10.03.2007

The Future of Ground Zero



This is the future view from Midtown Manhattan towards the World Trade Center site. The Architects Newspaper has a story on the three recently released designs for WTC 2,3, and 4. The developer, Silverstein Properties, now prefers the names 200, 175, and 150 Greenwich Street, projects designed, respectively, by Foster & Partners, Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners, and Maki and Associates. AN has renderings of all three projects.

200 Greenwich Street by Foster & Partners

175 Greenwich Street by Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners (aka Richard Rogers)

150 Greenwich Street by Maki and Associates

What do you think? I'm a little disappointed. But at least things seem to finally be moving forward.

2 comments:

nar said...

I actually have to say I've never been frustrated with the speed or process at the WTC site. I know, I'm in the minority there. But given that it's NYC, the sheer size of the site, the various players that are involved by necessity and the emotionally and politically charged nature of the site...frankly, I'm impressed to see development of the site already at this place, and with some new construction underway.

As for the designs...not personally my taste. But if you can't get social consensus on the design of a new building in downtown Tampa, we'd be fools to think you ever could at the WTC site. There will always be a lot of people dissatisfied aesthetically, so you almost have to evaluate the proposals on a programmatic and functional level more than design.

For example, due to what happened in 2001, the WTC is revered and almost treated as holy land. But in my personal taste, the original WTC were ugly buildings, so any of these designs are an aesthetic improvement (although I realize it's hard to remove the emotions from the equation.)

Christopher Vela said...

I have to agree about the design, I am really not too thrilled about the new WTC complex. I didn't like Liebeskind’s orignal creation either. Since United Architects lost, I really didn't want to put too much hope in the 'architecture' but rather for on-track rebuild for the sake of making positive stance.

Architecturally, these look like high tech office buildings. Though I am sure there was thought put into it, there is no story in the design at least looking at it. But without the buildings, I just think being onsite would be highly emotional and moving.