View Poll Results: Construction is underway, how do you feel about the final design for the WTC site?

Voters
191. You may not vote on this poll
  • I am more than satisfied; I believe that the final design surpasses that of the original World Trade Center. 10/10

    50 26.18%
  • While nothing may ever live up to the Twin Towers, I am wholly satisfied with the new World Trade Center; it is a new symbol for a new era. 7/10

    55 28.80%
  • I have come to terms with the new World Trade Center; although it has a number of flaws, I find the design to be acceptable. 5/10

    47 24.61%
  • I am wholly disappointed with the New World Trade Center; we will live to regret the final design. 0/10

    22 11.52%
  • I am biased, but honest, and hate anything that is not a reincarnation of the original Twin Towers.

    17 8.90%
Page 2 of 406 FirstFirst 1234561252102 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 6086

Thread: World Trade Center Developments

  1. #16
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,752

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    The Post is right on with this article. *Although they are tabloid-fare on a lot of issues, they are the only true "bullshit detector" in this process.

  2. #17
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    I find it hard to believe the Post is on the case and not just trying to tear down the credibility of the most highly regarded paper in the country (as it continually has over the years). It's still the rag it's always been. His conclusion that The Times is trying to push its real estate agenda with every WTC editorial is laughable.

    In fact, poll after poll has found that the public has no love whatsoever for Libeskind's design, and that in fact, half of all New Yorkers would like to see the Twin Towers rebuilt as they were.

    He says, "in fact" twice. Not only is this bad writing, but it simply is not a fact. We all know how the Post makes up their own "facts", this is no different.

  3. #18

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    Quote: from tonyo on 9:57 am on July 15, 2003
    Child's tower is supposed to be all of the 1776 ft. that Libeskind's is. *Neither spire has any office space above floor 70.
    Everything I have ever seen about the Child's tower says it is a 70 story building with a lattice work that dissolves like the branches of a tree as it reaches a height of about 1300 feet.

    In other words, it does not have a spire nor does it reach 1776 feet. I would think though that to have any hope of this alternative to be accepted it would hace to be modified to reach 1776 feet somehow. Locking in that number is one of Libeskind's greatest contributions to the site.

  4. #19

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    Yep, you're right. People complain that Libeskind's design doesn't really bring back the skyline, however at least he set the height. The one thing Silverstein said he agreed on was that a 1776' freedom tower of some sort would be built. It's good because since its original freedom tower design isn't perfect we dont have to fear the changes that will be made to the site. Can a 1776 foot tower really get any thinner? I Think if anything it will be changed to be a little thicker.

  5. #20
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,752

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    JM, since most of the articles I read are posted by you first, I take your word for it.

    However, I recall Silverstein saying that he is excited to start building the 1776 foot tower. *

    Moreover, I can't see him or anyone changing that specific part of the plan. *Its number is etched in everyone's head.

  6. #21

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    Waiting to be etched into the sky. *

    For all the wtb fiends...
    The spire will be at 1776'. *Does this limit the adjustment of the 1776' height to reference the roof?!

    Obscene - I know.... just thought I'd throw it out there.

    What height is floor 70? *
    (14'x70=980') *14' is verrry generous. *Is there residential above this? *How long is the spire?

  7. #22

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    Ever seen this dead Shanghai proposal?

    Hmmmmm, looks familiar......




  8. #23

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    Wow, that is VERY familiar. Was that a copy of Libeskind or did Libeskind copy that? If Libeskind copied it then that'd be awful. The new WTC being a copout of something in Shanghai! Hopefully it's the other way around, since its not going to be built in Shanghai anyway.

  9. #24
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Garden City, LI
    Posts
    1,778

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    Boo

  10. #25

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    July 16, 2003

    Officials Reach Agreement on Rebuilding Downtown

    By EDWARD WYATT

    The architect with the winning design for the World Trade Center site and the developer who will rebuild the office space there agreed early this morning to collaborate on the design and construction of the 1,776-foot tower that will anchor the redeveloped site both on the ground and in the Lower Manhattan skyline.

    The agreement between the architect, Daniel Libeskind, and the developer, Larry A. Silverstein, came during an eight-hour negotiating session that stretched from Tuesday afternoon into Wednesday morning.

    The agreement was forged under firm pressure from officials at the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which have been ordered by Gov. George E. Pataki to adhere to an aggressive time line for the redevelopment effort.

    David M. Childs, a consulting partner with Skidmore, Owings & Merrill and the architect hired by Mr. Silverstein to work on designs for the trade center site's office space, will lead the collaboration, according to a statement issued jointly this morning by Mr. Childs, Mr. Silverstein and Mr. Libeskind.

    Mr. Childs and Skidmore will serve as the design architect and project manager, leading a team that will design the tower, which Mr. Pataki has called the Freedom Tower and which will be the first commercial building to be constructed at the site.

    The proposed building has been called the world's tallest, although the occupied office space is expected to be only about 70 stories, with much of the remainder of the height being accounted for by a telecommunications antenna.

    Mr. Libeskind, whose master plan for the trade center site was selected in February over eight other designs in a competition of renowned architects, will serve as a collaborating architect during the concept- and schematic-design phases of the project and will act as a member of the project team, according to the statement.

    "This collaboration will facilitate the development of the Freedom Tower in a manner consistent with the Libeskind vision," it said. "We are confident that SOM and SDL will produce a world-class icon in the Lower Manhattan skyline and a powerful symbol of our nation's resilience in the aftermath of tragedy."

    Development corporation officials said they believed that the agreement will end months of sometimes-heated battles between Mr. Silverstein, who has declared his intention to rebuild all of the office space that was destroyed in the terrorist attack of Sept. 11, 2001, and Mr. Libeskind, who has maintained that he has a public mandate to forge a new design for the site.

    "It is a historic development that two architects at this level are willing to work together in this way," Kevin Rampe, the president of the development corporation, said in an interview.

    Some matters remain to be settled between the parties, however. Among them is the location of the tower, which Mr. Libeskind had designated for the northwest corner of the site. Mr. Silverstein, however, wants the tower to be closer to the new transportation hub, which will lie on the eastern portion of the 16-acre site.

    Officials who were present at the meeting, including representatives from the Port Authority, refused to characterize the negotiations or say what had impeded an earlier agreement. But two officials said that the agreement came after a lengthy period of direct talks between Mr. Libeskind and Mr. Childs, who had faced each other in the design competition.

    Rebuilding officials want to begin construction of the tower next summer, in order to complete the erection of steel by the end of 2006, a deadline set by Mr. Pataki and which coincides with the end of his current term.


    Officials from the development corporation brought Mr. Libeskind and representatives of Mr. Silverstein together to try to force an agreement over what role Mr. Libeskind will play in the design of commercial office space on the site.

    The impasse centered on how much influence Mr. Libeskind would have on the design of the first office building to go up at the site, the 1,776-foot tower that will define the rebuilt trade center's presence on the Lower Manhattan skyline. It has generally been understood that Mr. Libeskind would not actively design all the office buildings, and Mr. Silverstein has been talking to many architects about their desire to fashion one or more of the towers.

    But Mr. Libeskind has actively sought a role in the design of the largest tower. Mr. Silverstein, however, has pushed for the involvement of other architects, particularly David M. Childs, a partner at Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, in part because Mr. Libeskind has never designed a high-rise office building.

    Mr. Silverstein also wants changes to the location and other features of the office buildings in Mr. Libeskind's master plan for the site, agreements that Mr. Libeskind has so far been reluctant to embrace.

    In an interview on Monday, Mr. Libeskind said he believed that moving buildings around the site could change its entire character. "It's not a matter of just moving a building here or there," he said. "It can change the views, the light and wind conditions, the composition of the entire site."

    An agreement between the development corporation and the Port Authority dictates that Mr. Libeskind will help to "develop commercial design guidelines governing future commercial development on the site," guidelines that are consistent with his proposals for the heights and shapes of buildings. Those guidelines are to be completed by September, the agreement states.

    But Mr. Silverstein undoubtedly has a large role in the review of those guidelines. He has made clear to several rebuilding officials that he believes that his lease gives him the right to rebuild as he sees fit, subject to the agreement of the Port Authority, perhaps, but not to the whims of any other agencies.

    Although the commercial office buildings will not be completed for years, the planners must know where the office towers will be located in order to design the underground elements of the trade center.


    Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

    (Edited by Christian Wieland at 9:49 am on July 16, 2003)

  11. #26

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    Quote: from tonyo on 9:43 pm on July 15, 2003
    JM, since most of the articles I read are posted by you first, I take your word for it.

    However, I recall Silverstein saying that he is excited to start building the 1776 foot tower. *

    Moreover, I can't see him or anyone changing that specific part of the plan. *Its number is etched in everyone's head.
    Especially now that the broadcasters have signed on ($$$$$) I can't see Silverstein lowering it. I wouldn't be surprised to see Childs' proposal to have a lower roof line than Libeskind's spire does. I expect something much like one of THINK's WCC towers with the skeleton filled up about 2/3rds of the way with an antenna on it.

    All in all, I've yet to figure out exactly why Silverstein wants his own architect and all these changes. Is it just monetary considerations or is it ego?

    (Edited by JMGarcia at 3:33 am on July 16, 2003)

  12. #27
    Moderator NYatKNIGHT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Manhattan - South Village
    Posts
    4,240

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    I'm still not sure what they agreed to. Did Libeskind get everything he wanted? Silverstein can't move the towers?

    If they aren't going to rebuild the twin towers, then what should replace it is an awesome building, yet it sounds so flimsy when they describe it. These guys have the green light to build the world's tallest building, nearly everyone has come terms with its 1776 foot height. The developer is hard-pressed to find 10M s.f. of office space on the site. Yet all I read is "antennas", "unoccupied space", "lattice",......why the hell don't they just go for it, jeez. Build a real building, dammit!

  13. #28
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    3,298

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    I couldn't see the pictures of the dead Shanghai proposal, but I'll take a stab in the dark...did it, by any chance, happen to be the Daewoo Business Center designed by John Portman? *I remember that it had been rejected, yet in recent weeks has been proposed once more.

  14. #29

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    I've never seen this rejected project before.
    The similarity with that of Libeskind is not that striking.
    One of the towers looks almost empty.

  15. #30

    Default Ground Zero Developments

    July 17, 2003

    Compromise to Build On; Developer Gets His Say in Ground Zero Design
    News Analysis
    By EDWARD WYATT

    Larry A. Silverstein was not in the room as the two renowned architects, Daniel Libeskind and David M. Childs, worked out an agreement early yesterday morning to collaborate on the design of the 1,776-foot tower that will be the first office building to rise at the World Trade Center site.

    But Mr. Silverstein, the developer of the site, nevertheless secured the right to put his imprint on the Lower Manhattan skyline when rebuilding officials agreed to appoint Mr. Childs, his handpicked architect, as the lead designer and project manager on the tower.

    Mr. Libeskind, who devised the master plan for the site but whose buildings Mr. Silverstein ridiculed as creating acres of unusable floor space, will serve as a collaborating architect during initial design a role that one rebuilding officials said essentially gave him 49 percent of the votes in any decision.

    And plenty of decisions still must be made, even after the eight-hour negotiating session that led to the collaboration agreement. The largest is where exactly the tower will sit, a decision that will influence subsequent office projects on the site.

    Yesterday, Kevin Rampe, the president of the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, which is overseeing the rebuilding project, said that rebuilding officials would consider Mr. Silverstein's request to move the tower from the northwest corner of the site, where Mr. Libeskind placed it, closer to the transportation hub, at the corner of the restored Fulton and Greenwich Streets, where Mr. Silverstein would like it.

    The parties must also determine how much the building will represent Mr. Libeskind's renderings, which show the tower nestled against the side of a 70-story office building.

    Mr. Silverstein and Mr. Childs have considered a more conventional, and less expensive, option: centering the spire over the office building itself.

    Asked yesterday whether he was concerned that his design would be compromised, Mr. Libeskind said, "No, absolutely not. It's going to be a collaboration, it's going to be something really dramatic, and it's going to restore the skyline of New York."

    Each side can claim some satisfaction from the pact. Mr. Libeskind, whose role as master plan architect did not guarantee a role as architect of the site's commercial office buildings, now has his first skyscraper project. The agreement also provides that the 1,776-foot tower will be developed "in a manner consistent with the Libeskind vision" for the overall site.

    By pushing their own vision, Mr. Silverstein and Mr. Childs have angered some of the officials overseeing the rebuilding, including those at the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and in the governor's office. But these officials have also learned that Mr. Silverstein has a lot of leverage: his proceeds from the trade center's insurance will give him the money to make the project happen.

    Mr. Childs's inclusion in the project is unique. His firm, Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, was one of the participants in the design competition that Mr. Libeskind won. Its proposal, however, was almost universally derided as unimaginative and impractical, and Skidmore dropped out of the competition soon after it began.

    As the three men stood arm in arm yesterday, they vowed that their collaboration would begin immediately. "We need to roll up our sleeves and get to work," Mr. Libeskind said.

    The agreement came after hours of talks Tuesday night between Mr. Libeskind and Mr. Childs. Less than 30 minutes after representatives from all of the parties involved gathered at the development corporation's headquarters, on the 20th floor of 1 Liberty Plaza, the two architects were asked to adjourn to a separate conference room to see if they could reach an agreement.

    Mr. Rampe, the president of the development corporation, said in an interview yesterday that he told the two men that "this project was bigger than either of them, and was better with both of them on this than without them."

    It quickly became clear that Mr. Rampe was speaking for Mr. Pataki, whose senior advisers were monitoring the progress of the negotiations by telephone and who advised Mr. Rampe that the meeting was not to break up until an agreement was reached.

    Lisa Dewald Stoll, a spokeswoman for the governor, said he "wanted to make sure that everybody was working together and moving forward."

    "Rebuilding Lower Manhattan is an honor and an obligation," Ms. Stoll said. "The governor is proud that the spirit of cooperation endures long after Sept. 11."

    The governor is also one of the big winners from the agreement, as construction of the tower is likely to be a big focus of media attention as the Republicans hold their convention in New York City next summer.

    "You're still going to have a lot of of fighting and conflict surrounding this, because it is a huge project with billions of dollars at stake," said an adviser to one of the principals in the agreement. "But whatever happens, Governor Pataki is going to have a building to stand in front of when everybody's watching."

    The tower will not be completed by August 2004, when the Republican Convention will be held in New York City. Rather, construction is scheduled to start sometime next summer. By about the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attack, however, construction workers are scheduled to top out the structure, and the building should be completed some time in 2008.

    People involved in the meeting Tuesday night said that Mr. Libeskind and Mr. Childs talked very little about the 1,776-foot tower itself, but rather about commercial architecture generally, about the concept of Mr. Libeskind's design and how the office towers should be integrated with the memorial, the train station and other parts of the development.

    Most of those other parts of the redeveloped trade center site will not be affected by the agreement between Mr. Childs, Mr. Libeskind and Mr. Silverstein. Mr. Libeskind has already accepted contracts with the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation to work on the development of the memorial area and the spaces closest to it, including the cultural buildings planned for the site.

    He also has a contract to work with the Port Authority and the development corporation on the refinement of his master plan, including the layout of streets and open spaces, the location of commercial development parcels, pedestrian and automobile traffic patterns, and underground features.

    Additionally, Mr. Libeskind has agreed with the Port Authority that he will have a role in the development of the transportation hub, both its underground components and the structure that many officials have likened to Grand Central Terminal.

    Mr. Libeskind will not be the lead architect on the terminal, however; because federal money will pay for it, a more experienced design team has to take the lead role, according to federal regulations.


    Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

Similar Threads

  1. Winter Garden of World Financial Center - Recent pictures
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 166
    Last Post: August 31st, 2016, 12:04 PM
  2. Rockefeller Center Christmas Tree
    By Edward in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: December 21st, 2010, 09:17 PM
  3. Building Art at Rockefeller Center
    By ZippyTheChimp in forum New York City Guide For Visitors
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: June 26th, 2009, 02:40 PM
  4. East 57th Street Tops Retail List Highest Rents In the World
    By noharmony in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: January 30th, 2008, 12:33 PM
  5. Jazz at Lincoln Center - Time Warner Center
    By Edward in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: October 16th, 2007, 12:47 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software