View Full Version : Quick Survey: *Your Predictions - Libeskind or THINK?

February 17th, 2003, 12:37 AM
My gut says Libeskind, but THINK looks like the popular favorite. *Libeskind seems to be more of the smooth talker behind closed doors, though. *So much of being a successful architect is politics.

February 17th, 2003, 01:18 AM
I predict that the plan they do eventually decide on, will be eviscerated by politcs, greed, and bureaucracy. * The politicans, developer, and agency heads will make sure that they will get what they want, and not what the city deserves. *I predict a bleak future skyline, but I hope that I am wrong, and that I am also just being overly cynical.

(Edited by amigo32 at 5:28 am on Feb. 17, 2003)

NyC MaNiAc
February 17th, 2003, 02:42 AM
I hope the same, Amigo32 and I mean that in the best possible way. Well, I actually am quite optimistic aout the project which though *might be stupid, I think it's a good way to go around it. I'd say I'd be happy with either project with slight(actually more than slight) modifications.

Libeskind is good if....
Those 2 crystal like towers are increased in shape and made into twin towers (worlds tallest would be great) Than fatten up that other building/spire (which one is it?) and place it more in the middle. This would actually be a great package all together. I dont like how everything is just kind of put on the site in no particular order. So straighten everything up, make twin towers and put the spire tower in the middle. Almost perfect.

Now to THINK...

Well all I really want is for the 2 main buildings to be closed and not "open". The whole "I want to be the Eiffel tower" thing does not work for me. This is New York City, and here, IMO we need office buildings. So, basically I just want them to be the World Trade Center and not the World CULTURAL center. All of that nonsense can be put somewhere else. I want true buildings. Than the 8 other surrounding buildings should have maybe at least 3 or 4 of them truly impact the skyline while the other ones can be just tall enough to effect Lower Manhattan.

So the chances of what I want happening are slim but...We'll see what happens. Here's hoping to everything turning out right on that 16 acre site in Lower Manhattan...

February 17th, 2003, 11:36 AM
I think the Libeskind scheme is a safer bet because it requires less public investment and is apparently favored by most deciders, as well as the "designer and urbanist" crowd. It has a strong street plan, which is all some seem to be interested in and the rest can be completely altered over time.

As for my preference, I hesitate and keep changing my mind. I have serious doubts about both of them. They are probably flawed but have potential. Libeskind is the more gifted architect but his approach here is problematic. If he is chosen, I hope he'll surpass himself and improve his design, not compromise its integrity.

February 17th, 2003, 11:48 AM
Definitely Libeskind...w/modifications

The modifications being:

1. More height for the two tallest crystal towers i.e., 1450 ft. and 1250 feet (buildings on lots A & B on the Libeskind plan), and for the fifth crystal tower i.e., 1100 ft. (where Deutsch Bank or Liberty 130 stands or the building on lot E).

2. Add Foster's kiss towers on Lots C & D with his trans. center below them (same location in Foster's plan) in place of the 3rd crystal tower and combine Foster's trans. center with Libeskind's trans. plan/link to the updated Fulton station.

3. Get rid of the circular walk, create more street-level greenery, retail, human spaces.

4. Start the memorial competition for covering the "pit" but keeping the original idea of WHY the bedrock should remain exposed...in other words...maintain the brillance of the idea of "the foundation of democracy is still intact".

5. Don't let Silverstein convince Libeskind or THINK that 60 storey SOM boxes should be built in place of the crystal towers!


If the response is what I think (GREAT) then, give it to CNN and other pollsters and have New Yorkers, America, the world...vote on it!!!!

February 17th, 2003, 03:40 PM
Libeskind. The WCC popularity with the public may be because
it evokes the twin towers, but Libeskind seems to have reached the ears of the right people.

The main reason for my choice is the street plan. The memorial pit will get smaller, but I still prefer it to be below grade. A street level memorial will lead to conflicts
with future retail and other non-memorial events.

Hopefully, the circular walk will be replaced by some sort of decking or West St tunnel.

If you want to make comments to the LMDC, go to the NY1 site. The polling is email controlled.

http://www.ny1.com/ny/Polls/index.html?topicintid=15&subtopicintid=141&pollact ivequestionintid=883

February 17th, 2003, 04:48 PM
I'm still totally up in the air over this but I think Libeskind has got the ear of the right people. I think that the Muschamp review was actually a sign of desparation on THINK's behalf.

Unfortunately, what I think we are really going to get is Libeskind's street plan and museum, a shallow pit filled with a huge memorial, tombs, etc., and a bunch of SOM boxes for towers at around 750ft designed in the same style as 7WTC.

The public is going to have to stay involved as much as possible to assure the skyline doesn't get really ruined.

February 17th, 2003, 05:08 PM
Muschamp is not THINK's spokesman, regardless of what some say. At worst he strengthened his criticism in reaction to Libeskind's unexpected popularity.

February 17th, 2003, 05:33 PM
JMGarcia - I'd flip if the idea of 750 foot office towers by SOM were put in down at Ground Zero - they've ruined enough AFAIC.

I like Libeskind - I've said it since the plans came out, with Lord Foster's proposal in 2nd. Anyone who says that the office towers will further the vacancy rate is speaking bulls***. Remember 3 years ago? Companies were moving to Jersey because they couldn't find large blocks of office space? Guess what, that situtation will happen again in the middle of the next recovery.

Other critics say that Lower Manhattan is not attractive anymore. Funny, that's what they said in 1960 when plans for the old WTC were being drawn up. Now that we'ere missing it, what could bring back the area and make it work 24 hours a day? A 16 acre memorial? I don't think so - a new WTC must be built to breathe life in the area. Libeskind is the best of the 2 remaning to accomplish this.

If we construct THINK's proposal, we're basically saying that nostalgia has replaced innovation as the conventional wisdom. If this is the case, *count me out of rebuilding and maybe out of holding hope for the city's future. Please, lets make the right choice!

NyC MaNiAc
February 17th, 2003, 06:21 PM
Libeskind is good. I agree. Yet, IMO the "skyline element" just plain sucks. There's a bunch of medium sized towers everywhere and a tall anorexic spire. I like that he's making office buildings and not a "soaring memorial" that we'd have to look at everyday and think of 9/11...I guess I just want Twin Towers back. And his plan dosn't make this happen. I just want the 2 tallest towers increased to world's tallest size and made identical. A new WTC for a new page in the city's future. Heck, even add a spire to one and then throw in that spire in the middle...

Am I asking alot? Yes.
But is it possible? I hope so.

Whats your opinion? Do you like the skyline Libeskind creates?

TLOZ Link5
February 17th, 2003, 06:29 PM
Libeskind himself already said that modifying the heights of the crystal towers will not affect the placement of sunlight in the Wedge of Light and Park of Heroes, so the ambience of his memorial will not be compromised if the buildings are made taller.

NyC MaNiAc
February 17th, 2003, 07:05 PM
TLOZ Link5, excuse my ignorance, But is that good or bad? Sorry for my stupidity.

February 17th, 2003, 10:29 PM
Now that I looked at the link I see that no one likes either of the buildings. I sort of liked the THINK plan, but they should have filled more of the building. The Libeskind looks horrible, but the garden is a creative idea.

(Edited by DominicanoNYC at 10:34 pm on Feb. 17, 2003)

February 18th, 2003, 01:35 AM
If they filled more of the building, the integrity of their lousy project would be lost ?
Who would be happy with that ?

February 18th, 2003, 12:03 PM
Exactly how useless is it at this point to be discussing the memorial aspects of either plan when the memorial design competiton will begin soon??? *I have never understood that, only to think that the LMDC is using the issue to detract from the larger issue at hand. *Which is how in the hell do they justify choosing either of these monstrosities???

Keep the public talking about "slurry walls" and take the discussion off the horrible buildings they are proposing for the site.

(Edited by NYguy at 12:03 pm on Feb. 18, 2003)

(Edited by NYguy at 12:04 pm on Feb. 18, 2003)

February 18th, 2003, 12:27 PM
Right. They might find a memorial design that is spectacular and then realize it doesn't fit with either plan. Then what will they do?

February 18th, 2003, 01:45 PM
The LMDC did go about this all wrong. *They should have quietly come up with a concrete site plan behind closed doors, as the PA is doing, and only after that have a real competition for the memorial and office buildings.

February 18th, 2003, 02:04 PM
Are you serious? That is precisely what the competition countered - the technical approach. All three are inseparable and have to be spatially organized in harmony.

TLOZ Link5
February 18th, 2003, 03:54 PM
Quote: from NyC MaNiAc on 7:05 pm on Feb. 17, 2003
TLOZ Link5, excuse my ignorance, But is that good or bad? Sorry for my stupidity.

Depends upon where you look at it. *The way I see it the victims' familes obviously liked the concept of Libeskind's memorial, so they won't object to modifications so long as the ambience of the memorial isn't affected.

February 18th, 2003, 05:00 PM
Speaking of surveys, the Municipal Art Society is now accepting comments on the two remaining designs. As always, they have a choice of the two designs and neither.

Whatever comments are made on http://www.imaginenewyork.org/ is up to you.

February 18th, 2003, 05:40 PM
Throwing in my two cents, the office buildings will be the deciding factor for me. *As far as I know, the THINK plan precludes anything tall around the lattices, which is a big negative. *If the Libeskind proposal pushes up the heights of the buildings around the garden needle, it would have my vote. *The best possible outcome would feature the Foster towers anchoring the garden needle. *I don't care what goes into the memorial.

NyC MaNiAc
February 18th, 2003, 05:57 PM
I second that Eugenius...If he would raise the towers and make them Twins.....

ah, the possibilties...

February 18th, 2003, 07:51 PM
i really dislike both of these proposals and its really sad that this is the best that NYC can come up with. However, i like Libinksi's plan slighty more because it does have "buildings" which will help restore the skyline. Although i feel like others in that the heights should be boosted....to be honest u could get rid of that damn garden i really dislike it. Its a big knife with a long pole, that has no office space and isnt even asthetically pleasing. THINK's proposal is just awful.. its just a skeleton world trade and doesnt even blend in nicely with the downtown skyline. Also THINK has no other office buildings even 600-700fters to go nicely with those 2 attocities. They get ZERO points in my book.

NyC MaNiAc
February 18th, 2003, 11:20 PM
Now, thinking outside the box a little, are we positive one of these designs will really be built? I mean considering we're being told this project will take about a decade (I hope I'm wrong with this time period, but I dont think I am...) Should we really have a final design for the site less than 2 years after the attacks?

As in, could the public still possibly overturn these projects and get good ol' Yamasaki in here to create some new twin towers?

February 19th, 2003, 10:01 AM
Thank God no. I agree that no one is positive that one of these designs will be built as we see them today, but throughout this entire process one thing seems to be clear - they will not build what was there before.

It seems those who want nothing but the original twin towers (or something very close) will say the new design is ugly, or awful, or horrible, no matter what is proposed. Why not get over it and really start thinking outside the box.

February 19th, 2003, 11:34 AM
I completely agree. we should preserve the past, not
recreate it.

At this point, accept whichever of these two plans presents
the best opportunity to evolve into something better.

February 19th, 2003, 02:51 PM
Yamasaki's dead.

NyC MaNiAc
February 19th, 2003, 10:09 PM
Maybe you guys took that comment wrong. I dont want the old twin towers back. I mean, I loved them...the way they caught the sun, the way they stood proudly over the Hudson River, and over all of Manhattan...


But they were flawed. We all know this. They were great, but then again...they were just boxes, elegant perhaps, but just boxes. It's time to bring something better there, but what I see going on right now, does not look so good...

I'd like to see Twin Towers back. The Yamasaki comment was made because I want to see Twins rise at that site... Not the old twins, but 2 symmetrical buildings. And betweem Libeskind's *crazy design with towers everywhere, and THINK's see through pieces of steel, thats not going to happening.

Time to move on I guess, but I'm not pleased with what will probably go on that site...


Is this the best we have? I still don't think they match the pure beauty of the originals...but of course, thats just my opinion...


Your opinions on the matter?

(Edited by NyC MaNiAc at 10:18 pm on Feb. 19, 2003)

February 20th, 2003, 04:20 PM
diVinci, that sounds excellent!

February 20th, 2003, 05:16 PM
JMGarcia informed me that...

he would try to add Foster's kiss towers to Libeskind's plan and replace the fifth tower w/ the 3rd tower and increase the height of the tallest two crystal towers and provide a new image...when he returns home from vacation.

Can Derek2k3 try to modify his image too? *Any other takers? *This revised version would be....SPECTACULAR!!! *I think if we can get this image done, I will forward it to Libeskind, Foster, the LMDC, Pataki and Bloomberg. *Then on to CNN and the media.
Let's get the public to view it and the world's reaction.

If my intuition is right...WATCH OUT...you'll get an overwhelming response in favor of Libesking/Foster!!