by the RPA Staff
In February, Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg stood alongside Daniel Libeskind as he unveiled a majestic vision for rebuilding Ground Zero. Studio Libeskind's master plan answered the public call for something truly special and remarkable, an innovation that would create a globally recognized icon for New York's rebirth and a magnet for visitors from around the world. At the heart of the plan, though, was a moving and sacred memorial space that truly honored those we lost on September 11.
While not everyone agreed on the plan, it was the result of a historic public process. Tens of thousands of people participated in two "Listening to the City" forums, the Imagine New York workshops and the official public input process hosted by LMDC. The LMDC's "Innovative Design Study," which led to the selection of the Studio Libeskind master plan also emerged from this public process. The public rightfully assumed that this plan would be largely implemented, with at least its strongest themes intact.
However, in recent months evidence is emerging that this may not be the case. As rebuilding officials contend with developers' requests, the promise of a visionary master plan is gradually being undermined by private interests.
First, developer Larry Silverstein has his own plans for the office towers. He has refused to commit to the concept for Libeskind's iconic Freedom Tower, including the sky gardens and majestic spire. It remains unclear whether Libeskind will be involved at all in its design, since Silverstein has contacted other architects for this job and not yet committed to including Libeskind.
Second, Silverstein has proposed a substantial change to the plan itself, adding a fifth office building on the site. The fifth tower would be located over the PATH terminal that was supposed to be a grand entry point into Lower Manhattan, open to light and air.
The third threat to the plan is leveled at Libeskind's proposed recessed memorial plaza. While the memorial itself has yet to be designed, Libeskind's sunken plaza was the element that distinguished itself from the other proposals and assures a sacred, contemplative setting for the memorial. The connection with the slurry walls and the perception of being close to the bedrock - where so many remains were found - is the heart of the plan. But local groups have opposed the concept of a sunken plaza, arguing it would hinder movement through the site. Moreover, the Port Authority is nearing completion of a substation near Liberty Street that could make it extremely difficult to complete Libeskind's vision. Without the exposed slurry wall and sunken memorial space, the proposal loses much of its emotional impact.
Finally, Westfield Properties, the retail developer that held the lease on the old WTC mall, has plans of its own. The company has threatened legal action against the Port Authority, claiming the master plan doesn't take their needs into account. Westfield's needs include less street-level retail and much more enclosed shopping - a mall larger than the Paramus Mall wrapped around the supposedly sacred memorial space.
While individually each of these alterations may seem minor, in aggregate they could quickly move us from a visionary plan to a run-of-the-mill office park wrapped around a shopping mall and a windswept plaza.
To illustrate the potentially damaging impacts of these proposals, the Civic Alliance to Rebuild Downtown New York yesterday released images visualizing this scenario (Images and more information available at www.civic-alliance.org).
While some rebuilding officials have downplayed these concerns, the danger of reverting to a conventional office development is real. In this city, it is the rule, not the exception. The world is watching what happens on this site, though, and it must be more than just an exception - it must be exceptional.
In February, Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg stood alongside Daniel Libeskind as he unveiled a majestic vision for rebuilding Ground Zero. Studio Libeskind's master plan answered the public call for something truly special and remarkable, an innovation that would create a globally recognized icon for New York's rebirth and a magnet for visitors from around the world. At the heart of the plan, though, was a moving and sacred memorial space that truly honored those we lost on September 11.
While not everyone agreed on the plan, it was the result of a historic public process. Tens of thousands of people participated in two "Listening to the City" forums, the Imagine New York workshops and the official public input process hosted by LMDC. The LMDC's "Innovative Design Study," which led to the selection of the Studio Libeskind master plan also emerged from this public process. The public rightfully assumed that this plan would be largely implemented, with at least its strongest themes intact.
However, in recent months evidence is emerging that this may not be the case. As rebuilding officials contend with developers' requests, the promise of a visionary master plan is gradually being undermined by private interests.
First, developer Larry Silverstein has his own plans for the office towers. He has refused to commit to the concept for Libeskind's iconic Freedom Tower, including the sky gardens and majestic spire. It remains unclear whether Libeskind will be involved at all in its design, since Silverstein has contacted other architects for this job and not yet committed to including Libeskind.
Second, Silverstein has proposed a substantial change to the plan itself, adding a fifth office building on the site. The fifth tower would be located over the PATH terminal that was supposed to be a grand entry point into Lower Manhattan, open to light and air.
The third threat to the plan is leveled at Libeskind's proposed recessed memorial plaza. While the memorial itself has yet to be designed, Libeskind's sunken plaza was the element that distinguished itself from the other proposals and assures a sacred, contemplative setting for the memorial. The connection with the slurry walls and the perception of being close to the bedrock - where so many remains were found - is the heart of the plan. But local groups have opposed the concept of a sunken plaza, arguing it would hinder movement through the site. Moreover, the Port Authority is nearing completion of a substation near Liberty Street that could make it extremely difficult to complete Libeskind's vision. Without the exposed slurry wall and sunken memorial space, the proposal loses much of its emotional impact.
Finally, Westfield Properties, the retail developer that held the lease on the old WTC mall, has plans of its own. The company has threatened legal action against the Port Authority, claiming the master plan doesn't take their needs into account. Westfield's needs include less street-level retail and much more enclosed shopping - a mall larger than the Paramus Mall wrapped around the supposedly sacred memorial space.
While individually each of these alterations may seem minor, in aggregate they could quickly move us from a visionary plan to a run-of-the-mill office park wrapped around a shopping mall and a windswept plaza.
To illustrate the potentially damaging impacts of these proposals, the Civic Alliance to Rebuild Downtown New York yesterday released images visualizing this scenario (Images and more information available at www.civic-alliance.org).
While some rebuilding officials have downplayed these concerns, the danger of reverting to a conventional office development is real. In this city, it is the rule, not the exception. The world is watching what happens on this site, though, and it must be more than just an exception - it must be exceptional.
@RegionalPlan