they design something like that? its a little strange... it looks like the buildings are foreshadowing the planes...dodging them now....

PHLguy
July 26th, 2005, 07:40 PM
wait I thought SOM designed the Freedom tower, does that mean the tower will change?

TallGuy
July 26th, 2005, 07:55 PM
Read the thread!!!!! This is SOM's original design from the competition. It has nothing, NOTHING, N O T H I N G to do with the Freedom Tower.

PHLguy
July 26th, 2005, 08:28 PM
Stop flipping out, If it was an original design it should have been gone years ago. get yourself together.

JMGarcia
July 27th, 2005, 01:42 PM
wait I thought SOM designed the Freedom tower, does that mean the tower will change?

Why yes, yes it does. They're going to shorten it.

Jasonik
July 27th, 2005, 01:53 PM
O M G ! ! !

*waits feverishly for new renderings*

Alonzo-ny
July 27th, 2005, 11:34 PM
Why has this thread resurfaced its only going to cause confusion

NoyokA
July 27th, 2005, 11:43 PM
I'm just soo pissed off that SOM has withdrawn and I can only conclude this confirms that the World Trade Center will not be built because this is NYC and nothing tall can be built right? I also heard that this means no other skyscrapers will be built in NYC and this means in 100 years another skyscraper will never be built other than some building thatís 500 feet but that doesnít count, Hong Kong builds 1000 foot skyscrapers why canít we? I swear to god if they donít build atleast 24 1,000 foot skyscrapers on the west side I will commit suicide. BTW does anyone know whats happening with the Con Ed site, I hope we will see super tallís there too. It seems like Chicago is the only city that can build anything these days. I am going to close this thread because I donít want anyone to tell me these projects wont be built because I already know NYC canít build supertall buildings and as a result NYC is dieing it is not as good a city as Chicago, Honk Kong, and Dubai which builds supertall buildings. Sine NYC cannot build skyscrapers I feel as if it is dead and as an appendage of my life being I have died as well.