The Battle For Ground Zero, Part 130

Cost projections for the memorial are spiralling out of control according to pretty much everyone following the Ground Zero rebuilding, and fundraising for the project is seriously lagging. The memorial foundation was supposed to raise $500 million, but has only raised $130 million thus far. Mayor Bloomberg and Gov. Pataki are trying to cap costs at the memorial to $500 million despite the fact that there's no way it could ever be built for that price in its current configuration.

And that means that the entire Michael Arad design may be due for a redesign of its own.

Only two or three years ago, the problems faced by the memorial, the spiritual centerpiece of the site, would have been unimaginable. The underground complex, with its pools, waterfalls and galleries, was the product of a worldwide design competition that drew 5,201 entries and inspired tremendous public passion.

It was supposed to be immune to the controversies that had engulfed the commercial rebuilding at the site, with its completion assured by an outpouring of good will and open checkbooks. But fund-raising has lagged, with just $130 million raised from private contributions.

The new estimate, $972 million, would make this the most expensive memorial ever built in the United States. And that figure does not include the $80 million for a visitors' center paid for by New York State. It is likely to draw unfavorable comparisons to the $182 million National World War II Memorial in Washington, which opened in 2004; the $29 million Oklahoma City National Memorial, which opened in 2000; or the $7 million Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington, which opened in 1982.

The original World Trade Center itself cost $1 billion in the 1970's, or about $3.7 billion in current dollars. Then again, everything at ground zero carries a big ticket, from the $478 million vehicle-screening center to the $2.2 billion PATH terminal.

Perhaps one needs to adjust the figures to account for inflation so that we're not comparing apples to oranges, but there is definitely something amiss when the Ground Zero memorial is anticipated to cost $1 billion or more.

Why are the costs rising like there's no tomorrow? Well, there's disputes over who should bear the burden of preparing a "buildable site." The Memorial Foundation thinks that should be on the Port Authority, which is trying to shift the costs elsewhere.

In the current design, the names of the victims would be inscribed 30 feet below street level, on a parapet in galleries surrounding underground pools within the footprints of the towers. Officials said that eliminating the galleries and moving the inscription of the names to plaza level would save money and resolve some security issues and perhaps assuage opponents.

"We've always made it clear to the foundation and to L.M.D.C. that we do not support this memorial as it stands now," Mr. Gardner said yesterday, although he refused to discuss the April 18 meeting.

But supporters of the current design objected to what they said would be a major revision to appease some critics. "I don't think it's appropriate to go back and start from scratch," said Jeff H. Galloway, a member of Community Board 1 in Lower Manhattan. "The memorial design wasn't thrown together in some haphazard way. It's the result of a thorough and amazingly inclusive process."

Monica Iken, a member of the foundation board and a champion of the original design by Michael Arad and Peter Walker, expressed her dismay at what she called a "leadership failure."

The NY Post notes that Pataki, Corzine, and Bloomberg are all calling for fiscal responsibility, all while pushing a project that will still cost $1 billion in its current configuration and that taxpayers should watch their wallets.

The New York Sun has an article today that once again calls for the rebuilding of the Twin Towers. That's simply not going to happen at this point, and it's wishful thinking to believe otherwise.

UPDATE:
The cost of the memorial is bringing out some interesting reactions from the bloggers. Jeff Jarvis wonders about the size of the memorial, not just the cost.

Now New York is finally going to build its 9/11 memorial. But it has grown too big. It’s not the cost — which is now estimated at an incredible $1 billion. It’s the overpowering way this too-large memorial will be too big to be part of life. The NY Post called for shrinking the memorial sometime ago and I am coming to agree and even to wonder whether it should be at the site or elsewhere.

The footprint of the memorial itself actually isn't all that big as it's a fraction of the entire Ground Zero's 16 acres. It's the complexity of the site and the memorial design that is really at issue. We're talking about a memorial that extends 70 feet below street level on multiple levels that has to be coordinated with other infrastructure needs for the entire site - transportation, utilities, access points, and the actual memorial space itself. Some of the costs are related to the cost of doing business in New York, as well as the costs of materials having increased significantly since the memorial design was first chosen.

This isn't to say that I agree with the memorial design. I wonder about the complexity of the design and its feasibility (curtain waterfalls that would run only part of the year because of issues with freezing water causing hazardous conditions). But unless you've been following the story for long, you wouldn't understand how the memorial fits into the larger mess that remains the Ground Zero rebuilding. The whole memorial and Ground Zero building process is all about compromises built upon what many consider to be a seriously flawed Libeskind master plan, which itself grew out of distaste of plans generated by the Port Authority's designers.

Poliblog points to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington DC as an example that should be emulated in New York. Maya Lin, the designer of the DC memorial, was on the panel that chose the Michael Arad design.

Just a Bump in the Beltway is incredulous at the cost.

Gothamist also has a roundup:

Well, that's what happens when memorial officials estimate the cost of building something - always go to a contractor for an estimate, put another 20% on it, and then you're almost in the ballpark.

UPDATE:
About the costs of various projects, I've calculated current dollar costs using this calculator:

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial cost $7 million in 1982. In current dollars, that would be $14,493,260.

The Twin Towers were built for $1 billion in 1970. In current dollars, that's $5.15 billion.

The WWII Memorial in Washington DC cost $182 million and opened in 2004. In current dollars, that would be $194.62 million.

The Oklahoma City Bombing memorial cost $29 million. In current dollars, it's $33.65 million.

The differential in cost is still staggering, but provides more context. None of the other memorials required the kinds of technological and engineering involved at Ground Zero.

UPDATE:
Glitch in the Matrix meant that this article was posted 9:20PM, when it should have been posted 9:20AM today. That's why the time stamp keeps changing.

UPDATE:
Curbed has a posting that goes into how Bovis Lend Lease threw everything and the kitchen sink into the cost for the site to reach the $1 billion level. Curbed is a good resource for finding out the latest on real estate in the NY metro area.

Technorati: World Trade Center, WTC, Pataki, LMDC, urban policy, Freedom Tower, IFC, International Freedom Center, spitzer, silverstein.