soon7x7
Topic Author
Posts: 2267
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 10:51 am

Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:29 am

Recently the mayor of New York was on a talk radio show motioning about the stalling and slow progress of the New world trade center at ground zero demonstrating a sort of disgust that here we are almost ten years later, and a hole in the ground still exists. My question is why didn't they just break out the original blueprints and rebuild exactly what was destroyed. Enourmous time and expense in development would have been save in addition the reconstruction of identical buildings in the original locations would have had a strong political message. I can't think of one reason why it would not work other than it just makes too much sense...g...any opinions?
 
flybaurlax
Posts: 589
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 12:34 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:51 am

I halfheartedly agree with you. It would be like when the Vietnamese would rebuild exactly the same thing after we bombed it time and again. I think it would be a powerful message to those who supported the people who brought it down. I know some people would view it as erasing that the event ever happened, but I believe it would be more of an honor than an insult.
Boilerup! Go Purdue!
 
BMI727
Posts: 11110
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:59 am

Is Ground Zero considered a burial site? If so, that would throw a wrench in the works for rebuilding on the same footprint.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:02 am

Well, for one, the investigation took forever, and recovery took longer. It wasn't a controlled demolition and the twin towers weren't the only ones affected. That said, I too believe it's still a huge hole in the ground for being almost 10 years later. Construction on the 950 foot Devon Tower in OKC started this past October and should be finished in 2013.

The building would have to be redesigned, at least from an internal structural standpoint to incorporate the latest technologies to reduce operating costs of the buildings and reduce the environmental impact on surrounding areas. No doubt building regulations have changed quite heavily since the twin towers were constructed, and ALSO, they can't stand up to a 767 sized aircraft hitting them, so that needs to be addressed to.

With all of that, why not just start from scratch, because that's what you are doing anyway if you build two buildings that look the same.

Plus, in a way, the new building is more "inspirational" and will memorialize the victims in a more inspirational way architecturally than the original buildings. At least I'm sure the above was and is the current thinking.

This was published on Jan 30, 2009.



UAL

[Edited 2010-04-28 22:05:44]

[Edited 2010-04-28 22:06:24]
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
Airport
Posts: 545
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:52 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:22 am

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
Recently the mayor of New York was on a talk radio show motioning about the stalling and slow progress of the New world trade center at ground zero demonstrating a sort of disgust that here we are almost ten years later, and a hole in the ground still exists. My question is why didn't they just break out the original blueprints and rebuild exactly what was destroyed. Enourmous time and expense in development would have been save in addition the reconstruction of identical buildings in the original locations would have had a strong political message. I can't think of one reason why it would not work other than it just makes too much sense...g...any opinions?

Honestly, I'd like to see that versus the new World Trade Center currently being built. It might just be sad nostalgia, but they really were a New York icon, and NYC is not the same city without them.

Though I think it would be really really eerie working in a carbon copy of a building that was destroyed in the manner of the 9/11 attacks.

Interestingly, in an architectural forum I go to, this topic has been discussed again and again and again. I think the conclusion they reached was that because of the way the WTC was designed, there'd be no feasible way to make it structurally as safe and durable as the new WTC currently being built, and the majority of New Yorkers preferred seeing a new tower put up in its place. That was the conclusion they reached, I don't know if its true or not.

Cheers!
Anthony/Airport

[Edited 2010-04-28 22:23:13]
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11806
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:29 am

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
I can't think of one reason why it would not work other than it just makes too much sense...g...any opinions?

It would certainly look better than whatever Freedom Tower design is currently on the table.

What happened to classic, square-or-rectangular-or-similar, functional skyscrapers?

Maybe I'm old-fashioned in this regard, but I don't like all the funky, weird new skyscraper designs. Not least because they don't fit in at all with the rest of most city's skylines.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:31 am

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 3):
Plus, in a way, the new building is more "inspirational"

  
BULL!

That looks like cheap, ordinary run of the mill crap that is going up in just about any other major city.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 3):
No doubt building regulations have changed quite heavily since the twin towers were constructed,

How is building multiple cheap glass buildings any better on the environment than building two twin towers?
Given the situation involving 9/11, I think recent regulations should be waived so the original design can be re-build.
Those terrorist will be the victors if they get to permanently alter the New York skyline.

Quoting Airport (Reply 4):
Honestly, I'd like to see that versus the new World Trade Center currently being built. It might just be sad nostalgia, but they really were a New York icon, and NYC is not the same city without them.

  
Bring back the Concorde
 
Springbok747
Posts: 4007
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:13 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:36 am

Rebuild the towers as they were! I don't understand why the most powerful nation on earth can't rebuild 2 buildings...its been almost 10 years! How long does it take? Make a memorial for all the people lost..and build the towers like they were. They were NY icons..it will be awesome to see them again.
אני תומך בישראל
 
MoltenRock
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:43 am

Because the twin towers were an eyesore, out of date, and not economically feasible to rebuild.

Saying the "terrorist didn't win" rings hollow when a hole in the ground is still there 10 years later.
 
soon7x7
Topic Author
Posts: 2267
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 10:51 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:07 am

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 3):

I'm no building engineer but I can assure you that no building will or can sustain the impact of a 550,000lb 767 moving at high altitude cruise speed loaded with Jet A. The fact is, the buildings absorbed the impacts pretty well considering the construction methods used to build them. The burning fuel was the kicker.

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 7):

It took New york three years to build from scratch the 59th street bridge. It fairly recently took them 10 years to repave it!...did I mention unions?..."Fugetaboutit!"

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 8):

An eyesore to who?...excepting the Bin Ladens of course...The terrorists did win...nothing has been the same since that day...One of the greates aspects of those buildings were when I would fly my friends around Manhattan, you would pass the towers closely at 500' or a bit higher and people on the roof tops were looking down at you in a plane waving...I miss seeing those "eyesores", I watched them go up and I watched them come down and it still angers me...Always will...g
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12394
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:24 am

Never going to happen. An obscene mix of the families of victims, politics, politicans, insurance disputes, disputes with property management (Silverstein), too many jurisdictions (US, NY State, NY City, PANYNJ, NY City Police), obsessive security issues, tacking on hyperexpensive structures and side projects (transit center for example), the problems with tearing down adjacent structures for the larger infrastructure, the complicated infrastructure, the need to keep some local streets open to public vehicle traffic and one of the most emotional events to ever happen in the USA have all been factors with the slow replacement of the WTC site.
 
soon7x7
Topic Author
Posts: 2267
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 10:51 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:30 am

Quoting Ltbewr (Reply 10):

Your probably correct...in this climate they couldn't fill them with tenants anyway. Perhaps a permanent Memorial Park instead?...we still need places for the homeless to park themselves...g
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:47 am

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 7):
Rebuild the towers as they were! I don't understand why the most powerful nation on earth can't rebuild 2 buildings...its been almost 10 years! How long does it take? Make a memorial for all the people lost..and build the towers like they were. They were NY icons..it will be awesome to see them again.

I agree, i think they looked brilliant. Commanding and dignified.
 
Newark777
Posts: 8284
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:23 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 2:01 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2):
Is Ground Zero considered a burial site? If so, that would throw a wrench in the works for rebuilding on the same footprint.

They are still finding human remains every once in a while, but the fact is that the WTC site is right in the middle of the downtown NY financial district, and life has to go on.

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 9):

It took New york three years to build from scratch the 59th street bridge. It fairly recently took them 10 years to repave it!...did I mention unions?..."Fugetaboutit!"

It's the same reason that Tavern on the Green is still shuttered: disputes with the restaurant union. And not only that, the entire negotiation with them is under a gag order. It's disgusting.
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 2:08 pm

Quoting Superfly (Reply 6):
BULL!

That looks like cheap, ordinary run of the mill crap that is going up in just about any other major city.

That, I pretty much agree with. I didn't say "I" thought it was more inspirational....but no doubt the entire grounds and buildings will be a memorial in some way. The problem is, the land is worth too much money to really put a true memorial there. At the time of the OKC bombing and shortly after, our downtown was dead. It was just office buildings mainly composed of law offices and government buildings. The land was obviously much cheaper than lower Manhattan. But, there are much prettier designs I would think than what is planned. Unless it shines so bright you can see it from space.

Quoting Superfly (Reply 6):
How is building multiple cheap glass buildings any better on the environment than building two twin towers?
Given the situation involving 9/11, I think recent regulations should be waived so the original design can be re-build.
Those terrorist will be the victors if they get to permanently alter the New York skyline.

Well, for one, the internal structure is going to be different, at least on the freedom tower. The lower 10 floors (maybe less) are not even going to be occupied, but will provide a solid barrier against any ground bomb attacks with reinforced "armor" if you will. The top 150 feet of the building, from what I understand, or did understand, is an atrium. I know that the structure will be beefed up in comparison to the old one.

Also, the old WTC design did not incorporate the latest technologies. Not that you can't build a similar looking building and do that, but in regards to wind, ground movement stability, electrical usage, gas usage, water usage, about everything a vertical city can impose environmentally will be changed in the new building. While I would like to think for "green" reasons, it really has more to do with economic reasons. So in essence, you are going to have to redesign the entire internal structure of the building, might as well redesign the easy part, the glass.

UAL
"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5565
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 2:31 pm

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 14):
Also, the old WTC design did not incorporate the latest technologies. Not that you can't build a similar looking building and do that, but in regards to wind, ground movement stability, electrical usage, gas usage, water usage, about everything a vertical city can impose environmentally will be changed in the new building. While I would like to think for "green" reasons, it really has more to do with economic reasons. So in essence, you are going to have to redesign the entire internal structure of the building, might as well redesign the easy part, the glass.

You are correct that the old plans could not be used.

But I really like from the psychological stand point - rebuild it externally exactly like they stood before. They might have been knocked down once - but that will not stop us as a nation and a people.
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13441
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 3:38 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 8):
the twin towers were an eyesore
HORSEFEATHERS!!!
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
exFATboy
Posts: 1887
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 11:15 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 3:41 pm

Quoting Airport (Reply 4):
Honestly, I'd like to see that versus the new World Trade Center currently being built. It might just be sad nostalgia, but they really were a New York icon, and NYC is not the same city without them.

Surprisingly, most New Yorkers were not that enamored with the Twin Towers prior to 9/11 - they were architecturally uninspired and too tall relative to the rest of downtown - the plaza at the centre of the WTC site could be uncomfortably cold even on a summer afternoon.

After the attack, most New Yorkers became understandably nostalgic for the Towers (me included) and wanted them back. Polls for years after consistently showed that New Yorkers wanted the Towers rebuilt to look as much like the originals as possible, with updated technology inside, possibly on the opposite side of the site to leave the original "footprints" as the memorial.

The biggest reason we're not getting that is the arrogance of the governor of New York at the time, George Pataki, the PANYNJ board, and the "Lower Manhattan Development Corporation", who decided that the people be damned, we're going to go ahead with what WE want...thus, the "Freedom Tower". PANYNJ is truly impressive in its ability to not listen to the public, and that combined with Pataki's ego (and the unwillinginess of the city-appointed half of the LMDC board to stand up to him and his cronies), and Pataki's desire to have the architect Daniel Libeskind involved (which ed to further delays due to Libeskind's incompetence leading to much of the tower having to be redesigned) gave us the piece of junk and the accompanying, smaller buildings that will eventually grace downtown, destroying property values by dumping unneeded office space into the market (much as the original Twin Towers did.)

Personally, I would have preferred the Twin Towers back, as a gesture of defiance, or failing that just turn the main site into a park, except for Seven World, which has already been rebuilt. Actually, I'd like to see the PANYNJ get out of the real estate business entirely - I've never quite been clear on how they got involved in the original WTC. Actually-actually, I'd like to see the PANYNJ broken up into separate agencies for its different functions - ports, airports, PATH, and tunnels.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5):
It would certainly look better than whatever Freedom Tower design is currently on the table.

It's not officially called the "Freedom Tower" any more, just One World Trade Center. Most New Yorkers cringed every time they heard the name "Freedom Tower" and the gimmicky 1776 feet tall crap. Now if we could get "Newark Liberty Airport" changed back to just "Newark"...

Quoting Springbok747 (Reply 7):
I don't understand why the most powerful nation on earth can't rebuild 2 buildings.

Well, it starts with the complexity of the site itself - in all fairness, it's a difficult piece of ground to work with, involving the "bathtub" that holds out the Hudson River, the PATH station and tunnels, subway tunnels on the east side, and just being generally a cramped space.

Add to that the problems of deconstructing 130 Liberty St.* - a combination of asbestos on site and a long, drawn out legal battle between its last owner and insurance companies over mold infestation and whether or not the building could be safely renovated, further complicated by legalities where if the city condemned the building it would face certain liabilities, kept this from even being started for years, and not knowing whether this building would exist or not kept parts of the new WTC design in flux, as the PANYNJ wanted to use part of the 130 Liberty footprint as part of the cargo entrance and associated security inspection area.

(* - also referred to as the "Deutsche Bank" or "Banker's Trust" building or plaza. Most DB employees - of which I was one at the time - referred to it as "BT Plaza" right up to 9/11, despite DB acquiring BT a couple of years earlier - the initial integration was completed in June 1999.)

Now add to those logistical factors some less rational elements - first off was the argument over what was to be rebuilt - the Twin Towers, the entire complex, something new, just a memorial and park? Politics, of course, permeated the discussion - Pataki came to want a monument to his ego, Giuliani never seemed to fully engage in the process, and the state/city hybrid of the LMDC and the interstate nature of the PANYNJ creating further confusion, as individual players pursued their own agendas.

Layer on top of that the special magic that you get when you mix government, contractors, and unions...the same thing you see every time you pass a pothole being filled and you see six or seven guys standing around scratching their butts watching one or two actually doing something, but magnified to a colossal scale. Admittedly its sometimes not the best of work environments, and I do feel sorry for them on a bitter winter day, but the speed with which Seven WTC was rebuilt shows what's possible when you have effective decision-making and take one of the three elements (in this case, government) out. (The fact that 7WTC is outside of the "bathtub" helped too, let's be honest.)

Particularly galling was the collusion between some government officials and contractors - the 130 Liberty deconstruction was hampered (and stopped completely for some time) because the contractor used a subcontractor with political connections called the John Galt Corporation (named after the Ayn Rand novel hero, apparently), whose incompetence led to a fire that killed two firefighters - they and others are under indictment for the deaths.

And finally, add in the behaviour and incessant (and in some cases irrational) demands of some of the victim's families and co-workers. (Not all, but a pretty good proportion.) First this caused delay in the basic concept of the memorial - leading the pack here was the firefighters, demanding that their "brothers" be honoured separately from the main memorial, even delaying decisions for weeks arguing over how they would be noted on the memorial - just by name, or by unit then by name, or...it went on and on.

Even more disturbing is the insistence on the part of some families that work must be completely stopped every time even the smallest remnant of human remains turn up. This has happened repeatedly during the 130 Liberty deconstruction - at one point deconstruction was halted for months because a few bone fragments smaller than a dime were found, and some of the families started their calls about "needing closure" and such again. I try to be sympathetic to them, I really, do...but frankly, if after eight and a half years you can't accept your loved one is dead, that's called "detachment from reality" and you need treatment.

And this is just a brief summary of what put us where we are - the first tower and transportation center are supposed to be completed by 2012, although I'll believe it when I see it. As far as I can ascertain, work on the memorial hasn't even started (and I don't think it can until most of the "bathtub" is filled in), but it's supposed to be completed by the tenth anniversary of the attack. Again, believe it when I see it. I can't find a timeline for buildings 2, 3, or 4, although Wikipedia mentions several sources suggesting that at least two of these three will be initially built just as "stubs", only 4 or 5 stories tall, and completed later. (That's not so far off the original WTC - buildings 4, 5, and 6 were not that large.) A fifth building, announced for the 130 Liberty site, can't be started until the existing building is deconstructed, and LMDC is saying that won't be completed until sometime in 2013...and JP Morgan Chase, the announced tenant, has since backed away from the project after inheriting a very new tower in Midtown on acquisition of Bear Sterns. (Ironically, they sold the previous JP Morgan HQ downtown just before 9/11...to Deutsche Bank.) This has already reopened the argument of more office space vs. residential space.

In hindsight, we should have just rebuilt the PATH station, built a memorial, and made the rest into a park...at least it'd be done now, and we could always build office towers later.

But we didn't, so a big hole remains in downtown New York, eight and a half years after the attack...and thus a small hole remains in the hearts of many New Yorkers. Even this cynical, jaded one...at the end of the first season of Fringe, when Olivia travels to the alternate timeline and the camera pulls back out the window to show she's in one of the Twin Towers, intact and where they're supposed to be in 2009, I got choked up a little, and I wasn't the only one.
 
Newark777
Posts: 8284
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:23 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:04 pm

Quoting exFATboy (Reply 17):

  

Damn, couldn't say it better myself. I know the sentiment among people I talk to about the subject is just to get something done at this point. It's so pathetic to have to go through that pit every time you take the PATH. And I agree, at the pace they are going now, I can't see anything being done by the 10th anniversary next year.
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
 
flybaurlax
Posts: 589
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 12:34 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 4:33 pm

Quoting flybaurLAX (Reply 1):
I halfheartedly agree with you.

Sorry I didn't realize I said that, I meant WHOLEHEARTEDLY.
Boilerup! Go Purdue!
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9963
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:02 pm

Quoting newark777 (Reply 13):
They are still finding human remains every once in a while, but the fact is that the WTC site is right in the middle of the downtown NY financial district, and life has to go on.

How can they still find human remains when all there is now is a hole in the ground?
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:05 pm

Quoting Superfly (Reply 6):
BULL!

That looks like cheap, ordinary run of the mill crap that is going up in just about any other major city.

Got to agree with Larry, it's bad.

I am for building the buildings exaclty as they were, with new age technology they would great and once that last bolt and last tile were done we could send a message to AQ that would resonate around the world. I hope someone steps up. I am respectful of those that gave their lives there but we need to build them back they way they were.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
MoltenRock
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:06 pm

Look it may be all warm and fuzzy for Americans to wrap themselves in a blanket of denial, but making empty gestures of something just to make one feel that way doesn't make it so. Claiming not letting the terrorists win at this point is silly. They did win. They fundamentally changed the way the US works and interacts with citizens everyday. A couple of new buildings put up to look like old ones are like the faux brownstones hiding manufacturing / office facilities in Brooklyn and other cities. A veneer, nothing more.

Just a few of the changes:

1.) AIrport security (still a joke) but more invasive than ever.
2.) The red tape needed for drivers licenses, when the terrorists were in the country legally.
3.) IDs still needed in many/most towers on business. (What does this do? Nothing but hassle.)
4.) $2.5 TRILLION has been committed for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus a generation of Americans being born and raised unaware that the US has not always been "at war". Thousands have died, and tens of thousands wounded in "fighting terrorists". Not to mention the 20+ years of war debt that have been dumped at their feet.
5.) High school and other bomb scare pranks are taken as federal offenses and not to be laughed off.
6.) It will take 15 to 20 years post-attack to have the WTC site fully rebuilt.
7.) "Patriot" Act
8.) The US becoming darn near hostile of outside tourists in immigration / customs. Fingerprinting, biometric passports, etc.
9.) Airport delays, regular closing of entire terminals because someone got thru security and rescanning everyone. Mass delays, chaos, lost productivity in the hundreds of billions of $$$. Airline travel now relegated to "only when I have to go, and even then it's displeasurable and to be avoided at all costs" mentality among business executives.

Need I go on?
 
Newark777
Posts: 8284
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:23 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:09 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 20):
How can they still find human remains when all there is now is a hole in the ground?

These days, most are found on or in adjacent buildings, landing there after getting blasted out of the WTC in the plane impacts or during the collapse. As exFATboy mentioned, work at the Deutsche Bank building and others has been halted many times when these remains are found.

There is also still debate going on about the debris at Fresh Kills, as that surely still has some human remains as well.
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
 
September11
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:49 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 5:56 pm

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 21):
I am for building the buildings exaclty as they were, with new age technology they would great and once that last bolt and last tile were done we could send a message to AQ that would resonate around the world. I hope someone steps up. I am respectful of those that gave their lives there but we need to build them back they way they were.

I'm with you.
Airliners.net of the Future
 
northstardc4m
Posts: 2724
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 11:23 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:03 pm

Quoting soon7x7 (Thread starter):
My question is why didn't they just break out the original blueprints and rebuild exactly what was destroyed. Enourmous time and expense in development would have been save in addition the reconstruction of identical buildings in the original locations would have had a strong political message. I can't think of one reason why it would not work other than it just makes too much sense...g...any opinions?
Quoting exFATboy (Reply 17):
Surprisingly, most New Yorkers were not that enamored with the Twin Towers prior to 9/11 - they were architecturally uninspired and too tall relative to the rest of downtown - the plaza at the centre of the WTC site could be uncomfortably cold even on a summer afternoon.

Im showing this thread to someone i work with who worked in the twin towers in the late 90s...

As he puts it, they were gawd awful places to work. He had to take 3 elevators to get to his office, on the 54th floor. working late was impossible because the lights got shut off at 9pm unless they filed a written request up to a week prior! Air quality was horrible and the buildings would make weird creaking noises at times. the vent system would spray out foul smelling water vapor often and the heat would come on in july for no reason.

And as he puts it, the cafeteria served deep fried rat excrement... but i think thats a bit harsh myself.

So i don't think anyone would want to rebuild them exactly as they were... though i kind of agree that a similar looking building set would be nice... though maybe a little sentimental over practical.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:21 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
Claiming not letting the terrorists win at this point is silly. They did win. They fundamentally changed the way the US works and interacts with citizens everyday. A couple of new buildings put up to look like old ones are like the faux brownstones hiding manufacturing / office facilities in Brooklyn and other cities. A veneer, nothing more.

Oh yea asking someone to provide proof your a citizen is such a change? Your hate and jealousy for the US is obvious but these ridiculous statements just make you look bitter. You should stop

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
1.) AIrport security (still a joke) but more invasive than ever.

How many successful terror attacks have we had since 9/11?

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
The red tape needed for drivers licenses,

What red tape?

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
IDs still needed in many/most towers on business. (What does this do? Nothing but hassle.)

I was asked to show ID at a bank the other day, it took me literally 5 seconds to pull it out of m pocket, your digging yourself so deep bro

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
$2.5 TRILLION has been committed for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus a generation of Americans being born and raised unaware that the US has not always been "at war". Thousands have died, and tens of thousands wounded in "fighting terrorists". Not to mention the 20+ years of war debt that have been dumped at their feet

Your point?

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
High school and other bomb scare pranks are taken as federal offenses and not to be laughed off.

So I should laugh at someone that says there is a bomb in a school?

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
It will take 15 to 20 years post-attack to have the WTC site fully rebuilt

Bullshit, your just spurting out anything from your hatred of us, it took 5 years to build them the first time how is it going to take 15-20 a second time? LOL I can't wait to hear this.

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
"Patriot" Act

So?

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
The US becoming darn near hostile of outside tourists in immigration / customs. Fingerprinting, biometric passports, etc

Source? Your grasping at straws

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
Airport delays, regular closing of entire terminals because someone got thru security and rescanning everyone. Mass delays, chaos, lost productivity in the hundreds of billions of $$$. Airline travel now relegated to "only when I have to go, and even then it's displeasurable and to be avoided at all costs" mentality among business executives.
You have to evacuate a terminal when security is breached, as for lost productivity your making stuff up again. Not to mention your desciption of flying is not real accurate.

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
Need I go on?

No, you've embarrassed yourself enough.

[Edited 2010-04-29 11:23:50]
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
User avatar
c172akula
Posts: 821
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2001 1:53 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:05 pm

Thread on the construction progress of 'One World Trade Centre' here: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=123628
 
bhill
Posts: 1309
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:28 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:23 pm

I think it should be built to look like the middle finger flipping 'em off....
Carpe Pices
 
User avatar
falstaff
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:17 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:33 pm

I would love to see the same buildings there again. It would be like a big middle finger to Osama and his pals.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2):
If so, that would throw a wrench in the works for rebuilding on the same footprint.

Cemetaries get moved from time to time. Denver's City Hall is on an old Cemetary site. More recently many graves had to be reloacted when the Metrolink Light Rail line to STL was built, back in the 90s.

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 8):
Because the twin towers were an eyesore, out of date, and not economically feasible to rebuild.

There were about to be updated. GMAC lent the Port Authority a huge sum of money just before 9-11. GMAC had a hell of time getting their money back. No buildings=No loan. I remember reading about that in the Detroit Free Press back in 01-02.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 26):
it took 5 years to build them the first time how is it going to take 15-20 a second time? LOL I can't wait to hear this.

Yeah, it only took five years and that property wasn't vacant prior to that either. Not only did the WTC have to be built, but the land had to be cleared.
My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
 
BMI727
Posts: 11110
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:40 pm

Quoting newark777 (Reply 13):
and life has to go on.

I agree, but a lot of other people probably don't, which could throw a wrench in the works.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
User avatar
EA CO AS
Posts: 13441
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2001 8:54 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:41 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
Look it may be all warm and fuzzy for Americans to wrap themselves in a blanket of denial, but making empty gestures of something just to make one feel that way doesn't make it so. Claiming not letting the terrorists win at this point is silly. They did win. They fundamentally changed the way the US works and interacts with citizens everyday. A couple of new buildings put up to look like old ones are like the faux brownstones hiding manufacturing / office facilities in Brooklyn and other cities. A veneer, nothing more.

Just a few of the changes:

1.) AIrport security (still a joke) but more invasive than ever.
2.) The red tape needed for drivers licenses, when the terrorists were in the country legally.
3.) IDs still needed in many/most towers on business. (What does this do? Nothing but hassle.)
4.) $2.5 TRILLION has been committed for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus a generation of Americans being born and raised unaware that the US has not always been "at war". Thousands have died, and tens of thousands wounded in "fighting terrorists". Not to mention the 20+ years of war debt that have been dumped at their feet.
5.) High school and other bomb scare pranks are taken as federal offenses and not to be laughed off.
6.) It will take 15 to 20 years post-attack to have the WTC site fully rebuilt.
7.) "Patriot" Act
8.) The US becoming darn near hostile of outside tourists in immigration / customs. Fingerprinting, biometric passports, etc.
9.) Airport delays, regular closing of entire terminals because someone got thru security and rescanning everyone. Mass delays, chaos, lost productivity in the hundreds of billions of $$$. Airline travel now relegated to "only when I have to go, and even then it's displeasurable and to be avoided at all costs" mentality among business executives.

Need I go on?

I have to ask - and I swear I mean no disrespect in asking this - but do you ever have anything POSITIVE to say? Seems like every post I ever see from you, regardless of the topic, is negative.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan

Comments made here are my own and are not intended to represent the official position of Alaska Air Group
 
User avatar
falstaff
Posts: 5575
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:17 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:47 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
US becoming darn near hostile of outside tourists in immigration / customs

don't worry they give me a hard time too. I always get the third degree when driving back from Canada and I am natural born citizen and I'm white.
My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:00 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 2):
Is Ground Zero considered a burial site?

I recall reading something about that in the NYTimes a few years ago. This is what is stalling the new projects for the site. IMO, that hole will still be there in 20 years, untouched.

This is a very, very touchy subject with all involved. Nobody wants to touch this and risk lawsuits if the proposed building occurs, that is why it is taking so long.

I say leave the site alone, leave the hole there. Why ruffle the feathers even more than they need to be?
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11110
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:27 pm

Quoting falstaff (Reply 29):

Cemetaries get moved from time to time.

I think that the problem with Ground Zero would be that there is really no way to make sure that all of the remains are removed, which makes it a bit different than exhuming and moving coffins.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 33):
Why ruffle the feathers even more than they need to be?

Because that is valuable real estate and on 9/11 we lost a lot of office space. It would be wasteful to not put something useful (for commerce) on the site.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:34 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 34):
Because that is valuable real estate and on 9/11 we lost a lot of office space. It would be wasteful to not put something useful (for commerce) on the site.

I understand that but there are still people buried there.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
comorin
Posts: 3857
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 5:52 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:57 pm

I'd like to contradict a few canards by posters in here:

1. I worked at 1WTC and loved it. The elevators were the fastest in NYC and taking 2 elevators was not a problem.

2. The building creaked in 40 knot winds and it was exciting. Lots of very tall buildings do that.

3. There was the amazing Windows on the World restaurant - very elegant, with stunning views and hallowed wine cellar. I took the WOTW Wine Course by Kevin Zraly there. I had the best croissants, carpaccio at the food operation downstairs. Note that the pastry chef ended up in the White House.

4. It was a beautiful building, and I used to admire it every day living in Battery Park. I loved the use of stainless steel and marble - so elegant in its details. It had a amazing presence and simplicity inside.

5. The new designs are not ugly, but terribly banal. They could be anywhere.

6. Given the national significance of this site, there was a lack of leadership at the governmental level. The site should have been declared a National Historical Site, current owners booted through Eminent Domain, and build up the buildings with the 9/11 funds available. The mistake was to treat it like an ordinary commercial real estate site and let everyone wrangle over it. It's not human remains that are the cause of the current delay, btw.



7. They should have built a v2.0 of the original concept - 2 identical towers - why did they not get that?
 
Newark777
Posts: 8284
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:23 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:05 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 33):

The hole is certainly not untouched now, as you can see from this picture I lifted from Wikipedia. You can see the main tower going up and the two memorial pools taking shape. The PATH has also been operating through the center for years. It is highly impractical to leave this plot of land untouched, this is Manhattan, not some field somewhere.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/33/World_Trade_Center_site_2010.jpg

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 35):
I understand that but there are still people buried there.

You're never going to get all the body fragments, you just have to move on.
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
 
UAL747
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 1999 5:42 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:25 pm

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31):
I have to ask - and I swear I mean no disrespect in asking this - but do you ever have anything POSITIVE to say? Seems like every post I ever see from you, regardless of the topic, is negative.

Agree on the fact that this should not turn into a political thread.

We also have to remember that the entire WTC site is huge. Just look at the picture above and realize that that reflecting pools are approximately the size of the previous WTC, and you get an idea of how big the area is.

I think it just boils down to the fact that while it would be nice to have a memorial and/or rebuild the same buildings, economically, environmentally, idealogically, and financially, it makes no sense.

Underneath that hole, there is also infrastructure that had to be either rebuilt and repaired as well. The recover, investigation, and clean up obviously held up this project for some time, not to mention the massive paper work dealing with the financial aspect of it, and probably numerous lawsuits and court rulings.

The Murrah building was just demolished and turned into a park, but again, the land was cheap, and there was available land to develop a much more aesthetically pleasing building.

"Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy. Bangkok Tower, United 890 Heavy.....Okay, fine, we'll just turn 190 and Visual Our Way
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:45 pm

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 38):
economically, environmentally, idealogically, and financially, it makes no sense.

...and therein lies the problem.
We've become too cheap, and spineless and have allowed a bunch of whinny, irrelevant, counterproductive environmentalist to dictate what get's to be build. Re-building the World Trace Center makes perfect sense.




Quoting UAL747 (Reply 38):
The Murrah building was just demolished and turned into a park, but again, the land was cheap, and there was available land to develop a much more aesthetically pleasing building.

The Murrah building was never intended to be an iconic structure. The World Trade Center was briefly the world's tallest building until being topped by the Sears Tower in Chicago.
Bring back the Concorde
 
wn700driver
Posts: 1475
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 10:55 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:32 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 8):
Because the twin towers were an eyesore, out of date, and not economically feasible to rebuild.

Fortunately, you can't see them from Singapore. ..

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 8):
Saying the "terrorist didn't win" rings hollow when a hole in the ground is still there 10 years later.

I do agree with that though. This is ridiculous and costs our reputation of being an "industrious" nation dearly. Looking at the halfhearted, yet enormously expensive ways we like to handle these things lately, I'm quite confident we could never win something like WWII again. Guess we're lucky we were better at those things when that happened. . .

Quoting exFATboy (Reply 17):

Surprisingly, most New Yorkers were not that enamored with the Twin Towers prior to 9/11 - they were architecturally uninspired and too tall relative to the rest of downtown - the plaza at the centre of the WTC site could be uncomfortably cold even on a summer afternoon.

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm... I wouldn't say most. But I have heard my share of comments regarding... I think they were often times reffered to as the boxes the Chrysler & Empire State bldgs came in.

I always liked them though. But then I'm a big fan of minimalist (and to some extent Brutalist) architecture, so go figure. I think the observation deck was pretty nifty though. I used to like pressing my face up between those windows and looking straight down to the street a quarter mile below.

As for the post, reconstruction of the originals is obviously the best route to go. Instead, as with everything the government, unions, insurance companies, and city councils design, what we'll end up with is a goofy (at best) compromise. Through in ridiculously sensitive victims considerations, and it just gets that much worse.

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):

6.) It will take 15 to 20 years post-attack to have the WTC site fully rebuilt.


Hah! Maybe. But seriously, you should have put an "at least" in front of that figure.
Base not your happiness on the deeds of others, for what is given can be taken away. No Hope = No Fear
 
Newark777
Posts: 8284
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:23 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:40 pm

Quoting wn700driver (Reply 40):
I'm quite confident we could never win something like WWII again.

Thankfully the military isn't unionized.

Quoting wn700driver (Reply 40):

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm... I wouldn't say most. But I have heard my share of comments regarding... I think they were often times reffered to as the boxes the Chrysler & Empire State bldgs came in.

If I remember correctly, much of their criticism came in their early years, and they got absolutely slammed in the architecture editorials. They really grew into a symbol of NYC, evident in all of the movies and TV shows that had their silhouettes in the background of shots. Few things screamed NYC like the two towers at end of Manhattan.

When I was growing up and went into the city, it was always so neat to pull onto the highway and see them sticking above the horizon, for a kid they were pretty cool.
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
 
photopilot
Posts: 3069
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 11:16 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:37 pm

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
Look it may be all warm and fuzzy for Americans to wrap themselves in a blanket of denial, but making empty gestures of something just to make one feel that way doesn't make it so. Claiming not letting the terrorists win at this point is silly. They did win.

Absolutely Right. Al-Q did WIN. The economic cost to the Western World has been nothing short of staggering. And here it is 10 years later, and Osama BL is still at large, still not caught, still whereabouts unknown.

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 22):
They fundamentally changed the way the US works and interacts with citizens everyday.

Not just the USA. They've changed the way the whole world operates. Just look at the Loss of Freedom we now all must bear in the interests of "National Security". They've fundamentally changed the very RIGHTS we used to have and enjoy.

Did Al-Q win...... ABSOLUTELY!!!!! And building a new building or buildings of brick, concrete, glass and steel will not change a single thing to account for the loss of our individual freedoms. I don't care what you call them.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12394
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Fri Apr 30, 2010 12:06 am

Quoting exFATboy (Reply 17):
Actually, I'd like to see the PANYNJ get out of the real estate business entirely - I've never quite been clear on how they got involved in the original WTC. Actually, I'd like to see the PANYNJ broken up into separate agencies for its different functions - ports, airports, PATH, and tunnels.

From some research I did earlier today, I believe that the reason the PANYNJ got into building the WTC project was a trade off with the State of New Jersey to take over the Hudson and Manhattan Railway (H&M), which the PA renamed the PATH (Port Authority Trans-Hudson) in 1961. The H&M had gone bankrupt as most passanger rail services had become by the early 1960's due to ta variety of reasons. At least 2 buildings owned by the H&M were adjacent or near the station in lower Mahnattan on what would become the site of the WTC complex. In effect the WTC project was to allow the PA make money to offset the costs of operating the PATH system.

There was also long demands by key politicans in NY City and State to do a 'World Trade Center'. The PA had excellent access to credit markets, the then head of the PA pushed for a grand project and kept raising the number of floors it was to be to what would become it's 101 floor towers. The towers were engineered in the mid-1960's, the site cleared of several blocks of smaller buildings, the 'tub' started in about 1968, the towers started in 1972 and the site completed in about 1975 just at the early stages of a major real estate bust cycle. That is over 9 years at a time when construction was a lot easier to do. We are at 9 years this year. So the time factor is not so out of whack for such a project.

I don't like the delay, nor the entire plan why have a symbolic building be another target of terror, a symbol of financial arrogance, too expensive and really not needed now or the forseeable future.
 
MoltenRock
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Fri Apr 30, 2010 12:14 am

Quoting falstaff (Reply 29):
I would love to see the same buildings there again. It would be like a big middle finger to Osama and his pals.

True. Osama is still out there roaming free to be able to see such a gesture. Assuming he doesn't croak before they are done being built.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 31):
I have to ask - and I swear I mean no disrespect in asking this - but do you ever have anything POSITIVE to say? Seems like every post I ever see from you, regardless of the topic, is negative.

Absolutely. Just because you don't like my political views doesn't make them negative, nor should they be taken as such. It's merely a commentary on the subject. If someone's viewpoint makes you angry it usually means you're dead wrong and defending / believing your rhetoric without logic based input.

Quoting UAL747 (Reply 38):
Agree on the fact that this should not turn into a political thread.

Huh? The entire approval process was dominated by political nonsense.

Quoting wn700driver (Reply 40):
I do agree with that though. This is ridiculous and costs our reputation of being an "industrious" nation dearly. Looking at the halfhearted, yet enormously expensive ways we like to handle these things lately, I'm quite confident we could never win something like WWII again. Guess we're lucky we were better at those things when that happened. . .

Agreed!

Quoting wn700driver (Reply 40):
Fortunately, you can't see them from Singapore. ..

The Twin Towers were universally despised by New Yorkers. Faux nostalgia doesn't change that fact.

http://books.google.com/books?id=ruM...ed=0CDMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Quoting photopilot (Reply 42):
Did Al-Q win...... ABSOLUTELY!!!!! And building a new building or buildings of brick, concrete, glass and steel will not change a single thing to account for the loss of our individual freedoms. I don't care what you call them.

Agreed, but we have a number of "feel gooders" here on a.net that feel an empty gesture is far more important than actual accomplishments.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 26):
Bullshit, your just spurting out anything from your hatred of us, it took 5 years to build them the first time how is it going to take 15-20 a second time? LOL I can't wait to hear this.

The twin towers / WTC isn't rebuilt now, and it's nearly 10 years post attack, and aren't scheduled to be completed (assuming it even stays on schedule) until 2016 to 2017 sometime. You know, that equals 15 to 20 years. Have you been to New York in the past year? You do realize there aren't towers rebuilt right? Those mock ups of Freedom Tower, are just that, mock ups.

[Edited 2010-04-29 17:15:34]
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Fri Apr 30, 2010 12:16 am

Quoting exFATboy (Reply 17):
they were architecturally uninspired and too tall relative to the rest of downtown

For anyone to call the twin towers "too tall" has no appreciation for architecture, engineering and probably no appreciation for fast cars, fast trains, fast aircraft, high-speed Internet or any other breakthroughs or achievement of mankind.
Wouldn't surprise me since New York (and many other western big cities) has a lot of ascetics that would be happy if we were all living in huts. These people are called environmentalist.

Quoting photopilot (Reply 42):
Not just the USA. They've changed the way the whole world operates. Just look at the Loss of Freedom we now all must bear in the interests of "National Security". They've fundamentally changed the very RIGHTS we used to have and enjoy.

Did Al-Q win...... ABSOLUTELY!!!!! And building a new building or buildings of brick, concrete, glass and steel will not change a single thing to account for the loss of our individual freedoms. I don't care what you call them.

As long as we still allow people that follow the same ideology as Al-Queda, then yes they have won....so far.
Bring back the Concorde
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19766
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Fri Apr 30, 2010 1:08 am

Quoting Airport (Reply 4):
Honestly, I'd like to see that versus the new World Trade Center currently being built. It might just be sad nostalgia, but they really were a New York icon, and NYC is not the same city without them.

And New York wasn't the same city after they were built.

This was my major beef with NYC: they can't get anything done. 60 years before even considering a new, badly-needed subway line and then when they build the thing they won't include connections to half the lines it crosses and no cross-town service above the Park?

Ten years since 9/11 and no towers? Brown-outs every summer? No water pressure? Steam pipe explosions? It amazes me the city hasn't completely fallen down what with their inability to build anything.

Quoting soon7x7 (Reply 9):
It took New york three years to build from scratch the 59th street bridge. It fairly recently took them 10 years to repave it!...did I mention unions?..."Fugetaboutit!"

GThe unions are a part of the problem, but the administrative hassles, the silly parody of democracy such that disturbing a single mouse stalls the whole project, the entire forest of trees that needs to be chopped down to provide the paper for the Environmental Impact Study...
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Fri Apr 30, 2010 1:33 am

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 44):
True. Osama is still out there roaming free to be able to see such a gesture. Assuming he doesn't croak before they are done being built

Priceless

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 44):
The twin towers / WTC isn't rebuilt now, and it's nearly 10 years post attack, and aren't scheduled to be completed (assuming it even stays on schedule) until 2016 to 2017 sometime. You know, that equals 15 to 20 years. Have you been to New York in the past year? You do realize there aren't towers rebuilt right? Those mock ups of Freedom Tower, are just that, mock ups.

LOL, I love your math but lets get a little back to reality. Construction began in 2006 and are expected to be done in 2013. That's 7 years. Not 15-20.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
Newark777
Posts: 8284
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 6:23 am

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Fri Apr 30, 2010 1:44 am

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 46):
the silly parody of democracy such that disturbing a single mouse stalls the whole project

Speaking of which, there have been accusations of serious rat problems from Upper East Side residents since the blasting has begun. The people running the project say they have nothing to do with it, of course.
Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
 
MoltenRock
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: Twin Towers Again?

Fri Apr 30, 2010 1:52 am

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 47):
LOL, I love your math but lets get a little back to reality. Construction began in 2006 and are expected to be done in 2013. That's 7 years. Not 15-20.

First off you said 5 years, now you're saying 7? Which is it? It seems a pretty standard definition to anyone that "rebuilding the WTC" means from the time they were destroyed in the first place. If my fellow Americans want to pat themselves on the back for "rebuilding quickly" and showing that life goes on, then maybe they need to learn from Israel where after a suicide / bus / car / etc... bomb goes off, literally usually within a few hours to a day or two the entire blast zone is fixed, repainted, cleaned up, reglazed, etc.. 15 to 20 years is not considered any sort of timely standard.

You want timely? Try the Chinese building an entire high speed rail network spanning thousands of miles in 4 years. Now that's fast.

Replacing a building site within a generation's time span? Not fast.

See the difference?

By the way you do realize that tower #2 isn't even approved or financed or likely to be any time soon right? My 15 to 20 years is being generous to them getting it done faster than it likely will. Even the Port Authority themselves have said it will probably be until 2030 to have full occupancy.

http://www.tribecatrib.com/news/2010...-tower-is-still-up-in-the-air.html



[Edited 2010-04-29 19:05:22]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Pyrex and 22 guests