Message - ArchitectureWeek - News - Anniversary of Disaster - 2002.0911

    Responses | Architecture Forum | Architecture Students | Architecture Scrapbook | ArchitectureWeek    

Posted by  Alex Berg on September 14, 2002 at 06:19:57:


My firm, a real estate and equities investment trust interested in
furthering progressive design, has a proposal for the rebuilding of
the World Trade Center. Yet, apart from speaking with developers,
and only strictly as investors, we cannot seem to get our
proposal considered amid the rush of proposals which seem to run
the gamut from the ugly and banal, such as those proposed by the
Lower Manhattan Development Corporation, to the odd and avant
garde and impractical, such as those by some of the New York Time's
pet proposals by celebrity architects.

Our proposal is for a footprint of three large triangle structures,
each opposing each other, on the Church Street side of the WTC site,
rising twenty floors, each floor stepped back ten feet,
allowing for openable windows and fresh air for this set of floors,
also forming the base of an opposed triangle which joins the midpoints of the three
triangle base. This triangle which rests atop the base rises
another twenty floors, and is augmented at the 25th floor by a
square which is smaller diagonally than the triangle it rests on,
and 1/2 of which is cantilevered over the space below. This
square, though integrated with 15 of the 20 floors of the
triangle, rises another 20 floors. At the very top of this square
is a mast/aerial which rises to 800 feet.

Our plan provides for set asides/water features/memorials at each
of the former WTC footprints, incorporates the sphere which
survived the blast, includes the permanent installation of the
"Phantom Towers" lighting exhibit, and provides space for an
amphitheater which takes in the views of both the new building and
the memorials -- this could potentially be most dramatic if executed

There is also space remaining for a hotel and other ancillary
functions at the northwest end of the site.

In considering all of these elements, I believe we have answered
at least in part the needs of the various constituencies interested
in building a unique, beautiful, useful, and moving remembrance
to those who perished in the 9/11 event.

I would like to get our proposal heard by an entity like your
magazine because based on what I've seen, it seems the most
innovative, yet practical, amalgam of all of the varied voices
and needs for the site.

Even those proposals I've seen from New York, New Visions, or those
from the New YOrk Times pet projects, seem odd and too 'architectonic'
for the average user. Our proposal attempts to make something
of beauty out of all of the various constituent voices, and I wish
to share it with the world, though I realize it may never be

I have a power point presentation that I could email to you which
contains a site plan, and four elevations, in color, which depict
our proposal. If you are interested, please feel free to contact me
via reply to this email, or by calling me at 916 736 9115.


Alex Berg
DeSilva Family Trust
1400 Sherwood Drive
Sacramento, California 95822

ArchitectureWeek     Search     Buildings     Architects     Types     Places     Pix     Free 3D Models     Store     Library

Search by name of Building, Architect, or Place:   
Examples:  "Fallingwater",  "Wright",  "Paris"           Advanced Search


Post a Response -



This is an archive page. Please post continuing discussion to the new Architecture Forums.

To post successfully to the new membership-based DesignCommunity Forums:

    1) Go to the new forums area.
    2) Register with a valid email address.
    3) Receive and respond to the confirmation email.
    4) Then login to the new forum system.


Special thanks to our Sustaining Subscribers including .

Home | Great Buildings | CAD Outpost | DesignWorkshop | Free 3D | Gallery | Search | ArchitectureWeek
This document is provided for on-line viewing only. /discussion/21672.html