A complex of angular towers has been officially selected as the design for the World Trade Center site in New York.
Berlin-based architect Daniel Libeskind's design is centred around the excavated pit of the former World Trade Center.
The plan features a 541-metre (1,776-foot) spire, topped with gardens.
What do you think of the designs? Will the buildings be an appropriate replacement for the World Trade Center?
This debate is now closed. Read your comments below.
A nice design but it neither evokes the WTC buildings or the trajedy that happened there. Looking at the design doesn't give any sense of the sheer arrogance of the original buildings or the physical and emotional damage resulting from the attack. Put the Libeskind design somewhere else. It is not a fitting memorial for the tragedy.
it neither evokes the WTC buildings or the trajedy that happened there
It's all wrong. It's too dynamic with sharp lines and cut edges almost like broken glass. The spire should be in the memorial courtyard not along the street. Also there are too many buildings, the complex needs to be simplified. Less is more. I guess my argument is make it look like a memorial and not another strip mall.
This plan has very little appeal, architecturally speaking. It looks more like an expensive lesson in geometry 101. While the Think design wasn't truly a building, it was more appropriate. I hope they reconsider it and put up bigger and better Twin Towers.
Don Maharas, USA
Unfortunately this new complex will be a real attraction for more terrorism. We are just asking for more trouble. We should build an edifice that reflects some recently learned values such as humility.
Peter Cooke, USA
The designs are very powerful. But to avoid history repeating again, I would have preferred something like an Eiffel Tower which is a monument without any office space. I am not sure how many will prefer to go to work in the new buildings.
Sumaya Shakir Kaleem,
The new plans for the WTC are brilliant. What's wonderful about the Empire State Building, the Chrysler Building, and, to a lesser extent, the original twin towers is that they reflect architecture of their own time. To simply rebuild the old towers or copy the Empire State Building is the same as living reluctantly in the 21st century. The design is powerful, original, and modern. We can look back a few decades from now and show future generations that America in 2003 chose not to be victimized. Early 21st century America had its challenges, but we got through them. We chose to remember, but also to rebuild and persevere.
John Marquez, USA
I think building bigger buildings as a 'symbol of defiance', as some contributors suggest, is childish one-upmanship. I certainly wouldn't want to work on the 120th floor of a new building on this site - which would surely be the first target of any future terrorist attack. In 30 years time, the terrorists may well be a different bunch, but the symbolism of wrecking the new WTC complex will be irresistible to them.
I certainly wouldn't want to work on the 120th floor
I can understand why people wouldn't want the towers to be built - A memorial seems much more appropriate, but I like the message that it gives out - it shows that Americans will stand up again and they won't be kept down. But that said, I wouldn't want to work in there.
The area that WTC originally stood on should be left as a memorial garden, I think it is callous and greedy that such a terrible disaster cannot be remembered properly, instead greedy companies put aside human decency to make a profit, a new building on this site will serve as a memorial to what is wrong with the USA not about the tragedy that struck it.
John Taggart, Scotland
From the picture the complex of buildings looks inspiring and beautiful. I hope I can visit it one day. It preserves the core for a memorial but reaches triumphantly to the heavens too. The idea of a garden in the sky is thrilling! Way to go, Libeskind!
The idea of a garden in the sky is thrilling!
Fiona, South Africa
Beautiful, elegant structures. Very suitable
I didn't like the design when I first saw it, but having had a looked at Daniel Libeskind's website, I'm converted. Many of you who have posted here would do well to look at the pages too: the design leaves the area where the twin towers stood empty and the towers are built around this area. A good and well designed compromise.
I quite like the geometrical shapes of the towers, very unusual and striking. However, what the heck is the stitched-on structure on the side of the taller tower? What ever it is it looks untidy, as though someone forgot to remove the scaffolding.
P Boyle, Scotland
I have visited both the Jewish museum in Berlin and the Imperial War museum in Manchester, both designed by Libeskind. They are amazing buildings. My vote for the new WTC has always been with Libeskind. I am sure therefore that his designs will echo the sentiments of all involved in 9 /11, and of those now protesting world wide against war.
My vote for the new WTC has always been with Libeskind.
Helen Burge, UK
My personal opinion about the rebuilding of the WTC is that nothing should be built and the columns of light should shine at night to the sky to represent the memory of the place and the people who died there.
If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then we should behold the beauty of the memory of those who perished at the WTC on 9/11. Surely it is not right for us to "judge" the relative merits of the vastly differing designs - but to appreciate the efforts to recognise that their deaths were not in vain and that all the designs were a tribute to the triumph of the human spirit in the face of such obscene adversity. Not just God Bless the USA - what about God Bless Humanity?
Dave Hewitson, UK
I don't believe it is appropriate to rebuild any large building at the site of the WTC. The majority of the people of N.Y. rejected ALL the designs of large buildings. A plaza with a smaller building or a green zone is the only appropriate way to honour the dead, rather than be forgotten in another financial white elephant. Large buildings are a concept of the past which generate traffic congestions, thousands of bird deaths, wind problems, pollution, garbage.
I think the WTC place should be use for the memorial and not a commercial complex. There should be a garden and a monument in remembrance of those who perished there on 9/11. Building such towers again will never serve the purpose of keeping memory alive. Moreover as someone said here it would be setting up towers on a graveyard.
Building such towers again will never serve the purpose of keeping memory alive
The negative remarks here about Libeskind's work are shockingly ignorant and malicious. "Ugly", "nondescript" and "angled tops which make me afraid" belie an utter aesthetic ignorance. And no, this is not simply a matter of taste any more than believing in the theory of relativity is a matter of taste. There are discrete and discernable reasons to call this a masterwork.
Daniel, Italy: It's the emperor's new clothes. Because it's new and "avant garde" it's beyond criticism. The fact is, it is neither new nor avant garde. 60 years of conceptual post-modernism with a deliberate attempt to defy "conventional" beauty is more than enough. It's lazy and ugly - the very worst kind of architecture. This deliberate, elitist, we-know-best architecture, that ordinary people who live and work alongside feel no affinity for, much less have their spirits raised by it. The fact that it has been allowed in such a sensitive site just shows how modern planning is driven by cut-price principles, not aestheticism.
I grieve for the people who perished that day (our town lost five people), but the original towers were ugly. They looked like two saltine boxes placed on end. When you viewed the Statue of Liberty from New Jersey the towers were directly in the background and took away from the beauty of Miss Liberty. Has anyone thought about how this new design will impact the view of the Statue of Liberty? We must think with our heads and not just our hearts. Whatever is put there should blend in with the rest of Manhattan's skyline. It should not stick out like a sore thumb. There are wonderful buildings in the area that were built after the Twin Towers and the new building or memorial should blend in with them.
Tuxedo, NY, USA
I think it's fantastic. As someone who has lived a considerable amount of his life in NY, works in NY and was there on 9/11, this is a statement. It's bigger, brighter and still tells everyone, you can knock us down, but you will not knock us out. A few of my friends and family have talked about what should be there, and all of us came to the conclusion we wanted something even bigger. We didn't think it could be done for both economic and memorial reasons, but apparently it can.
We didn't think it could be done for both economic and memorial reasons, but apparently it can
I believe that we should see the redevelopment of the WTC site as a progress and a way of looking forward and dealing with the grief that many suffer. Remember, the past will only repeat itself if we do not learn and move forward.
Tristram Revill, France/UK
I too believe a memorial garden with some type of tower with the names of the people who died in this tragedy should be erected as a remembrance. However, I also believe that in addition, a new, viable trade centre should be built to represent our strength as a nation to persevere and to show that we will not be beaten or intimidated by terrorists. But, the new German design chosen here, does not represent that idea to me. I think the design needs to be revisited.
I'm thankful that the awful Think Tank design was not chosen and very thankful that the proposals not to rebuild weren't listened to.
Ted, NYC, USA
I saw one plan which was consistent with the design concept of the Empire State Building. It appeared to have a great open memorial garden in the middle, which would have really tied the island together architecturally from midtown to the battery. But I can't believe people get paid the kind of money they get paid to come up with junk like this.
A design concept of the Empire State Building would have really tied the island together architecturally from midtown to the battery
Greg Sarkisian, Virginia
I believe that those who lost their lives on 9/11 in those buildings would want America to rebuild on this site and stand against the axis of evil! Regardless of what's built on the site, Americans can never forget those who were lost in an act by insane madmen.
I don't think the towers should be replaced with any type of building. A memorial garden would be much more respectful and a peaceful place for people to go and remember those who died in the attack.
I think the complex will be a 'different' addition to the NYC skyline and should be a nice group of buildings when finished. For me it was a choice between this design and the one from Foster & Partners.
Tim Jarman, United Kingdom
I believe the area of the former Twin Towers should remain a memorial site. The city should plant trees and add an obelisk in the centre of the site carrying the names of the victims. Most of the victims were pulverized in the crumbling towers. To build the new complex of towers would be like building a house on a graveyard.
I believe the area of the former Twin Towers should remain a memorial site.
Daniela, Berlin, Germany
Superb. Daniel Libeskind is one of the finest architects in the world and the subtlety of his vision will be a welcome change from the boring machismo of most modern American architecture. And well done to New York for accepting a foreign architect, rather than playing the jingoistic card and choosing a lesser home grown talent. It's just a shame that given the way things work here, New York will probably have its completed WTC replacement long before we start on Libeskind's old design for the V&A Museum extension!
Stuart W, UK
Re: Stuart W, England. Daniel Libeskind is not a "foreign architect". He was born and raised in Poland but studied in America and is a US citizen.
Only one word could describe these buildings....UGLY
I do not like the angled tops of the buildings. It looks like the tops slid off. It looks like a still of buildings coming down. Not a good reminder or image.
Richard Bruce, USA
The wrong choice was made! This is a really mediocre design, just another bunch of nondescript office buildings. The spire does little to save the situation. The THINK team concept was far more attractive and distinctive. New Yorkers should be up in arms about this decision!
New Yorkers should be up in arms about this decision!
Having been in NY last summer, it looked so different. It was like losing a long lost friend.
I think this German design will be an excellent replacement. At least they've had the sense to reject that monstrosity by Lord Foster in the earlier stages of the design competition.
The towers should be rebuilt using the exact same dimensions and the exact same look, but with enhanced structure and foundation; using the most modern and durable materials that will endure ten times the punishment they received on 9-11-01. Why design new targets? Just rebuild the old ones in defiance to global terror.
Dave Foley, Canada