Another skyscraper at World Trade Center: a mistake?

[Eric J in MN]

Re "Tower Will Put New York on Top of the World,"
Dec. 20: So we're back in business in Lower
Manhattan. And once again, ours has to be the biggest.
It'd be amusing if it weren't so utterly depressing. This
tower is a tribute not to freedom but to unchecked swagger and greed. It signifies
our steadfast refusal to reflect upon ourselves, even in the wake of great national
tragedy. A glass needle on top, of all things.

How can the rest of the world look at that and not see a taunt … and after that, if
history tells us anything, a target? Is it too late to reconsider this lunacy? Is there
anyone out there big enough to step up and tell the emperor he's naked?

Dawn O'Leary

Santa Monica

LA Times, Letter to the Edtior, December 24, 2003

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/letters/la-le-warnock24.1dec24,1,3501195.story?coll=la-news-comment-letters

[mot78]

1. Tell that to most of the public in NYC

we want to see our skyline restored. BTW, isn't a memorial supposed to help us reflect? The building and the memorial are not mutually exclusive.

[Eric J in MN]

7. of course it's our problem how the new skyscraper is perceived

What if terrorists blow up the whole building at once? Thousands upon thousands will die.

[mot78]

11. I know there's concern about the building being a target

but that fact that the "Freedom Tower" (I hate that name) will be a target makes it no more a target than other buildings in NYC. THe Pentagon was/is a target and it's only 5 stories tall! The Brooklyn Bridge, Statue of Liberty, and our subways are also targets. NO matter what we build in NYC, if it's loved and adored by the populous, it will become a target.

[Eric J in MN]

15. More people died at the World Trade Center

More people died at the World Trade Center than at the Pentagon because the Twin Towers were taller.

[mot78]

16. That's because the WTC was unsafe

it wasn't even up to proper NYC building codes because the Port Authority was exempt from them. Also, the Pentagon was a horizontally massive building, and was able to properly absorb the shock of the impact. If a plane hit a shorter building, say 10-20 stories that wasn't horizontally massive, then it probably would collapse even faster than the Twin Towers did, leaving little to no time to escape.

[Eric J in MN]

21. They didn't use planes in the 1993 attack.

In 1993, they used a truck bomb, and if the bomb had been bigger, everyone in the tower would have died at once.

What if they use a truck bomb to attack the Freedom Tower?

[mot78]

22. Unlikely

The surrounding streets will be heavily guarded. Why do you think they didn't use a truck bomb instead of planes on 9/11?

[Eric J in MN]

23. What does heavily guarded mean?

Are you saying that no one will be able to drive a truck down a street adjacent to the Freedom Tower?

[mot78]

24. "What does anything in the city is a target" mean

The Freedom Tower is no more vulnerable than other landmarks or public places. I'll refer you to post 19 if you have any other safety questions.

[YNGW]

25. Bombs

>What if they use a truck bomb to attack the Freedom Tower?

What if you get hit by a car on the way to work and die. You know, people just don't live like that, in fear of what *might* happen. If that were the case, we'd never get out of bed, that is, if we even felt safe there.

[mikehiggins]

41. Because the Bush administration didn't do its job

They were more concerned about Star Wars and tax cuts than listening to the Clinton transition team, or to the committee on terrorism Gary Hart was involved in.

[JE748]

2. Make it 10 times higher

It should be a confirmation of American spirit and resolve. It will not be built as a form of international antagonism. But, unfortunately, if others take it that way it is their problem, not ours.

[TankLV]

34. Ya got that right.

The original poster chooses to look at it their way.

I choose to look at it as the best of American ingenuity and prowess.

Pride in America.

A refusal to cower in fear before the bastards who planned and executed the attack.

A belief in a better and grander future.

All the best humankind and this world has to offer.

And evidently the decision-makers concurred, as do an overwhelming majority of persons.

But those who wish otherwise have valid points, also.

Fortunately, the powers-that-be feel as I do.

BTW - this new spellcheck feature is just great - for those of us whose brain and fingers do not always work in concert!

[YNGW]

3. In a word: No

Part of life is remembering what happened, picking up the pieces, and moving forward. I disagee it has to do with greed. If that's the case, the whole city or any city who conducts commerce has to do with greed. I personally believe the majority of people from NYC would welcome the new buildings. It's time to rebuild and to bring life back once again to where life once thrived.

[Eric J in MN]

4. What about the safety of the workers in the new skyscraper? nt

nt

[mot78]

9. They're working on that

the architect and developer listed a bunch of safety features in the Freedom Tower, including reinforced concreate safts for the building, wider stairwells, designated points of refuge, and stairwells just for firefighters.

[YNGW]

10. What about the safety of the people...

...in the Empire State Building, or the Sears Tower, or any other large building?

People aware of the risk can make an informed decision that is right for them. I doubt anyone is going to be dragged in there kicking and screaming.

[ldf]

39. i would work in that building in a new york minute...

every building in manhattan is a target.

we can whine and cower and tailor our lives to meet the threats of terrorists, or we can choose to attempt to live our life to it's fullest.

as a new yorker, i much prefer the later.

if you are afraid, don't come to new york. the rest of us will just have to carry on without you.

[RedSock]

5. i'm in nyc

i've lived in nyc for 17 years and worked in the WTC for 3 years. i could not care less how tall (or not tall) the new building(s) will be. i'm more concerned that it will be ugly and tacky.

[YNGW]

12. appearances

>i'm more concerned that it will be ugly and tacky.

As i recall, that was one of the concerns with the WTC's.

[Must_B_Free]

6. If we make it high enough

maybe we can even reach the gods!

[evil_orange_cat]

8. nah, I think they should build another two towers... or one bigger one...

even taller than before... in fact, make it the tallest in the world and put a big fat middle finger statue on it pointed towards Mecca.

The thing I don't like is naming it "freedom tower". I'm sick of naming everything "freedom".

[gulliver]

13. It's an inspiring, stunningly stupid move.

But I'd rather have the terrorists fighting that one building than bringing the fight to other parts of Manhattan. Bring 'em on.

I'll bet people are just lining up to work there.

[slackmaster]

14. The more of a taunt the better

The chickenshit assholes who brought down the WTC towers and killed thousands of innocent people deserve to have the towers rebuilt in the form of a giant hand flipping the bird in the general direction of the countries that sponsored and supported them.

[Eric J in MN]

17. Which accomplishes what?

Which accomplishes what?

Do you think that terrorists can't destroy another building?

[mot78]

19. Go to these site for more information

They're full of people who'll give you detailson the safety

http://www.teamtwintowers.org

http://www.newyorkcityskyline.org

http://forums.wirednewyork.com

[TankLV]

35. My thoughts exactly!

nt

[windansea]

18. Mz Leary

can stick it up her ass...all 1776 feet of it

[mot78]

20. The building is NOT really the world's tallest

the roofline is only up to 1,500 feet, and office space is only up to the 70th floor. 1,776 feet only includes the spire.

[windansea]

32. yep...and my post still stands!! n/t

[TankLV]

36. Oh, but it is!

It is an "occupied" "building", not a communications "tower" like the CN Tower, which is the worlds tallest "freestanding" "structure" ("non-occupied" "structure").

Any building you might mention has spires included in the calculations, look up the history of the Chrysler Building for some pertinent info.

But you can always deconstruct any building and come up with the facts you stated for just the "highest occupied floor". Only then is your point valid.

[Blitz]

26. It is most emphatically NOT a mistake

I'm only sorry that they didn't rebuild the original towers taller, as most New Yorkers wanted or that they didn't go with this design, which was my favorite among the finalists:



Check out the slideshow here:

http://www.renewnyc.com/plan_des_dev/wtc_site/new_design_plans/firm_f/slides/slide1.asp.htm

I am concerned that the proposed 70 story building will not have nearly enough space to make up for the loss of two 110 story buildings. But as for the symbolism? Higher, brighter and bolder, please. It is scheduled to be completed on September 11, 2008 (and started in August, 2004, right before the Republican convention - tell me again why the Democrats passed on NYC as their convention site?). If I have any opportunity to do so, I will gladly work in the Freedom Tower.

[YNGW]

27. Thanx Blitz

Great site!

Good luck pulling the sleigh tonight, Blitz(en). ;-)

[mot78]

28. My favorite plan was Foster

I think if they selected it instead of Libeskind, we'd have a better plan.

[Blitz]

29. Foster was very impressive

And people in the industry that I talked to thought it was the favorite. It certainly provided for more office space than the selected plan (I think). My problen with it was that it didn't seem to integrate very well with the rest of the skyline. My favorite thing about the United Architects plan was the diagonal lines at the base which made it look like it grew out of the city rather than being separate from it. I also liked this proposed section of the interior:



In injected a classic element into an ultra-modern design.

I'm just glad it wasn't the Meier design ... that was hideous.

[mot78]

30. True

Meier's was dubbed the "tic tac toe" design. Libeskind's plan looks a lot better today than it did a year ago.

[TankLV]

38. You're batting a thousand with the way I feel about the subject so far!

I sometimes can't believe that someone would actually go ahead and spend the energy to not only come up with such a ridiculous concept as the "tic tac toe" monstrosity, but to then have it seriously entered and then considered instead of being laughed off the stage (or the restaurant napkin it probably came from way back when).

[YNGW]

31. Both are impressive.

It's like with anything. Some people are going to like it, some won't. One was chosen over the others. And so it is.

[windansea]

33. damn

looks huge from that angle

[TankLV]

37. Thank you for the link. I concur heartly.

(wow! - we agree on something!)

see what happens when you never put anyone on ignor as some others have unfortunately decided.

And BTW, a Very Merry Christmas/Happy Holiday Season to you and everyone else here! I'm off till the 2nd! Woo Hoo!

[Emperor_Norton_II]

40. I was partial to the Gaudi design

Not as tall as WTC - in fact I think it just barely beats out the Empire State in total height - but the design has that nice Art Deco / High-Tech fusion look. Though I am a big Flash Gordon junkie, so take that with salt.

I was sorry to see that the vertical gardens taken out of the Leibskind design. That was one of the neater elements of the original concept.

[mikehiggins]

42. The bigger the better

and the sooner the better.

There are always timid folks out there but nothing big gets done if you listen to them.