Readers comment on my designs for rebuilding the WTC
 
 
Readers’ Comments
on Proposals for Rebuilding World Trade Center
 
*******
ON MY ORIGINAL PROPOSAL
 
From Holly—  11/21/01

I thought more about bringing back the original Fritz Koenig and how important it is to me. A concern of mine was how to present the damaged original in a way that won’t horrify people who come to view it. Have angels emerge from the ripped opening souring up to heaven. The Angels could represent those lost from the disaster of 9/11 and 1993. Presenting the Fritz Koenig on a higher fountain than originally created, but maintaining the same style so that you could engrave the names of all those lost and have the water softly cascade over the names. The height of the fountain would bring the globe and the Angels closer to heaven adding to the effect.

Something that has tormented me about buildings is they aren’t designed to aide the evacuation of handicapped or quadriplegics. These people are at the mercy of others evacuating in a panic and not thinking clearly. I encourage you to be a pioneer and design some sort of harness or basket that could carry these people down an escape route without using electricity, but rather gravity. I am warming up to the interconnected three building theme. It is clever. (I am working on my issues with natural light being blocked and a fear of being enclosed and debris falling on top of myself and others. I will never forget the horror of seeing the building collapse as I was running knowing that I couldn’t outrun the cloud and debris.)

While I am not an architect nor have I been educating myself on other new WTC designs, I love yours. I feel your design is well thought out (independent breakaway escape structure and reference to Flatiron bldg.... one of my absolute favorites, strong and handsome). I sincerely hope you get the opportunity to bring your dream to life.

Happy Thanksgiving!!!

——————————

My reply—  11/22/01

Thank you Holly for the wonderful compliment on my design. It alone made the whole effort feel worthwhile.

Your fountain memorial idea is inspired— water cascading over names, something like the Civil Rights Memorial in Montgomery, only much larger. The ripped globe raised up would be stunning. An option would be to have doves rising from it along with or instead of the angels, introducing a peace motif.

I was slow in getting out of bed this Thanksgiving morning. As I laid there I found myself thinking not of the turkey to come but of your challenge regarding a handicapped escape plan. I too had heard about the employees in wheelchairs who were trapped.

A possibility might be a continuous track or rail located under the inside handrail in a stairwell (if under the outside handrail it would obstruct doors). Riding on this track would be a bracket device that could hook or clamp onto the side of a wheelchair. The track would stay level for a few inches above where the stairs started down so that the chair could clear the risers.

There would still have to be a hand or battery-powered slowing or braking mechanism so the rider could descend with the flow of pedestrian traffic. Also it would go down only. But it might be doable. The person would end up still in his own chair with which to exit and clear the area. A version of such a system might even be designed so as to be able to be retrofitted into other buildings.

While I’ve designed a few simple things I’m not mechanically-inclined enough to work out all the details. But someone could run with it. As many things as have been patented over the years, there may already be a version of this idea fully or partially developed.

——————————

From Charlie Samuels (NYC)—  1/9/02

Great design! I was wondering who would come up with a feasible design that mimics the grandiosity of the original towers and I’ve always thought that passageways should have been between the originals.

Don’t forget about emphasizing the lucrative tourist business by repeating the Windows on the World restaurant(s) and Observation Deck(s) which will undoubtedly be much more popular than the originals if your design gets implemented. I think those may be the most attractive advantage of building such tall buildings again. I wish there was a way to build ONLY those in a way that would make them impervious to most attacks.

I hope you submit this as the date is coming up fast.

——————————

From Marlene Sweet (Seattle, Washington area)—  7/25/02

For some time now, I have been thinking about what would be appropriate to replace the WTC. I felt three buildings, situated in a triangle, around a central reflecting pool and memorial to victims would be the best solution. Then when I decided to do some research on this, I came across your wonderful design. It is just what I was trying to put together in my mind!!

Triangles and pyramids have represented power and strength to many societies for thousands of years. Water has always been uplifting and renewing to the spirit.

I live near Seattle, WA, and there is a building that has a terraced-effect, causing a pyramid-like look going upward. This type of effect could also be incorporated into triangular buildings.

Please feel free to use my comments or contact me. Bless you for your efforts. My son was in Boston on business the day before the attacks, and frequently took the very flight out to L.A. that crashed into the tower. He was deeply affected by being so close to the horror of it all.
 
 

*******
ON MY MODIFIED PROPOSAL
 
From Rick Weisenberger (Paducah, Kentucky)—  7/30/02

I like your proposal a lot better than the ones that are circulating now. You are the only one suggesting building it bigger and better than before. I especially like the idea of a 119 story structure (911 backwards).

It would make a powerful statement against terrorism that we can come back even stronger than before and would be a fitting memorial. Everyone else is talking about building it smaller than the original. The tallest of any of the current proposals is only 85 stories.

To me, this says the terrorists took away a part of us that we can never get back. In a way they did in all those who were killed, but we don’t need a constant reminder in the form of a building which will never fill the missing hole in New York’s skyline that was so savagely taken away from us in the 9-11 attacks.

Have you sent your proposal to any NYC officials? If not, please consider it.

——————————

Addendum (From Rick Weisenberger)—  8/1/02

...You also have my permission to include the following:

I propose that all high rise buildings be equipped with not only the standard water sprinklers, but also high capacity foam sprinkler systems, which would activate automatically on affected floors when the air temperature exceeded a certain high value, such as the boiling point of water.

A large foam tank and high capacity pumps would be located on all of the utility floors of such structures, which presently house water tanks, HVAC equipment and the like. If a plane hit, all of the tanks and pumps on the utility floor above the fire would be activated and smother the burning floor(s) with foam. Backup power systems would be provided on each of the utility floors in case power to the floor was interrupted, so that the pumps would come on.

I have seen just how fast foam can extinguish a raging jet fuel fire from fire drills held at the Greater Cincinnati International Airport. A large jet fuel fire is snuffed out in a mere matter of seconds! This was just in open air. Imagine how much more efficiently the foam would work if confined within the walls of a burning structure. All the oxygen to the fire would be cut off.

I’d much rather take my chances of walking out through the bubbles before burning up in a fire any day! In a study done on the WTC disaster, it was the heat of the sustained jet fuel fire which brought the towers down— not the impact of the crash.

If the towers would have stood, there would have been only a small fraction of the damage done to the other surrounding buildings. People trapped above the fire floor could have made it to the roof for pickup by rescue helicopters (or down another tower via one of your connecting bridges if they survived the initial impact). Instead no one made it to the roof and rescue by helicopter was made impossible due to the intense up drafts of heat and smoke.

Since the towers eventually collapsed, nearly 3000 people were killed before the buildings could be evacuated. If the fire had been snuffed out quickly and the towers had stood, there would have been far less loss of life and injury. Few if any of the 300 or so NY fire fighters would have died due to their heroic rescue efforts.

Imagine that the WTC damage was limited to the few floors on which the initial impacts occurred. With the use of a high capacity foam sprinkler system, this could have well been the case. I propose that such systems should be included as standard equipment in all high rise structures, to prevent future disasters of this type and magnitude.

——————————

From Scott Elders (Cleveland, Ohio)—  8/23/02

I was just checking out your proposed plan for rebuilding the WTC. Hands down it is the ballsiest proposal I’ve seen. Particularly I like the fact that these towers are taller than the originals and that there’s one more. I don’t know if your proposal has a snowball’s chance in hell of making it, but it’s easily my personal favorite.

——————————

From Charlie Buscemi (New Orleans and Hawaii)—  9/5/02

I just saw your website. I am e-mailing it to all of my friends. I think it is time for us to stop cowering and rebuild the towers grander than before.

Have you had much interest in your idea? How have the "professionals who know better" responded?

——————————

From Janet Metzger (Paducah, Kentucky)—  9/10/02

How incredibly awesome your work on the WTC proposal is... surely none submitted could surpass the dynamic structural beauty and inspiring presence of your creation.

Congratulations Warren, I am truly moved by its excellence.

——————————

From Olivier Garcia (Peypin, France)—  9/29/02

Very good for the triangle shape plus the skybridge at the topside [instead of a mid-floor skybridge like the Petronas].

At first I thought the concept of building three towers didn’t look good but the idea of the sphere at the topside is quite interesting [maybe a replica of the sphere made by this German sculptor which used to stand at the feet of the WTC].

Why not build a huge covered winter garden at the topside of the three towers [referring to Babylon’s hung gardens]? Have you ever thought of a scenic elevator?

I don’t know if your proposal will rise one day. Wish you good luck.

——————————

From L. A. Bernstein (native New Yorker)—  10/7/02

I visited your plan at <“http://www.warrenfarr.com/rebuild”>. While I do like the look of the triangular towers, I am inclined to believe that the need for office space is a greater priority economically. Another difference between our proposals is that I acknowledge your preservation of the footprints. Although I understand the significance, I do not believe that it is financially possible.....in view of the lease on the land with the Port Authority of NY & NJ, the funds and taxes collected on office space are still a great necessity.

I do like the concept of interconnecting skybridges. However, I believe there are building codes instituted since the early 1970’s that prohibit their use.

The events of 9-11 are bringing about a great deal of change in architectural standards and guidelines for skyscrapers in NYC. The impact appears to have literally blown off the fire-proofing which was sprayed onto the steel beams and girders, causing the steel to loose it’s integrity. The stairwells were not constructed wide enough for people to leave as firemen ascended...Once the inner core (and elevator banks) were compromised, the outer frame began to buckle. NOVA has made an excellent program, entitled "Why the Towers Fell" which I am sure they will re-broadcast on PBS. Try to see it when they show it again!

——————————

My reply—  10/7/02

Thanx for the prompt response... Your comments are thoughtful and appreciated...

If the public insists on leaving the footprints there should still be more than enough room for the three square towers in the spaces left by the smaller buildings, which— more so even than mine— the extra tower with its many floors should eliminate the need for.

I too [reference his proposal— see below for link] believe any memorial needs to be more than just a name for each victim.

I didn’t know about building codes against skybridges, since I see them in other cities on other buildings. Maybe NYC should think about changing that one.

I saw the NOVA program, it was every bit as good as you said it was.

——————————

From Christopher (Pacifica, California)—  11/12/02

I think your WTC proposal is wonderful! I had been thinking of the idea of three towers myself, as I’m sure a lot of other people had. (Kind of an attitude of, "If they knock down two, we’ll put up three" attitude to show our courage.) But I’d never seen another proposal that’s as sensible, bold, and elegant as yours. Truly great.

What response have you had from the so-called "powers that be"? From your website I can tell that the general public loves your idea, but I’m wondering if you’ve gotten any serious response from Silverstein, Bloomberg, LMDC, etc. I’m sure they get so many proposals they don’t bother to respond to each one— but yours seems obviously more sophisticated, visionary, etc. than most others they get.

I’d be really interested to hear if you’ve gotten any response from anyone involved in the decision-making process on this.

BTW, are you as puzzled and disappointed as I am by people’s assumption that "nobody would want to work in the highest floors of a new WTC"? People use this as an excuse to lower our ambitions. But surveys show that only about 50% of the people would have such reluctance— while the other 50% would be especially eager to work in the top floors of such a great new monument. I think there would be no problem at all filling the new WTC with tenants.

Also, I’m curious if you’d heard anything about making the top 30 stories (approximately) of the new WTC—say, stories 80 through 110—into a hotel. Even if employees were reluctant to go to their office on the 105th floor every day, certainly tourists and businesspeople would be willing to "chance it" by staying that high just for a few days. Even if they figure that the WTC is a target, I’m sure they’d figure that the odds are astronomical that the building would collapse during their three-day stay!

Anyway, thanks for a great proposal. I have really enjoyed looking at it.

——————————

My reply—  11/23/02

Really enjoyed your letter, and thanx for the great comments!...

I’ve submitted my design proposal wherever I could. Perhaps the best response I got was from the architectural firm that did the six original proposals. They answered and told me they were forwarding my link to the Chief Engineer of the Port Authority of New York, the present owner of the site. But I haven’t heard personally from him yet. I did submit to LMDC but just got their form letter back concerning a future memorial design competition.

I am hoping that with the skywalk escape options an even greater percentage of people would not mind braving the heights...

——————————

My letter to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg—  11/24/02

Dear Mayor Bloomberg:

Besides a suitable memorial and possibly a museum, I would like to see the world’s tallest building(s) on the WTC site, not only to make the residents of your fine city proud, but as an additional draw to visitors like me. I have devoted a web page to such a proposal, emphasizing design and safety features, located at http://www.warrenfarr.com/rebuild. Thank you.

Regards,
Warren Farr
www.warrenfarr.com

——————————

From Stuart Pringle (Dyer, Nevada)—  1/4/03

Dear Mr. Farr,

Please see enclosed letter. Is there anything your organization can do to help make LMDC honor its orginal intent about the memorial on the World Trade Center Site? The same letter was forwarded to the L.A. Times and CNN.

Jan. 2nd 2003 The Editor. 60 Minutes 524 West 57th Str. New York NY 10019

RE: WORLD TRADE CENTER MEMORIAL

Dear Sir,

We believe that the general pubic is being needlessly deprived of a priceless opportunity to display the creative architectural potential of the American people. After the tragedy of 9/11 almost two thousand architectural drawings, ideas and concepts were submitted to the LMDC for consideration. Hundreds of these designs, most of them amazingly imaginative were graphically displayed on the internet.

The LMDC initially ignored this public response and displayed six new models for the WTC site, designed by their own architects. There was an immediate outcry against the unimaginative designs. These ideas were subsequently withdrawn.

All of us who originally submitted our ideas, were then asked to sign a legal waver, allowing the LMDC to use them at their discretion, without obligation to the designers. Those who signed it, did so in good faith – not expecting financial remuneration, simply thankful that we might be contributing to the common wealth of the nation. (Copy of waver is enclosed)

Subsequently we were informed that an open competition would be held and a panel of fair-minded experts would be selected to judge which one was the best it. The enclosed form letter, regarding this competition was sent to us by the LMDC.

During the months since, there has been several nationally televised news programs announcing that designs sent in by seven large architectural firms would be the only ones under consideration. The response from the LMDC to a phone call from us regarding clarification of the "open" competition was ambiguous. It seems that our ideas are now limited to a "memorial" only – how and where that will fit in with the larger plan will be revealed later.

At the very least this matter conducted by the LMDC has been misleading. More importantly, it arbitrarily dismisses the idea that architectural genius might well reside outside the traditional field. This is unkind. Mankind and his buildings have been engaged in a love affair since the first straw shelter was fashioned. Michael Angelo never attended architectural schools and gave the world wonder of St. Peter’s basilica.

The tragedy of 9/11 was not simply a New York thing. It was international in scope. People from all over the world died there. As the financial center of the nation, every State in our union has invested heavily in Wall Street. The decision about what memorial should be built there impacts us all. With a Middle East war now in the offing, the WTC site is now far more spiritual than it is commercial. The final monument, should not be some little statue lost in a corner – but the whole site. It should reflect to the world at large the cultural response of our national psyche to such a mind-altering tragedy. Just another tall building, no matter how fancy, will not make that magic.

In closing, we believe that the competition for the best design for the site should remain as we have been led to believe it would be. The LMDC should not be allowed to play around with this. The seven professional firms interested are at liberty to enter the competition themselves and have their ideas judged by a public panel along with the rest of us.

We hope you will give this argument national exposure.

Sincerely

Stuart Pringle

——————————

From Douglas A. Pierce (Santee, California)—  1/11/03

I like it!

——————————

From Perry Pezzolanella (Utica, New York)—  1/25/03

Warren, Until I came across your proposal I liked the Fosters & Partners design best. As a tourist, the World Trade Center was the place I always looked forward to visiting during my only 4 visits ever to NYC. I can never forget getting lost in the underground mall or the views from the 107th floor. Your design rekindled the hope that all of these memories can be relived again and at the same time show respect to those that died there.

I think the reason why proposal after proposal is getting rejected is because most people want the original style of the Twin Towers with the strong vertical lines and latticework. That is what captured my attention on your proposal. At the same time people do not want the exact WTC rebuilt as it was (although I did, but out of respect I accept we cannot rebuild on the footprints). Your design is an excellent compromise for what we all want to see and I could only wish yours was in the December proposals. If by fate yours was choosen, you got my vote. Your concept would draw me back to NYC for a 5th time. But at least Foster's Towers has an appeal and their's does not "look like Albany" as some had said about the July proposals. —Perry

——————————

From Javiel Resto (Hartford, Connecticut)—  3/5/03

Warren, this is the best proposal offered as of now. Its design makes it very unique and impressive. I strongly agree with you; build them bigger and stronger. This is the heart of New York City and if anything, I think of it as the new heart for New York.

Great design!

——————————

From Rick Weisenberger (Paducah, Kentucky)—  12/7/03

Last night while we were both admiring the work you put into it, Stephen printed out the pages of your WTC tower proposal. About 2:30 AM last night I had a revelation; the same kind I got when I came up with my whistle and speaker designs.

I have never been wrong when I get these revelations and everything has always been found to work exactly the way I saw things at the time. Whenever I have failed to sketch them at the time all has been lost, as I can never recall them in the morning.

I feel that this attached cross sectional plan would strengthen your towers several times over and greatly help to eliminate the problem which may have caused the catastrophic collapse of the original twin towers.

The floors of the original towers were only supported by its outer steel skeleton and its inner core. When the affected floors buckled, due to the extreme heat, it tore the supports loose from the outer skeleton, allowing all the weight of the floors above them to come crashing down like a hammer. If only there had been more lateral support, reports say this may not have ever happened.

My concept of a triangle within a triangle, with the core at the center would result in a high rise structure of exceptional strength. Please feel free to incorporate this cross sectional drawing into your proposal, as I feel it may sway those who judge it in favor of your design. This, combined with my other proposal of a high capacity foam dispensing sprinkling system, with pumps and reservoirs and backup power located at all utility floors may prevent further collapses of any high rise structure so equipped. The triangle within a triangle concept would apply only to a structure of triangular cross section, such as the three towers of your WTC proposal.

The Sears Tower uses a cross section of nine square bundled tubes, which top off at predetermined heights to just two of the bundled tubes at the top. This, in my opinion is already a stronger design that the single square tube used by the original WTC.

An equilateral triangular cross section in itself would have superior resistance to wind loading, while the internal cross section that I propose may make it the strongest of all possible high rise designs. I would like to see your design win. Good luck!

Rick's Core Plan Suggestion

——————————

From Bruno Volpacchio (Sleepy Hollow, New York)—  5/13/05

Loved what I just saw an excellent idea and it should really be pushed... 119 stories... is perfect. NY needs to have the tallest again... for our psyche. What could be done to really have this come about... enough is enough... this is what we need!!!

——————————

From TJ (Brick Township, NJ)—  7/22/06

Its a really amazing proposal i think it should be a little bit shorter though.

——————————

From Marcus Wright (Birmingham, Alabama)—  8/16/06

I really like your proposal and I hope they decide to use this one. I love the way you positioned the towers to show America's strength, also being able to see the outline of the North tower traced by the new one. The memorial sounds so peaceful and filled with serenity. My first impression of rebuilding would be that we would come back taller and stronger— 119 is a great way to show that strength.

——————————

From Joe Buckel (York, Pennsylvania)—  12/28/06

Hi! My name is Joe. I saw a video about 9/11 and did some research about it on Google to see what they were planning to rebuild. I saw your idea and the rest was history! I think we should rebuild something like that. I wasn’t a big fan of the living spaces. The office spaces would be stretching it. People lost their lives here due to horrible acts of terrorists. We should remember what happened there, and make a memorial dedicated to them, not build over them. The three buildings would be great. What ever they do, just don’t rebuild over the original site of the towers. Take the Oklahoma bombing site for example. They made a huge memorial for that site. I visited that memorial over the summer, and I was very pleased. One or two of the floors should be dedicated to the towers, how they were built, what happened on 9/11, and a dedication to the emergency workers and everyone else. Thank you for reading my e-mail and listening to my two cents. Have a great new year!
 
 

*******
WTC Rebuild Links
 
A Year at Ground Zero ~ PBS.org
 
Listening to the City
 
Millennial Renaissance Imagery Logo ~ www.mri2000.com - 28258 Bytes
 
Imagine New York
 
Lower Manhattan Development Corporation
 
WTC Restoration Movement  
New York City Skyline (Message Board)  
 
Memorial Links
 
Official Competition Site  
Competitor Forum  
Wikipedia Memorial Proposals

Warren Farr Homepage          Back to Memorial Competition Entry          On to Writing

guestbook - contact
© 2006 Warren Farr, revised 12/30