The Battle For Ground Zero, Part XXIV

Quadrant plan lies at heart of dispute, at least according to the New York Times. They point to Libeskind' master plan, which drew the boundaries for various aspects of the rebuilding.

By dividing the trade center site into quadrants around the east-west line of Fulton Street and the north-south line of Greenwich Street, planners created a clearly defined parcel containing the twin towers' footprints.

In retrospect, it seems obvious that this parcel would come to be regarded by some as the memorial precinct exclusively; no matter that planners envisioned a cultural building there as a buffer for the memorial, as a place of "memory and hope"; no matter that people died throughout the whole trade center site.

In retrospect, it also seems obvious that it might grow politically difficult to situate anything in the precinct that was not directly related to 9/11 or that veered at all from a tributary function.

And now there is a mire around the Drawing Center, a 28-year-old museum in SoHo, and the embryonic International Freedom Center, conceived by Tom A. Bernstein, the president of Chelsea Piers, and Peter Kunhardt, a documentary filmmaker.

These institutions were chosen in June 2004 to occupy a cultural building at the northeast corner of the memorial precinct. Last month, responding to critics who foresaw the possibility of anti-American artwork or programs in the building, Gov. George E. Pataki asked the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation to secure an "absolute guarantee" from the institutions that they undertake nothing "that denigrates America."

That led in turn to what Stefan Pryor, the corporation president, said yesterday were continuing discussions with both institutions.

The design of the structure, by the firms Snohetta, Adamson Associates and Buro Happold, is already being revised to pull it away from the void and pool in the memorial plaza that will mark the location of the north tower. The current plan calls for the building to be 40 to 45 feet from the void at its closest point, about twice the distance of the design unveiled in May. Over all, the building's footprint is being reduced at least 10 percent, said Craig Dykers, a partner in Snohetta.

If you haven't noticed by now, but many of the problems with the site's redevelopment stem from decisions made to use Libeskind's master plan. For starters, the idea that the street grid would need to be restored in some fashion is simply a non-starter. There's no way that the streets would ever be reused, given the security concerns. Plus, it takes away valauble real estate needed for the memorial, open spaces, and office buildings for the site.

The choice to use Libeskind is a failure that can be directly attributable to Gov. Pataki.

As to what uses the Snohetta building can be used to should the IFC and The Drawing Center decamp, it seems eminently clear - expand the 9/11 Memorial and museum to include the facility as display space for some of the thousands of objects recovered from the collapse. Since it is at street level, the building would be a logical locus for a museum and a focal point from ground level.

Take Back The Memorial has more on the campaign to get rid of The Drawing Center and IFC from the site.

Meanwhile Calatrava's rail terminal at the WTC is going to be approved after additional changes were made to improve security.

The board is to vote today on the overall project and on the authority's $300 million contribution to the $2.2 billion budget. (The $1.9 billion balance comes from the Federal Transit Administration.)

Groundbreaking is scheduled in September, and the terminal is to open in 2009. Mr. Calatrava is also designing what would be the nation's tallest building, in Chicago. He is working on the trade center project with STV and DMJM Harris.

Their revisions are nowhere close to the alterations made recently to the proposed Freedom Tower at the trade center site, which was fundamentally redesigned after objections raised by the police. But the main transit hall, between Church and Greenwich Streets, will almost certainly lose some of its delicate quality, while gaining structural expressiveness. It may now evoke a slender stegosaurus more than it does a bird.

There are still 150-foot-high wings on either side of the hall's tapering arc, but there will not be glass or any other material between the ribs. The wings will still open on nice spring and summer days, and ceremonially every Sept. 11, exposing the concourse below to the open sky. But the width of the maximum opening has shrunk to about 30 feet from 45 feet.

Twice as many steel ribs will enclose the transit hall in the revised design. By reducing the space between the ribs to 5½ feet from 11, the designers have cut down on the amount of glass that would be exposed to a blast. The ribs themselves would create a protective shadow, depending on the angle of the explosion.

This would appear to lessen the direct lighting available into the transit center, which was one of the major selling points of the design. However, it still sounds like a striking piece of architecture and one that is truly befitting the site. Another good feature is that it eliminates the need for PATH hill, which was the large bank of escalators to the station level.

UPDATE:
Here's the press release associated with the Port Authority's approval of the Calatrava PATH hub at the WTC.