Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Rebuild the WTC?

  1. #1
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,573
    Blog entries
    3

    Rebuild the WTC?

    Well, should we?

    pro: A symbol that United States (and the rest of the civilized world, for that matter) won't bow down to terrorists.

    con: Would you want to work there? Would such a target get hit again?

    Sorry that I have so few words to offer. I'm still in shock.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  2. #2
    Cyburbian Plannibelle's avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    los angeles
    Posts
    44

    Re: Rebuild the WTC?

    Originally posted by Dan Tasman
    Well, should we?

    [QUOTE}pro: A symbol that United States (and the rest of the civilized world, for that matter) won't bow down to terrorists.

    yes rebuild. If we do not we send a message such tactics work. Not only that, a very large labor force will be displaced and perhaps out of work which will harm the economy. Our resolve to continue our lives and not back down is a testament to our resilicene. and a hallmark our life.

    con: Would you want to work there? Would such a target get hit again?

    probably not. To many other factors will be in place. It would take proably 7 years to build back if not longer. By then hopefully a lot more security measures would be in place. I hope Bush dispenses with his idea that we need new billion dollar military toys and put the money into improving our counter intelligene and intelligence networks and capabilities. I recall in 1990 in the Army I took a course on low intensity conflict. The Soviet Union had not fallen and even then we knew that would be the new enemy.

    Sorry that I have so few words to offer. I'm still in shock.
    we all are. This was a day in infamy because non military targets inside US soil were hit.

  3. #3
    maudit anglais
    Registered
    May 1997
    Location
    Odd-a-wah
    Posts
    6,586
    I'm sure that they'll rebuild the Pentagon, but I don't know about the WTC... Although I agree with the sentiment that rebuilding it would send a message, I'm not sure how practical it would be to rebuild it as it was.

    I don't agree with the con arguement - any large, landmark building is potentially a target. On that basis, you could almost make a case for sprawl...look at the difference in effect between the Pentagon attack and the WTC attack.

  4. #4
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,573
    Blog entries
    3
    Originally posted by Tranplanner
    On that basis, you could almost make a case for sprawl...look at the difference in effect between the Pentagon attack and the WTC attack.
    I've thought of this as well. I've been checking alt.planning.urban, to see if the sprawlmongers there are using this rare but tragic incident to reinforce their arguments. Usenet seems unusually quiet lately, though.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  5. #5
    Cyburbian Planderella's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 1998
    Location
    NOLA
    Posts
    4,468
    Dan, you and I are on the same wavelength, but my question goes just a tad bit further - should we even allow buildings at such excessive heights? It becomes an obvious safety risk for those on the upper floors. Not to sound morbid or irreverent, but can you imagine what those people had to endure trying to evacuate the WTC from the upper floors? Then I remember the movie "The Towering Inferno" when the fire department couldn't access the fire because of the building's height......

  6. #6
    Cyburbian Plannibelle's avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    los angeles
    Posts
    44
    Los Angles doesn't have very many buildings in over 50 stories hieght. The only other buildings I can think of that could have been targets is the Transamerica tower in SF and the Sears Building in Chicago, and even so, it doesn't have the significance since it is New York. It's not just the tallness of the building but the location and power of New York. It is the financial heart and urban soul of the US if not the world.

  7. #7
         
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    130
    I'm not sure on this one. I remember Tuesday, when the reports were still in the early stages, thinking of how they could repair the towers after putting the fires out. Then the nightmare really began.

    Of course is is feasible to rebuild, and we can assume that the market would favor redevelopment. But is it at all appropriate?

    I'm searching for some precedent for this kind of destruction and what resulted. I know the White House was burned/destroyed during the War of 1812. Numerous places were ravaged during the Civil War. But nothing of this scale has ever occured in the United States.

  8. #8
    maudit anglais
    Registered
    May 1997
    Location
    Odd-a-wah
    Posts
    6,586
    A good chunk of downtown Manchester (UK) was blown up by an IRA bomb in 1995. They were still rebuilding when I visited 4 years later. Of course, the scale of the devastation is far different (and the area was evacuated before the blast).

    I think the location pretty much dictates there will be a rebuilding of some sort - I don't mean to sound crass, but that is some pretty valuable real estate. I can't see a reconstruction of the twin towers though. I would think/hope that a significant space would be put aside for a large memorial.

  9. #9

    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    somewhere cold
    Posts
    201
    Although it would probably make sense to rebuild it, I would be afraid to go in it. I am afraid to go in any large building now, or any federal building. I am sorry to say, I guess if that is what the terriorists wanted, it worked.

  10. #10
    Cyburbian Plannibelle's avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    los angeles
    Posts
    44
    It wouldn't make sense not to rebuild. The buisnesses leasing space in the WTC work with other NYC businesses and markets. I find it doubtfull with all the security measures at the airports, the retaliation to the Terrorists by Bush and the extra funding NSA and CIA etc will get towards anit-terrorist activity that a repeat performance would occur.

  11. #11
    maudit anglais
    Registered
    May 1997
    Location
    Odd-a-wah
    Posts
    6,586
    The more I think about this, the more I wonder what the effects will be on planning/design in general. Reading the business pages it is apparent that there is already a scramble for replacement office space. Where will these companies go? In the short-term, will they relocate to other cities where space is available? What about the long-term? Will those companies choose to relocate again if and when the WTC is rebuilt? Will big business in general start to shun high-rise, prestigious addresses in favour of anonymous business parks? What will this do to planning - accelerate the sprawl of employment land uses?

  12. #12
    Corn Burning Fool giff57's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 1998
    Location
    On the Mother River
    Posts
    4,574

    Rebuild the WTC

    Not only rebuild, but make them the tallest damn buildings in the world. Design them for strength and security, and fly a huge flag on top.....

  13. #13

    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    11

    Rebuild the WTC?

    Does anyone remember the building in New York where the Weathermen blew themselves up? They reconstructed a townhouse there, but with a rotated section to represent the violence that occured there. A new building on the WTC site should acknowledge the tragedy but reaffirm our resilience.

  14. #14

    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    18
    I agree with a lot of you, rebuild, and I don't think it is crass to say that the real estate is valuable. Remember it is owned by the Port Authority, so what do think they will do? I just doubt it would be feasible to make a large portion of it a memorial, and besides that, it may not be a good use, as far as urbanism goes. I think a memorial is in order, but so are some pretty heavy duty 'scrapers, too. Make a tower, dedicated to the event and those who bravely lost their lives there, and dedicate some space to the memorial. In fact, a lot of space could likely be saved, if, rather than two huge towers and 5 smaller buildings were there, it was like 5 50 story buildings, no? I am seeing a sort of urban space, created by framing it with some sturdy 50 story buildings, and a very important, necessary, and prudent memorial in the middle court area. I think an excellent memorial to fallen New Yorkers would be a very urban setting, with all of the strengths and amenities that New Yorkers are identified by, at least Manhattanites.

  15. #15

    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    3
    I think they should and will rebuild but I would like to see them site the new development so that a memorial could be built that would allow a sundial or lens to focus a beam of sunlight at 8:45AM on any September 11th. Like Stonehenge, a time specific monument could be a very powerful reminder of what makes that space (and life itself) so precious. Some park to accomodate the thousands of visitors that will likely be drawn to the site should be part of the plans from the beginning. This might be a way to make the area more attractive to other users besides office workers.

  16. #16

    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    18
    I think accomodating the tourists right off the bat is a great idea, the sundial, well, I think it is hip. I would like to see the face of some big money dude who wants to build the building when planning comm says: "Yes, this is nice, but we would like you to incorporate a sundial." Love to be a fly on the wall.

  17. #17
    Corn Burning Fool giff57's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 1998
    Location
    On the Mother River
    Posts
    4,574

    Rebuild the WTC?

    Originally posted by A Stewart
    I think they should and will rebuild but I would like to see them site the new development so that a memorial could be built that would allow a sundial or lens to focus a beam of sunlight at 8:45AM on any September 11th.
    Very Cool idea

  18. #18
    Cyburbian Plannibelle's avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    los angeles
    Posts
    44
    Iowa
    Posts: 28
    Rebuild the WTC?

    quote:
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by A Stewart
    I think they should and will rebuild but I would like to see them site the new development so that a memorial could be built that would allow a sundial or lens to focus a beam of sunlight at 8:45AM on any September 11th.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    Yes an excellent idea!

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Should we rebuild in flood zones???
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 21
    Last post: 04 Dec 2012, 5:12 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last post: 22 Sep 2005, 3:56 PM
  3. Replies: 10
    Last post: 06 Sep 2005, 5:15 PM
  4. Competing WTC rebuild plan
    Design, Space, and Place
    Replies: 3
    Last post: 11 Mar 2004, 4:12 PM
  5. Who (doesn't) Get to Rebuild Iraq
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 24
    Last post: 15 Dec 2003, 4:20 PM