Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 15:51:00 -0500 (EST) From: Louis Epstein Subject: WTC Rebuilding #272:Slam the Trash NOW!!! By now you've probably seen the atrocity of a "final" design for the "Freedom Tower". Everything we seemed to have gained recently has been taken away even as Pataki blathers shamelessly about this symbol of surrender showing triumphant resilience. The observation deck is now to be on the 67th or 73rd floor, depending on which article you believe...the office space limited to 70 or even only 60 floors.The roof is HUNDREDS of feet shorter than the Twin Towers...there are already higher-roofed buildings in Asia,never mind the ones under construction that will have roofs even above the ornamental cagework. Tallest self-supported antenna,it may be,but tallest building is false advertising...we must demand OCCUPIED SPACE at least as tall as what was there before. The public officials and the developers think it is fine to deny us all possibility of reclaiming what the killers took away,in terms of ability to return to the skies. WE MUST EXPRESS ANGER AND REFUSAL TO ACCEPT THIS!! The old Post board is still there: http://www.webforums.com/forums/f-read/msa154.69.html but we can't expect what's written there to influence people. A NEW NY Post board just about this has opened: http://www.webforums.com/forums/f-read/msa154.62.html CHIME IN AND BE LOUDLY PRO-TALLER-TOWERS! This will likely be quoted in an article there tomorrow. We should express anger to the officials who defend this travesty. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/3334671.stm is one venue where you can submit words to website editors. letters@nytimes.com is where you should send protests to the pro-garbage editorial below(the "Garbage" comment is from Cecil Shepherd,who forwarded this to me). As always,they want letters under 150 words and demand a postal address and phone number from all writers. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 08:31:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: NYTimes.com Article: Rising Above Ground Zero Garbage... \----------------------------------------------------------/ Rising Above Ground Zero December 20, 2003 The twin towers at the World Trade Center and the skyline they anchored feel like memories from a very distant era. Now, here we are with a new tower looming in the future, the one presented yesterday morning by Gov. George Pataki, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the architects Daniel Libeskind and David Childs. This new tower, which will rise, pivoting gracefully, from the northwest corner of the World Trade Center site, is much, much better than we had any right to expect, given the widely reported differences between Mr. Childs, who is responsible for the tower's design, and Mr. Libeskind, who is responsible for the master plan. Both Mr. Childs and Mr. Libeskind are supremely articulate in explaining the purposes of this tower, but it will eventually begin to speak for itself in ways that are hard for us to imagine at the beginning of the process. The building will mark the place on the skyline where the twin towers stood and fell. It will recast the light of Lower Manhattan and recreate, on its own terms, the old feeling that the World Trade Center was looking over your shoulder, no matter where you stood downtown. The builders say that at 1,776 feet, this new tower would be the tallest in the world. What matters isn't its height but its quality. Mr. Childs has rightly grasped the importance of making it not only a figurative icon, but a technological one as well. New York's many critics may well differ over his plan to incorporate electricity-generating windmills within the webbed structure above the occupied floors. But he is certainly right in striving to make this building a landmark of environmentally innovative technology. The notion of harnessing the inherent capabilities of the tower's site - within the wind stream along the Hudson River - makes a great deal of sense. Governor Pataki noted at the tower's formal unveiling that "everything we do at ground zero is a memorial, a tribute." He is right - the very position the building occupies, and what surrounds it, guarantees that it will never lack symbolic importance. Adding unnecessary symbolic freight would detract from the overall power of the design. In particular, Mr. Libeskind's insistence on building the tower exactly 1,776 feet - or 541.3 meters - high ought to be reconsidered. That requirement could complicate the construction process while adding little to the visual impact of the tower. While the two architects were the stars of the tower's unveiling, Governor Pataki also deserves a great deal of credit for making certain that the project did not dissolve into artistic squabbling along the way. If the governor needs to continue using his negotiating skills to get this tower built, it will be well worth the effort. The scale and the beauty of this building remind us of what we hoped could be accomplished in Lower Manhattan. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/20/opinion/20SAT2.html?ex=1072927086&ei=1&en=3eddc49a634c5142 Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company \----------------------------------------------------------/ ---------- End forwarded message ---------- The NY Post has regrettably knuckled under to endorsing this disastrous design... http://nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/44109.htm Express firm disagreement to letters@nypost.com. News stories on the compromise-eyesore: http://nypost.com/news/regionalnews/13931.htm http://nypost.com/news/regionalnews/44096.htm The predicted endorsement from build-quick-minded Cuozzo: http://nypost.com/news/regionalnews/44100.htm Family-group reaction: http://nypost.com/news/regionalnews/44142.htm All this right after letters mainly against the plans: http://nypost.com/postopinion/letters/13862.htm http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/nyc-freedom1219.story is Newsday's story....write (with address and phone number) to letters@newsday.com to vent disgust with this building's pretentious false height and the symbolic retreat it vainly tries to hide. Note Newsday's poll..."Would you work there"..."Yes" is winning, but the fact is I would work in a new WTC ONLY if it included a building where one could work at least as high as in the OLD towers.CNN very briefly had a poll asking if the new design was an "adequate replacement" for the Twins,which suspiciously maintained a 77% yes vote nonstop before disappearing...and a no vote,some worry,might be misconstrued as being anti-tall-Towers. Beware deceptive polls...find channels to EXPRESS your views, where people will read them and listen.And DON'T STOP! I bet "Do you think replacing the Twin Towers with buildings with roofs hundreds of feet shorter sends the right message" would not get a 77% yes vote! The Bank of America midtown tower is going ahead after a deal was reached to buy the contested property,which will not be condemned.So there goes hope of getting them to push for giant Towers. Keep your eyes on the prize in the skies. -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.