Why isn’t this a more popular idea? What better way to show the world how strong, united, powerful, capable, undefeated, and superior American society is? Plus I think a new Twin Towers would be an even better tribute to those who died than a park or memorial.
I think they should rebuild them as they were, but with a gold colored metal outer skin. So they look basically the same, but newer. It would restore the famous NYC skyline and 50 years from now people would still remember the ‘new’ towers vs. the ‘old’ towers. Plus they should symbolically make them both one story higher.
I think a memorial would be much better than re-building the towers. America is strong and we don’t have to re-build just to show that. I don’t know how others feel, but I think it would be kind of creepy to go into rebuilt towers in the same exact location. Maybe if there were new, different types of buildings that might work, but not the exact same twin towers.
Seriously, I wonder how many tenants would move back into the towers if they were built back to their original size or taller. I’m talking about the ‘upper’ floors.
It’s not politically correct to say so, but the original towers were never all that attractive to begin with. The new plans are designed to blend in with the skyline better. But the main problem with the ‘rebuild the originals’ approach is that it’s basically trying to pretend that nothing ever happened at the WTC site. If the towers were rebuilt, there wouldn’t actually be any site at which people could gather or even just wander about a little and reflect on the events of 9-11.
The Twin Towers were designed in the 1960s. IMHO, we can do better. And there’s no reason why we shouldn’t.
I agree that the southern tip of the island of Manhattan could use a visual anchor. I’m wondering whether a lighthouse motif might work.
There is no shame or disrespect to the deceased in re-establishing commerce in downtown NYC. After all, it is the world’s pre-eminant business district.
A memorial, of course, would be appropriate.
The approach consistent with recent ideas regarding urban planning -more walkways, less public dead-space- are interesting and deserve considerartion.
Agreed. And if they had enough trouble filling the top floors that the rent dropped to affordable levels, I’d rent there.
I’ve thought all along that the proper response would be not just to rebuild the buildings, but to go all the way and make it the tallest building in the world - by all measures. Make the top floor higher than the spires on the Petronas Towers so there’s no longer any contention.
I think they most likely won’t rebuild them very high, since there are apparently not enough people wanting to actually be in the top floors. I wouldn’t mind having the tallest building in the orld, though. That would be some prestige.
Several reasons not to rebuild the towers as they were, some of which have been mentioned above:
• The ecomony is not the same as it was in the late 1960s; NYC does not need (and could not fill) that much office space downtown.
• They really were ugly. Though, having looked at the new proposals, I am disappointed that no one could come up with something better than the generic Atlanta/Dallas/Los Angeles boxes they did.
• Who would want to rent on the upper floors?!
• Cities change. If we’re going to “rebuold Manhattan as it used to be,” I’m all for tearing down the Empire State Building and putting the old Astor farm back up as it was in the 1840s.
IMO (and not just after they were destroyed) I thought that the Twin Towers looked great, architecturally. I mean, it’s an office building, not a medieval cathedral. Function should dominate form, not the other way round.
Buildings like the WTC and The Sears Tower are what a modern skyscraper should look like. The Empire State Building is kind of a nice blend of old & new, but I find the art-deco Chrysler Building absolutely hideous! Spires? Gargoyles? Hubcaps?!? Puh-leeze! It’s a skyscraper, not a pimp’s Cadillac! The same goes for the Petronas Towers’ busy, horizontal, ‘electric coils’ look.
The WTC had a really pleasing visual design. Smooth sides & vertical lines of steel & glass. And because there were two side by side (and because they were so enormous) I think the simple rectangular box shape looked beautiful!
I would imagine that completely rebuilt towers would become a new target for every anti-American crackpot out there. A symbol of defiance that might just get whacked again, by whatever means.
The natural solution, for me, would be to faithfully replicate the WTC on-site with open steel latticework ala the Eiffel tower. There could be an observation deck, a “hanging garden”, whatever. Plus radio and cell communication relay equipment, special lighting, whatever etc. This way the skyline could be restored, but with the sense of having a “phantom limb”.
I haven’t heard much to impress in the rebuilding plans so far, but I definitely like the idea of restoring the original street layout of the area. The expanded role of mass transit sounds promising.
I don’t think we should rebuild the towers. I feel we need to have a place to cry and let the terrorists know how much they hurt us. Surely if we build a place to cry at, we can show the terrorists just how hard we can cry and just how mean they really are. Yup when those terrorists see me cry, that will show them.
