Look, here's the problem. You're not building the real Enterprise. Repeating that over and over isn't going to make it any more true.
You're building a mobile space habitat that happens to be shaped more or less like the Enterprise. And no one here has said anything convincing about why it should be shaped that way, other than, "It would be kewl!" Because there's no good reason to shape it that way.
That website talks about "form following function". It tries to convince us that the ship's main function is to inspire all of humanity and that this is the best form for that purpose.
Who says that's true? What makes it so awe-inspiring to anyone other than Trekkies? You give us a survey
that proves that specific
form is more inspiring to most of the people on Earth than any other. Heck, even a significant number of people. Say a tenth of the population, 700 million people. Then you'll have a case.
Until then, all you're doing is aping the outline of a fictional ship with no other commonalities. It will be a different size. Different internal layout. Different power source. Different propulsion (and located in different places). Different speed and range.
Not to say that the whole concept is invalid. It has validity. But trying to make it look like the Enterprise or tie it into Trek is a pointless exercise in geekdom that's likely to turn off any of your audience that don't happen to be Trekkies.
You could make the exact same proposal for a ship that is shaped differently and more efficiently (wherein form really does follow function) with no Trek connection. The proposal would be equally valid. More valid, probably.
Can you sell that on anyone? That should be the first question. If the answer is no, then you sure won't convince anyone of the Enterprise thing.