2001	The 6th Designers 3D CAD Challenge with Architectural CADD Systems 2001 Challenge of the Architectural CADD Cup

Forum of ideas for what to do with the site, and what kind of buildings (if any) are appropriate

To contribute your comments email them in here by clicking here *** Forum@architecturalcadd.com ***

From: glangdon@shore.net

Subject: RE: WTC II - A New Hope

Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2001

I too, have friends and family (a cousin) with offices in the North Tower, we have not heard from.

I had discussions with many different architects, mostly at the BSA, before going ahead with this 3D Design Challenge, and the discussions of "too soon to do this" did come up a number of days ago. In the past few days, though, discussions in internet forums about what should be built there has grown to the thousands per hour, and the building property owner has now been on CNN twice and several other news shows already talking about some sort of "multiple towers". I believe THAT is premature, as, at this point we don't even know if a building is appropriate or possible, which is why this particular competition is open even to the "put a green meadow there" type suggestions as suggested by Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun Times. Architects also design parks and memorials, and I have done several myself. The schematic design nature of our 3D Design Challenge makes it possible to explore the full range of nothing to mega-something which may give guidence (or even disuade) to any actual "building design" competitions that the AIA or others may run in the future.

I am still numb and what scares the wits out of me even more yet, is the unceasing talk about all these "end of the world" and war scenarios. I truely believe that since it is already scheduled, flexible enough to make this change, and able to focus on an ability to help non-architects visualize, that the 3D Design Challenge really is in the right place at the right time, and can be a help to our whole society by focusing on something positive, future, and hopful, instead.

Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2001

From: "Robert Scott" <scottbldr@voyager.net>

Subject: Re: DBUG> WTC rebuild or not?

Anyone up for a DBUG Internet collaboration on a new tower design. I'm not sure how this would work...just an throwing an idea out for discussion....

Robert Scott

Robert Scott Building & Design

From: Allen McCree, FAIA

>I foresee an open, 'ideas' competition for a new building, not so much to pick a new architect as to get the world focused on something positive, rebuilding.

Now that you mention it, yes, I think that will be the correct approach.

Cheers and Hope,

Allen McCree, FAIA

From: Lane Chambliss <lane@lightlink.com>

On a related note, relative to the future use of the WTC site: What about a building to house an institution dedicated to eradicating the conditions throughout the world that lead to terrorist acts. I have no idea how such an institution would be constituted, but I can't imagine a more fitting memorial to the thousands of souls of those who died. Lane Chambliss

Of course one has to rebuild, bigger and better. There should be offices and a mix of activities, both cultural and business. Yes, there should be a place to mourn, but that shouldn't be the main thing. It must be a place looking into the future, not the past.''

- Bernard Tschumi, dean of the Columbia architecture school

''We must rebuild the towers. They are a symbol of our achievement as New Yorkers and as Americans and to put them back says that we cannot be defeated. The skyscraper is our greatest achievement architecturally speaking, and we must have a new, skyscraping World Trade Center.''

- Robert A.M. Stern

''What's most poignant now is that the identity of the skyline has been lost. We would say, Let's not build something that would mend the skyline, it is more powerful to leave it void. We believe it would be tragic to erase the erasure.''

- Elizabeth Diller and Ricardo Scofidio

''Whatever they take down, we'll rebuild. I think we should provide the same amount of office space, that it's the least we can do.''

- Philip Johnson

''Something else has come out of this, and that is how much ownership people outside of New York feel about our city. Maybe it's not just our decision. Maybe we should let the American people vote on it.''

- Ralph Appelbaum

''Whatever we do in the future has got to reflect the sense that the West, its culture and values have been attacked. I would hope that we would not be deterred from going as high as the old towers were. We should not move back from that point. We cannot retreat.''

- Peter Eisenman

''Once we get over the grieving, we should realize that this could be a defeat, or it could be like Chicago after the fire, in 1871, when they invented the skyscraper and changed the ways cities have grown all over the world. We should build an even greater and more innovative skyscraper.''

- Terrence Riley, architecture curator, Museum of Modern Art

''It should be rebuilt. We need office space, though we don't want to build the same towers - they were designed in 1966 and now we live in 2001. What has to be there is an ensemble of buildings that are as powerful a symbol of New York as the World Trade towers were. The life of the city depends on people living and working in the city and loving it - we want people there. We want them in a place that can be magnificent.''

- Richard Meier

Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 12:00:42 -0700

Lets rebuild the WTC, here's my design...

the facade will face the afgan capital.

<< editors note: questionably offensive image deleted >>

David Nicholsoncole wrote:

> Architectural comments on the disaster

> What next? Could buildings have radar/anti aircraft precautions etc attached to them? ('energy fields'?) I cannot see how, as a shot down aircraft would merely crash on somebody else, and would probably have enough momentum to keep going even though crippled. The system would be excessively complex, and who would man such a system for an event which has never happened before and may never happen again.

Subject: Re: WTC structure - architectural comment

From: Mark Burginger <archicad@home.com>

How can you account for the massive amount of JP4? Jet fuel?

The economies of building dictate a columnar structure, if the developer could have his cake and eat it too, he would have an inverted pyramid - More office space as you ascend the building. Follow the design strategy of the pine tree, minimizing fire damage. The pyramid building in San Francisco is an example. Would a fire in the upper section cause a failure of the complete building? Perhaps not with increased structural support as you descend the building. Also redundant decreased structural fuel as fire spreads upward. Support, triangulation, fire protection jackets, etc. Mark , hind sight expert, Burginger

From: "Foster Jonathan" <jsfoster1@mindspring.com>

Subject: Yamasaki on the WTC

Here are words from the chief architect of the World Trade Center, Minoru Yamasaki who died in 1986:

"I feel this way about it. World trade means world peace and consequently the World Trade Center buildings in New York....had a bigger purpose than just to provide room for tenants. The World Trade Center is a living symbol of man's dedication to world peace ... beyond the compelling need to make this a monument to world peace, the World Trade Center should, because of its importance, become a representation of man's belief in humanity, his need for individual dignity, his beliefs in the cooperation of men, and through cooperation, his ability to find greatness." - Minoru Yamasaki

This clearly expresses the power of the ideas behind architecture... Jonathan S Foster, jsf@nyArchitect.com

From: "Ernest Burden III" <ebiii@oreally.com>

<< In my opinion, rebuilding anything less than the original footprint, massing, SF and height, whether one tower or two, will only symbolize the "success" of these lunatics in their destructive goals. I would be embarrassed to honor these people with a big "memorial park", however well landscaped, sculpture-filled and inscribed. The gaping hole in your(our) skyline must be filled. >>

I agree, but then no-one will be asking me to make the choice, so I only mentioned the memorial as a possibility.

But remember that the Murrow Federal Bldg (did I spell that right?) in Oklahoma City was not re-built, and was replaced by a memorial park. I rendered one of the competition losing designs, and contributed to that design. I had lived for many years just south of where that building stood. Of course, many parts of the town I lived in were torn to bits a few years ago by a tornado.

Here is my prediction for the WTC site: there will rise a new WTC tower, or more likely another pair of towers, that will again be the worlds tallest, and they will stay that way for a very long time. The complex lost had a proven track record financially. (I just read that the current owner of the site lease had the lease insured against terrorism, although its unclear if that also applies to the 2 Billion dollar policy on each tower). The site can easily handle even taller towers. There is an underground granite mountain here that rises up to the surface at lower Manhattan, then dips down just north (making SOHO unfit for really tall buildings) then comes back up around midtown. This can be easily seen by looking at Manhattan from across either river.

> >...I prefer that SOM sit it out, as they are not very good designers,

> Right now, in my mind, they lay claim to the two best "contemporary" structures in Austin:

Don't listen to me on that. That is just an opinion of mine that is better left unsaid, anyway. And not even true, in most cases. I was just thinking of a few buildings, but I have rendered some nice designs for them. I was being a jerk. Whomever designs the new WTC will, I trust, do a fine job on such an important commission.

> >I foresee an open, 'ideas' competition for a new building...

I hope to be able to do some drawings in the near future of ideas for new towers, my usual organic stuff, just to draw, sort of like the 'late entries' to the Chicago Tribune competition. I would bet my son would want to do his own version. Maybe if I prepared some base computer perspectives of the immediate surroundings with the WTC site blank, copies could be given to school kids to draw in their ideas, get them looking forward. Ernest Burden III

From: David Bergman <bergman@cyberg.com>

I continue to ponder -- perhaps because it's the only thing we can do down here --the future of the WTC site. The idea behind memorial floors that one person posted -- that the memorial be incorporated in the design -- is an interesting one. I don't think a memorial should be the primary focus of whatever is built. Like the idea of building only a park, it grants too much power to the terrorists and too much negative focus to the site.

What about the memorial/park and the building(s) being the same thing? There has been a growing interest in recent years in green roofs -- roofs that are planted in order to both improve air quality and reduce the urban heat island effect. Appropriately, these roofs are also called "living roofs." What if the roofs of the new structures as well as as many of the surrounding buildings as possible were built as or converted to living roofs? The result would be a new urban landscape with public vistas from which to ponder the rebuilt site and memorialize the victims while, simultaneously, giving back to the environment. In my eyes, that is a totally positive solution: a memorial that greens and improves the city while creating awareness of both the event and our environment. David Bergman

Subject: RE: WTC elevators

<<Did the elevators got up all 110 floors, or did they have to break that down into >>>two runs? "C. Morris Stafford" <cms@loggia.org>>>

Actually, the elevators were one of the most important revolutionary ideas Minoru Yamasaki had. They had calculated that had they used the old system employed by buildings such as the Empire State Building (where banks of elevators serve, say 1-15, others 15-30 etc.) the entire site would have been needed for all the squar footage of elevator shafts (i.e. witness the dismal amount of 1st floor "lobby" space in that Empire State Building), and that, were the cabs have the capability to stop at all floors it would take several hours for the occupants to come and go each day.

By stacking the 20 or so elevators in seperate shafts - so that each shaft had 3 elevators - with only a few "express" elevators to zip you to an intermediate "sky lobby" - there were huge benefits. Speed to get to one's floor, despite having to take two elevators, Space saved - since having 3 elevators in each shaft tripled the capacity, and, possibly the most important for the people renting the space in the building - EVERY floor had exactly the same sf. area (making it easy to rent as well as move companies from space to space).

By splitting the square foot area into two towers - each using the bundled-tube type construction - the size of each floor was then ideal for open plan office space with access to window views.

The express elevators were the fastest ever built. As a person who has been now in 3 different elevators that "fell" (twice in the WTC and once in the Gulf Western building) and avoids them whenever possible, I still have a huge respect and admiration for the innovative elevator system that made the WTC even possible. The worst drop - when all six of us in the elevator ended up unconscious on the floor - was from, I believe, floor 72 to floor 66 - and was the very day I was there to interview the building engineer for an article (circa 1976), and he remarked that it "wasn't supposed to go that far before the emergency breaks kick in" but that they "had been having a lot of trouble with the elevators" as stuff was still under construction (despite the building "opening" four years earlier). Geoff Langdon

"Being a structural engineer, here is a link with some opinions regarding the collapse of the World Trade Center: http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.htm

"Also, the American Institute of Steel Construction is forming a special task force to investigate the structural collapses of the World Trade Center buildings. AISC is the technical institute responsible for developing and maintaining standards for design and construction of steel buildings in the United States. http://www.aisc.org/news.html " - Wilbur Bragg / Rosser International, Inc.

"For more on the WTC collapse check this web site at the University of Sydney <http://www.civil.usyd.edu.au/wtc.htm>. It has commentary from several architects and engineers on the cause of the collapse." - Steve Hudson / Oak Hill Marine Design

From: rschneid@endicott.edu (Richard Schneider)

Thank you for your efforts, Geoff! At this time of grief, sorrow, and soul searching, we need to have the inspiration that building can provide to lead us into the future. The hope created by rising edifaces will serve as an affirmation of our spirit and our willingness to face the challenges this crisis has brought us.

For myself, I hope to see a building or buildings constructed with one or more towers becoming the tallest in the world. Also, the design should reflect our own times with a possible nod somewhere to Yamasaki's design. Of course, a memorial must be part of the overall scheme. Richard

>Commissioner of New York City when asked whether he felt that the towers should be rebuilt and he responded with a sorrowfull "Who would move into them."

>Think about it. Wayne Schultz

Reply :

Exactly the point of this, what I regard as a kind of preliminary exploratory design competition.

I fully expect that some of the ideas submitted may indeed not involve a building or building complex at all, but something else - who knows..... maybe just some kind of memorial arch.

Before the AIA national starts going to town with any "building competition" and before the current site owners go much further in their talks on CNN about "possibly four smaller towers", we as a nation, and society in general, need to determine if "buildings" are even the way to go here.

Obviously, for all sorts of health reasons, we cannot possibly leave the pile of rubble there as it is now (clearly one option, but not a particularly good one) - so SOMETHING must happen to the site.

THAT is why the Design Shootout, being right now, and potentially focusing national attention on the future and something positive and hopeful, healing, and potentially even inspiring, instead of scaring the wits out of people with constant talk of the war to end all wars. Just as the singers and entertainment industry are singing, the Wall Streeters are continuing in the NY Stock Exchange, and Giulianni encourages us all to go about our jobs which in turn helps out the most - we in the architectural design business can do our part best, by indeed doing our thing - creating images of a hopeful future world.

The Design Shootout, with its emphasis on 3D visualization so that all the non-architects can see what the various options may bring, is unique in many ways for this purpose. The emphasis on a "3 hour design charrette" schematic level means that, quicker than any other forum, we can change the project to help provide this social service. With some people already talking general concepts - for either buildings or parks - we could see a flood of more meshed out ideas by November 14 at the Boston World Trade Center. You know that, come next year, each CADD company may develop a competition for the site as we have seen in the past, as will the AIA national (if indeed it looks like a "building" is appropriate, as the Design Shootout will explore), but rather than a competition restricted to just Autodesk or Graphisoft or MicroStation users - right now we need an across the board view of ideas, all, of course, using design software so as to make these schematic design ideas truly visual to the public. -- G. Langdon

From: Michael Smith <mike.smith208@verizon.net>

Geoff, Will any site information be made available through you, or is that up to each team. Specifically it would be great to be able to get a 3D site model that all can work with, rather than each team trying to recreate the site, which would take precious resources and time away from the WTC design. It would also be more fair if everyone was working from the same model. There have been MANY 3D maps in the print media over the past 2 weeks. I wonder if you could get access to one. Thanks, Mike Smith

From: David Nicholsoncole <davidnc@innotts.co.uk>

Geoffrey, I note that people will have to register for the CAD competition for Manhattan WTC site. Will site information and photos etc. be available if we want to set something similar to students - although it would be impossible to meet a Oct 31 deadline with the new term not starting till next week. -- david / David Nicholson-Cole : University of Nottingham

Reply:

I have already downloaded several maps, particularly from the nycgov site which delineate the disaster areas. Others I usually get from a wide variety of sources each year. There is a "Resources for Designers" button on the Design Challenge web site, where I will be uploading these.

Several organizations already have 3D models of this area of the city. Given the circumstances, they may be enticed into contributing a portion of these to this effort. I have, by the way, set up a system whereby each competitor can end up generating funds for the NYC disaster relief fund charities (check out the info so far on the web site). In the possible event that existing 3D site models are not available, I can create them, at least in a schematic - block model form (I have done it many times before very quickly) and will make that available to all the designers on that web site.

I also have photographs I have taken myself from several angles from the Hudson river I will upload to use for context photocomposites.

The deadline is actually November 14 - certainly enough time to get at least a schematic design together - pretend it is a 5 hour weekend charrette. The 6 images due on 10/31 are just preliminary, mainly to help us guage how many presentations we need to accomodate on Nov 14.

From: "David Evans" <davevans@mindspring.com>

Geoff: I am so glad that you sent me this email. Your project sounds very interesting. It should be fascinating to see what people come up with. I think that we should just encase the whole thing wrekage and all in a big glass box or covering of some sort and leave it as a memorial to what happens when people stop thinking for themselves and begin following a belief system blindly.

Reply:

Yea, I kind of thought you would be interested, particularly with the sort of national interest in this site and whatever happens to it.

At this point of course we cannot even assume there will even be "buildings" of any kind on the site, and already all sorts of non-building parks, memorials, underground museums, and even ponds have been suggested, as also duplicates of the previous towers, multiple smaller towers, and a tower bigger than the Petronas Towers -- I think your big glass box idea in an intriguing possibility too. This is why this particular competition is a great forum for exploring all these - but being able to really see what they would be like and feel like. I wonder if, when we see a dynamic walk-through (or around) something like the glass box tomb (a challenge for the architectural CADD designers right there) whether it truly would feel right and appropriate. Anyway, yes, I've taken this all on as a kind of precursor to what possibly may end up as yet another competition for a building (assuming our competition finds that is even appropriate) competition next year held by the national AIA. This kind of takes the pressure off the AIA to "act" at least right now. Instead, the competition I run in conjunction with the BSA (the regional chapter of the AIA) every year does an imaginary hypothetical project in virtual reality. Thus the project is ideal, and also gives architects a way to help out right now, by helping to shift the nations focus from negative paranoia and war to something positive and hopful for the future. Actually I am going to forward your glass box idea to the online forum for design ideas.

From: "Don" <cobi@xtra.co.nz>

Subject: DBUG> Phoenix

Time to rise from the ashes folks. Rebuild Manhatten and rebuild your spirit.

I leave this worthy OT subject with a suggestion, take from it what you will - in Word type NYC in say 24 point. Change font to webdings. Try again as wingdings. -- Don Bidwell

From: "Peddle Thorp NT Architects" <peddlethorpnt@octa4.net.au>

Some other spooky trivia.... The flight No. of one of the planes was Q33NY. Open your word processor and type in Q33NY at a size of say 26. Now highlight it and change the font to 'Wingdings'. Very spooky! -- Mark Bell

>In the past your emphasis has been on the software. Your competition has provided me with an objective and comprehensive method of

>comparing CAD packages. The recent turn toward design not only adds to an already bloated list of aesthetics-oriented competitions, but

>deprives potential CAD purchasers of a rational and highly worthwhile means of product comparison.

>GSGainer, Actual-Size Architecture

From: glangdon@shore.net (Geoffrey Moore Langdon)

I agree. However, on Sept 11 everything in the world changed. We found that our competition was in the best situation to help the NYC crisis, by providing a vehicle to uplift the spirits of the world, and refocus the nations attention from the negative (terrorisim, paranoia, war) to something more positive and hopeful. Much better than canceling, as so many other events scheduled for this fall have done.

Already, back in May, we planned a much different event from the spectacular circuses that we have done in the past. The do-it-all-from-scratch in only 3 hours we had done for 5 years, and made the point to the profession that there was indeed a new paradime of design software out there. To progress further - and really get to those still reluctant Principals and designers out there, and to the 2D CADD drafting crowd - we felt that we need to do more design on a deeper level. Hence the "6 month" not-live charrette with mainly a presentation of finished work public - with the only difference (from us and every other design competition) being that they would also show us HOW they did it (with the aid of captured screencam movies and video).

Our feeling was that it would turn the entire 3 hour event into a more interesting and more informative event, as for every instant you would be seeing CADD techniques explained or images of finished design - all still valuable for CADD evaluation beyond the demos you get from salesmen, and also more interesting for real designers. In the past, the first hour or so we were looking at blank screens and people scratching their heads contemplating what they were going to design.

Another major factor is that just about every CADD software developer was no longer interested in competing, as they all felt they had too much to loose. Thus we HAD to go back to our original format of inviting architect-user advocates, rather than CADD companies. The new format makes it easier for people to participate, even if they are nowhere near Boston.

Yes, with the World Trade Center site, I anticipate that the "learning" portion will be even less than we had planned, as there is now a focus on public service and an emotional tribute.

From: "Raj Mohanka" <rajmohanka@hotmail.com>

I saw your website and am glad that most Americans want to rebuild the WTC. I'm not an architect, but I have a few thoughts:

Since tall towers have the following benefits: Communications, Tourism, Office Space, Symbolism

I think it's important that we build a tower even taller than the previous WTC to show we're not compromising for terrorists. Instead of 2 main towers, we can build 1 main tower and make it the tallest in the world with a high office density at the bottom and tapering it to a much reduced office density at the top. At the very top can be a revolving restaurant and observation module (such as exists at the CN Tower in Toronto). The remainder of the 16 acre site can be a number of smaller office buildings (under 50 stories) with a prominent memorial for those who lost their lives in this tragedy. Thanks - I wanted to give my 2 cents!

>We are working on the WTC competition. Immediate questions are the type of drawings which are to be required. And data, such as site information, is is to be uniform ie., for you or to we continue with our own data.

>I am unclear whether the requirements for the "normal" competition are the same for the WTC, which is most likely a urban design study investigating ideas. -- best, Jonathan

As you would guess, we are going to have to be flexible this year as to the form(s) of the various drawings. The 9/11 changes mean that many involved will be more interested in helping out and showing their ideas/designs, than showing us how they did them, so we are granting a good deal of lattitude there too. Also, since a good portion of this will probably be more of a block model schematic design - particularly if a design involves proposing a large building or several buildings - requiring "floorplans/sections/details/etc." per se would not make sense for certain designs. Thus, we have to leave it to the judgement of any designers submitting work to choose what kinds of drawings make the most sense to show off their particular design.

For instance, if someone really did propose no building, but a memorial arch or something like the empty chairs done in Oklahoma, yes we would expect a relatively detailed site plan, and certainly elevations and 3D views of those "chairs" and arch - and, of course, a model of the site, with perspectives from various angles so we could see what it looked like and felt like - with at least one or two of the images a photo-composite so we could see what it looks like with the existing NY buildings in the background. If someone proposed, say, a Petronas Towers-like triumvirate with all three towers 150 stories tall, we would expect a less detailed block model, but a plan showing how the three were related and shaped, and certainly an elevation, and perspectives also showing those connecting bridges between them - and, again, the city in the background.

In other words, since the range of possible designs is soooo wide, (as opposed to when everyone did a single building as in our past competitions) we will be flexible to each designers judgement.

The largest project we have had so far was the Pier 15 project in 1998, which was about 85,000 sf. Even then, in only 3 hours, some teams, such as the Arris team, did extrodinary levels of detail (far more than we asked for or was necessary), even putting in ADA compliant fixtures in the bathrooms. For this NYC thing, I would be shocked if we actually saw furniture in any floorplans, unless the proposed design is REALLY small. Even depicting walls and rooms in a case like that tri-building above would not be necessary.

I don't see any way we can be uniform - though there is no reason why, say 22 images (as we asked for) of various views of a project cannot be there in gif or jpeg ready to post to a website.

As for being more of a urban design study, well, yes, probably.

Big question is whether the screen captured movies are still realistic to expect. My thought is - possibly. If someone has indeed done some kind of intriguing design, designers may really be interested in learning how they did it. Some designers, though, could possibly be more motivated to participate in order to show others a particular design concept to help out and inspire. Suppose, in such a case (and this is stretching "what ifs" almost beyond reason) someone proposed just flat asphault. Whereas such a submission would be allowable (though they would HAVE to model the surrounding site REALLY well and really SHOW that asphault from a lot of angles) I doubt that designers would be particularly interested in obtaining a tutorial movie of how they did it, so a screen recording in such an extreme case would be pointless. Thus it is Possible that there be Zero income or funds for NYC disaster relief from all this. Why allow such a submission - because, at this point, anything goes, and we WANT to explore all the possibilities for the site (to help out any potential future designers). Perhaps if New Yorkers (and the world at large) actually could see what it would look like as flat asphault they could realize that might not be the thing to do with the site. -- Langdon

know anyone who might be interested?

I have a rough design for replacing the WTC towers, but I'm not an architect -- I'm a total amateur, with no fancy software or anything.

So I'm wondering if there are any architects or designers or software people or anyone else out there who might be interested in working with my design and fleshing it out into an entry for this competition.

I've posted the rough design up on a webpage: http://www.geocities.com/peace_towers

Please take a minute to check out the design and share this message with anyone who might be interested in this project.

Thanks! -- Peter Johnson

From: "GARY JACKSON, President, Waterfountains.com, Inc."

We are not architects, but we are manufacturers of the world's most remembered form of water feature, the Giant Floating Stone Sphere Water Fountain. We are cuurently working on a sculpture idea incorporating our form of Water Feature for presentation to the world community as an Icon for Peace. You may not be familiar with our form of water feature, and you can visit our website at www.waterfountains.com and see its potential. We also have a three minute 3D Studio prepared presentation along with videos and jpgs that we use to submit to our clients.

We know that we cannot be a part of your competition, but can you give us any idea who is entering your contest. Possibly, one of the teams could use our concept for the monument portion. Our design is being finalized now, but can incorporate spheres with the earth etched on it from three feet in diameter to what is the world's largest at 6.5 feet (25,000lbs) to what could be the largest in the world at three meters (9.85 ft)....(85,000lb sphere). Our designs are working on a black granite sphere with continental etching and another as an alternative, a Lapis Lazuli Sphere that resembles the Earth naturally. If you cannot assist, can you refer us to someone that can review our special sculpture that could become the most remembered monument of this century. I shall include a couple of pictures for your information. -- Gary E. Jackson

It should be a Tower of Light (huge lights aimed straight up, the beams disapating at about 1400 ft creating a ghostly virtual building)- John Bennet, Gustavo Bonevardi, Julian Laverdiere, Paul Myoda

The site should house an international institute agains terrorism, possibly built with the rubble from the ruined towers -- Diane Lewis

It should be a new "world arts center" designed by Frank Gehry -- Susana Torre

It should be a new home for that ultimate symbol - the New York Stock Exange, the American Stock Exchange, and NASDAQ.

It should be, or include, a huge underground mall to connect Battery Park City with the rest of the city to add life in the form of retail and entertainment to this section of the city currently a desert of only office buildings.

It should be a dense street friendly neighborhood housing extending Greenwich possibly with a tower

From: "Kathleen Finnegan" <FinnegKE@jacksoncounty.org>

World Trade Center

What web page do we log onto if we want to send an opinion of what needs to be developed on the WTC site? I am sickened with the talk of building a taller stronger more powerful tower to represent America's might. What about the principle of this country, and the dedication to end suffering in the world? Why not a memorial to all victims of the WORLD? All those who suffer at the hands of fear and hatred, greediness and rage. Rather than a building...why not a park?

From: "Edward Wolfstein" <ed@wastudio.com>

I kind of had the feeling that <comments questioning the motives of the Design Challenge> might be one kind of reaction.

And I guess it is all too easy to be critical of an event like this, whether now, or years from now. But I do think that we have to start reflecting on the incident, and in that light, I agree that the Design Competition is appropriate at this time. I wasn't so sure on September 20.

Just as sporting events now go on, and the world continues to turn, so too must we do our parts, in our small ways (as I listen to God Bless America in the 7th inning stretch of tonight's Mets/Expos game).

So, you see, you have my support. I think <the person questioning the Design Challenge> is doing some powerful grandstanding, with some very strong emotions as ammunition. There will always be that sentiment - so be prepared to live with it.

From: "Edward Wolfstein" <ed@wastudio.com>

In today's Burlington paper there was a detailed article about grade school kids re-designing the World Trade Center Towers. It was funded by a major Vermont Bank, and the resulting models will be on display across the state in the bank lobbies. I'll clip it for you, or send you a scan.

It seems like the thing to do.

Will NY banks take offense? I don't think so. I should also send the article to <the person questioning the Design Challenge> and ask if he's going to reprimand the Vermont school system...

From: "Mark Magidson" <mark.magidson@virgin.net>

Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001

Dear Geoff - thank you for the long and sensative reply to my short question. Hope all goes well with the competition. For my part I have put a suggestion forward for what we could do in the UK. You thoughts would be gratefully received - I have written this to our PM and enclosed 2 JPEGS - Best regards - Mark

Dear Prime Minister,

RE: A proposal for two memorials to the dead of the World Trade Center

How can we remember the victims of this catastrophic event?

Manhattan's silhouette has now a huge gap made by the destruction of the World Trade Center. This proposal suggests recreating the 3 dimensional outline of both towers using banks of lasers set onto the original outline of the ground plan. These red and blue beams of light, reaching the same height as the lost towers, could provide a powerful experience and be responsive to changing weather conditions. The beams could sparkle in the rain and snow, change intensity throughout the day and be powerful beacons at night.

The physical gap in the cityscape could be filled and provide a focal point for people to visit, reflect and remember. As the Statue of Liberty was partly donated by the French, so too can Britain contribute to powerful memorials of the victims of this event. The monuments could be beacons of light and a reminder of the continued war on terrorism.

Part of this proposal could be the setting up of a similar temporary or permanent structure within a central London park. Links could be made between this and the monument in New York and other memorials around the world, using web based technologies.

We would greatly value your feedback and support for this project and should you be interested in developing the concept, we would be honoured to work up the scheme to the next costed stage. We are NOT looking for any payment for our small part in this scheme and have at this stage left elements of the proposal deliberately vague, (treatments on the lower lattice walls etc) to allow for inputs from many other people and organisations.

Our own background can be viewed on our website www.exhibitionplus.com We have had 11 years experience of developing major interpretative projects for major clients such as English Heritage and the Natural History Museum.

I hope that taken within the context of the current events unfolding before us, right now, that you can take the time to consider this proposal.

COPIES OF DRAWINGS SENT TO...

Jack Straw Mayor Rudolph Giuliani Mayor Ken Livingston William S Farish US Ambassador Tom Harris British Consul-General Larry Silverstein Sir Neil Cossons

From: Geoff Langdon <glangdon@shore.net>

<<..Hope all goes well with the competition. For my part I have put a suggestion

Wonderful suggestion. I truly think the tower-of-light thing will really happen as it has been suggested from more different sectors than any other concept, and apparently there is a group of artists in NYC already looking into how to implement it. With the idea that there could be simultaneous versions in London and NYC etc. in a kind of Statue of Liberty world memorial, it becomes really wonderful.

The old Trade Center was criticized most, even before it was built, because of the huge plaza at its base - raised up 15 ' on two sides (forming a barrier to the only residential portions of the city (adjacent Battery Park City to the west and the SoHo portion of Greenwich Village to the north) and being way too huge. Assuming there are buildings built on the site, the footprint of the original towers would make an ideal size for a plaza/garden/memorial. Thus, nothing is actually built on those sites, and, on special occasions the lights for the tower-of-light would erupt to the sky. I am only guessing, but I believe we will see a number of design submissions which include this kind of idea.

I could see, in the distant future, a remembrence day each Sept 11, where the twin towers-of-light in London, NY, Paris, and every other enlightened civilization in the world, all simultaneously link together and turn on - and perhaps even more powerfully ... turn off.

To contribute your comments email them in here by clicking here *** Forum@architecturalcadd.com ***