Nice proposal. I like how you took the existing Twin tower shape and used part of it to creat something new. It jsut seems to work well.
M A R K D E R R * A R C H I T E C T
MADISON WI. * MarkDArchitect@aol.com
WORLD TRADE CENTER RESURRECTION
LETTER TO MEDIA REPRESENTATIVES AND CITIZENS OF NEW YORK
January 6, 2003
Like most everyone else I know, I am profoundly disappointed in the way the process for the resurrection of the World Trade Center site is proceeding, and in the commissioned proposals that have been published thus far.
I encourage you to ask your friends, readers and viewers to consider the opinions presented here.
If you concur with the thrust of this letter, I ask for your help in pouring sand into the gears of a design process that seems to resemble a runaway train --- before it results in an architectural train wreck on one of the most sacred memorial sites in our country.
You can assist this effort by writing a letter to former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, New York State Governor George Pataki, New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomburg, the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation or representatives of your local media.
If you agree that there is an urgent necessity to rethink the fundamental design criteria and replace the present selection process with something more inclusive, respectful and coherent, I encourage you to forward a link to this website to everyone you know who shares these concerns - or should.
To those in the media who are reading this, it is respectfully submitted for your consideration for publication because I suspect that you will discover very broad public support for two things:
1) To extend the time frame for the final decision on the design for the resurrection of the World Trade Center site. Because there is a deeply symbolic significance to this project that is not being addressed. Because not enough creative alternatives have been offered to make a worthy choice. And because the entire process warrants national public participation.
2) To set up an eleven member design commission composed of ten members of the national professional societies of Architects, Engineers & Artists, New York City residents and the site developers. The eleventh member would be the chairman, Rudolph Giuliani - or someone that he selects. They, and a staff of their choosing would be charged with three primary tasks:
* To formulate a short succinctly worded list of architectural program design criteria that would be voted upon by a group that represents a fair cross section of Americans, who would prioritize them in order of importance.
* To solicit design proposals from all points of the compass; encouraging all licensed architects and engineers in America to contribute a sketch concept that they prepare on their own time. The design process would be open to anyone with a good idea - regardless of age or educational degrees. They would be submitted to the commission for review and if an idea is judged to have merit, it could then qualify for financial assistance for further development. All of the best ideas would assembled so that the commission, along with some of the most creative minds in the nation could pick and choose and assimilate them together into a handful of truly magnificent alternatives. Design by committee does not work if the committee has a thousand bellies and no brain, but it works elegantly if it has proper coordination.. Any symphony orchestra proves that. Two heads are always better than one if they are singing in the same key and pulling in the same direction. The same principle can easily apply to two million heads - it would just take a little longer and require an organized filtration process.
* To offer a final group of realistic and inspiring proposals for publication that are then voted upon in a referendum of New York City residents, because they were the most directly affected by this event.
This process should be organized in a manner so that a final design could be selected in about a year and a half from now.
I am certain that funding for this effort would be easily obtainable from benevolent private donors.
There is little doubt in my mind that any media poll would show that most of us believe that there should be more public input into this process, that there should be more creative alternatives to choose from, that the current proposals fall far short of our expectations and that this is probably the most important architectural project so far in American history.
I advocate a basic redirection of the current trajectory of the architectural dialogue about what should be built on this site toward a more architecturally substantial goal that should come into focus through a participatory process.
Although I do like some parts of some of the design proposals, none of them move me with pride or reverence or enthusiasm---and I am certain that a vast majority would agree that this project should inspire all of us with a sense of breathtaking magnificence.
I refrain from criticizing someone elses creative work without offering an alternative of my own in the same breath. Accordingly, I have formulated an architectural design proposal to illustrate that five objectives – all of which I believe are of fundamental importance to the resurrection of the World Trade Center site - can be achieved.
I wish to emphasize that I am advocating a broader base for design input and a slowing down and restructuring of the overall process. The architectural design concept proposed here is no more and no less than illustratrated proof that it is possible to marry the past and the future together in a respectful and artistically creative way.
The five elements that form the foundation of this design proposal are:
1) A sacred determination to preserve the exact footprints of the original towers and prevent them from being built over or trodden upon in any way. They are a national gravesite that commands the same magnitude of respect that we have for the souls who rest in our national cemeteries.
2) An architectural homage should be offered to the original towers by replicating a portion of them in some highly significant way to enshrine this hallowed ground. This is a crucial criterion which might allow for a design that effectively bridges the gap between a considerable number of people who would like to see the towers rebuilt as they were and those of us who understand that this is not really a practical architectural or engineering alternative.
3) The New York City skyline must be taken back in a manner that is both artistically inspiring and architecturally cost effective. This seems to translate to the necessity to provide about 7 to 10 million square feet of Class A emphasized rentable floor space (from what I have read). Whatever the program target square footage is, it should be enclosed in an architecturally significant and elegantly feasible structural framework.
4) The new structures should not only take back the skyline, but also elevate to a higher place. In this design concept, it is exactly 2,801 inches higher---which is the number of souls that perished there, according to the most recent information I have. This is a sacred number that I think should be incorporated into the new design in some architecturally significant way.
5) The safety of very tall buildings can be significantly improved. There are many methods to accomplish this, but maybe this project should set an example by achieving that goal in the simplest possible way. That would be to choose a geometry which forces the occupant load of every floor of the building to diminish in an inverse proportion to its distance from the ground below.
Some of the proposals address some of the criteria identified above, but none address all of them.
In formulating my design concept, I began by asking myself a very simple question; ‘If I was commissioned to build a gigantic structure on the site of Robert E. Lee’s house in Arlington, Virginia, or little round top at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, what would it look like?’ What should it look like?
I think this is a very valid question for all of us to ask ourselves as the architectural proposals for this site are being evaluated.
The current seven proposals are much better suited to a site located somewhere in Disneyland than to this memorial site. To me, these proposals are like suggesting that the cliffs and beaches of Normandy would make a dandy waterslide amusement park, or that maybe little round top at Gettysburg would be enhanced by the addition of a Ferris Wheel.
With all due respect to the architects who prepared the current proposals, on the basis of program directives that I have not seen, I have to say that they are all imaginative---but in a fashionably abstract way. Unfortunately, they all seem to have more to do with architectural whimsy than with generating a lofty stack of creative alternatives to choose from in the formulation of a worthy response to the deeply symbolic demands of this project.
By the way, how do you wash the windows of some of the proposals? The last time I checked, that was a pivotal consideration in high rise curtain wall design. Is there some new technology that is now available which makes this a minor concern? If so, I would like to know what it is.
In my humble “front line” oriented professional judgment, many of the structural forms proposed are architecturally clumsy and even downright silly. Also, many of them appear to be spatially inefficient and breathtakingly costly to construct.
But most importantly, they all seem to share a bewildering amnesia about the buildings that stood there for 30 years and the souls they entombed in less than 30 seconds.
And I find that deeply disturbing.
I don’t think any architect would intentionally say to the ghosts of the victims, "You can have a little place off to the side and out of the way, but don't expect us to allow the memory of you and your dead buildings to influence this architectural design in any significant way, because that just doesn't fit MY style..."
But regrettably, in my unvarnished opinion, all of the current design proposals seem to view the original towers that stood there for so long as nothing more than dead debris that should be swept away without a trace in order to pave the way for a stupendous new pile of architectural style---rather than a sacred place that should be enshrined with elements of the architecture of the original towers---and I do not think that a simple covered promenade or patch of grass with a rusty sculpture is enough to adequately memorialize the victims, the original towers, or the day they all perished.
We can do better for ourselves.
We must do better for them.
One of the fundamental challenges of architecture is to weld the words “respect” and “spectacular” together into a physical form that takes our client’s breath away. And in this case, the client should include all the citizens of America.
Something feels wrong about excluding the general public from the design process. While I applaud CNN for inviting viewer submittals, because this a very positive step, it is now time to expand and formalize that altruistic sentiment by actually setting up a process similar to this to solicit design input from all quarters.
I accept and understand with humility that the people at the helm of this project are making a strenuous attempt to be sensitive to many important issues, but I am pained by the perception that there is a frantic rush to "just start digging"---to build something that nobody seems to want.
The site developer is probably under crushing economic pressures to act quickly and if that is the case, that should be respected and perhaps the government should step in to ameliorate that pressure - to insure that we don’t rush into something that we should not rush into. I think that most Americans would eagerly find a dollar or two to cover that expense.
I don’t believe that anyone wants the survivors, the memory of the victims and the historical significance of the shining towers that stood there for so long to feel that they are just a pesky inconvenience in the design process---which will ultimately be bulldozed into insignificance by overwhelming new structures that memorialize them as a footnote.
Einstein said, “ Make things as simple as possible – but not simpler.”
I strenuously advocate a profound course correction in this whole process before everyone gets all atwitter about a particular design---on a new path leading deliberately toward an architecturally coherent, respectful, cost effective and artistically inspiring response to the most important architectural project in American history.
This project belongs to all Americans from the standpoint that everyone should be invited to contribute time, money or ideas it. But New York City residents were to most directly affected, so they should have the final say on what is built there.
This project is too important to proceed with before every citizen of this country receives a warm invitation to have a say in it and a different process is set up to solicit and select design ideas.
Because what we choose to do here and now may very well have a magnitude of significance that reaches far beyond our present ability to grasp in its true entirety.
These ideas have resonated deeply with everyone I have presented them to and that has encouraged me to present them in a national public forum - in case it might give a voice to others like us - who expect to be inspired with awe and respect by the architectural form of this project.
Please forward this information to anyone that you think should see it.
I grant unrestricted editing, publication and distribution permission to anyone who may wish to reproduce anything contained here.
Feel free to contact me at any time for any reason.Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Mark Derr * Architect AIA
PS
The Meier proposal for the project is interpreted by some people as a monument to the number 23 - which is a mythical symbol for some very negative things. I would not want to think that the designer did this intentionally, so I assume it was just an accidental blunder.
But either way, it makes this alternative inappropriate and unacceptable for that reason alone---because for this project, we must be very careful to pay attention to the structure and how it can be symbolically interpreted---whether or not we agree with that interpretation.
Other than that, I see no symbolism whatsoever in the Meier proposal - and that also makes it unacceptable. Like the other proposals, it should 23 skidoo.
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN NARRATIVE
This architectural design concept strives to create a worthy memorial to two equally sacred things; our country's loss and our resolve to overcome it.
The two purest motivational words in the language of architecture are Respect and Spectacular.
Respectacular is the guiding inspiration for the formulation of this design concept, because in my opinion, the resurrection of the World Trade Center site is the most significant architectural project so far in American history.
We cannot simply take back the skyline, we must elevate it to a higher place---exactly 2,801 inches higher; the same number of souls who perished there on that day. These are the glass and metal spires of light which crown each of the towers….which should be visible across 200 miles of open sea on a clear night---and glow with the same light as the torch of the statue of liberty.
Terrorism has administered a severe body blow to us and we as a nation will be symbolically defined in this century by the form of our architectural counterpunch to it.
Valid concerns about the safety of high rise buildings have been raised, and they are addressed in this design with the conviction that very tall buildings can be constructed more safely if two simple principles are employed and mandated by code.
1) The occupant load of a floor should diminish in a reasonable inverse proportion to its distance from the ground below. This mathematical ratio should be a function of several factors, so that overall safety can be achieved without the sacrifice of economical construction feasibility. This does not mean that all tall structures must have a pyramidal form, because the crucial factor is emergency evacuation time for every floor and this can also be achieved with an ascending ratio of exits per occupant.
2) The structural engineering design should be guided by the "bundled tube" concept rather than the floor diaphragm braced column, or "cards and toothpicks" structural configuration which supported the former World Trade Center towers. This method would insure that any catastrophic structural failure will be localized so as not to destabilize the entire building.
The footprints of the original towers must not be built upon, because it is hallowed ground. In this design, the two new towers are wrapped around the empty space of the missing towers and defined by vertical interface walls - which are detailed to replicate the facade of the original towers, and reflected in the waters of two memorial pools that have the exact shape of the original footprints. This enshrines the memory of what used to be by embracing it within the soaring buttresses of a new beginning.
Great architecture is frozen music, but this music must not play in a vacuum. It must be composed upon the balance sheet of commodity with the pen of construction practicality. Accordingly, this design provides 8 to 9 million rentable square feet with a high ratio of exterior glass to floor area provided by deep convolutions in the exterior faces of the pyramidal shaped towers. This geometric form would also serve to strengthen the overall structure.
The footprint of the new towers plus the memorial areas where the original towers once stood would occupy less than 40% of the sixteen acre site and that ratio could be adjusted up or down to accommodate the needs of the architectural program for the towers and the necessary low rise ancillary support buildings.
The cost per square foot of a structure must be balanced with the income it generates in order to qualify as a coherent work of architecture.
The symbolic meaning of this structure demands an artistically detailed form that would not be required of comparable developments of a similar scale, so I believe that the monumental nature of this project warrants a valid and appropriate expectation that a portion of the initial construction cost would come from both public and private contributions so as to insure its economic viability.
These drawings do not show all of the facade articulations and convolutions that would add interest and interior light, or all of the ground level landscaping and covered promenades that would give the project a welcoming pedestrian scale, but it does illustrate the major elements of a concept which embraces some things that many of us feel should be an essential part of this historically profound endeavor.
The final design should emerge from a national forum that encourages participation from architects, engineers, artists, New York City residents and every citizen of our country, who are guided by a transcending determination to marry the site developer's legitimate program needs together with those of the American people in an elegant manner.
One that is rooted in respect, cost effectiveness and simple, breathtaking magnificence.
We can do this.
This design concept is intended to serve as an assertive step in that direction.
Character is a jewel that is polished by adversity.
We must not allow the things that we cannot control to diminish our will to overcome them.
Let us resurrect this site in the form of two towers that shimmer like blazing jewels in the dawn of a new and better day.
Let there never be the shadow of a doubt that America is a lighthouse in a foggy world.
Please feel free to visit my website and to copy and forward the form letter below to anyone you think should see it.
Thank You.
Mark Derr * Architect AIA
________________________________________________________________
Dear Recipient of this Email,
I am sending you this with the hope that you have an interest in the resurrection of the World Trade Center site. If so, please look at my webpage when you have time.
http://hometown.aol.com/markdarchitect/myh...page/index.html If you concur with the thrust of the opinions offered, please forward it to your friends and local media sources who might share these concerns - or should.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Mark Derr * Architect AIA
PS
AOL has a quirk that occassionaly requires you to click on a website link 2 or 3 times before it loads.
Pretty fresh proposel, but i dont like them so mutch.
