Field of Design Concepts Under Consideration Narrowed For World Trade Center Site

Feb. 5, 2003
View Slide Show of Top Two Designs
The Lower Manhattan Development Corporation and Port Authority of New York & New Jersey announced today that the field of World Trade Center site design concepts under consideration has been narrowed to two – a design by Studio Daniel Libeskind and a design called World Cultural Center, developed by THINK.  Representatives of the LMDC, Port Authority, State and City reached a consensus on the two design concepts after reviewing extensive analysis and public comment.On December 18, 2002, nine designs for the site were released. Each design was subjected to rigorous analysis based on a combination of factors, including feasibility, context for the memorial, phasing and public comment collected during an unprecedented outreach campaign, “Plans in Progress.” Although all of the designs had many positive elements, the THINK and Libeskind design concepts best satisfied the criteria. These design concepts will now undergo further review and modification over the next several weeks to address issues raised by the analysis.  By the end of February, a single design concept and its underlying transportation, infrastructure and land use plan will be selected, providing a core vision for the future of the World Trade Center site. The design concept will be further refined and modified in response to further analysis and public comment. The LMDC and Port Authority thanked the many firms and individuals who participated in this historic effort.   The LMDC also announced today that an exhibit of the plans at the Winter Garden, which closed on Sunday, February 2, will reopen on Friday, February 7, featuring the two design concepts under consideration. The exhibit, hosted by the World Financial Center Arts and Events Program, will be open seven days a week, from 7 am to 11 pm.LMDC Chairman John C. Whitehead said, “The design teams have made a major civic contribution above and beyond what was asked of them.   Every one of these architects and designers is a winner for helping to shape the public debate over the future of Lower Manhattan.  After holding numerous public hearings in the boroughs and in New Jersey and listening to many constituencies and organizations, it was a difficult task to choose which design approaches offer the greatest potential - not only for today, but for generations to come.”  LMDC President Louis R. Tomson said, “Looking back upon the last year, it’s remarkable how much progress we’ve made. Through this unprecedented process of consultation and cooperation, a consensus will soon emerge around a single vision for the site. I want to thank all of our partners in this effort, particularly the Port Authority, for their commitment to doing what’s best for the future of our City. And I want to thank the teams. New York City, and the nation, is forever indebted to the men and women who offered the nine designs, each born of hope and forged in democracy.”Port Authority Executive Director Joseph J. Seymour said, “Today’s announcement is a testament to the historic levels of public input that the Port Authority and LMDC have received throughout this process. We are now in a position to move forward on some of the most significant decisions for the site – identifying space for an appropriate memorial to the heroes of September 11, and identifying a transportation, infrastructure and land use plan that will commit us to the construction of a world-class transportation hub, as well as site development, to spark the rebirth of Lower Manhattan.”LMDC Board Member and Site Planning Working Group Chair Roland Betts said, “The architectural teams have served this City, this country and their profession with extraordinary distinction. They have elevated the dialogue to unprecedented heights and to each we owe a heartfelt debt of gratitude.”In August 2002, LMDC launched a worldwide search for architects, planners and artists to propose new ideas for the World Trade Center site. In September 2002, seven teams were selected from among 406 submissions from around the world. The teams were charged with incorporating elements in their designs that were derived from public comment, including a respectful memorial setting preserving the footprints; a bold new skyline; and a range of commercial space.  The seven teams produced nine designs, which were released to the public on December 18th, 2002.Plans in ProgressImmediately after the release of the plans, the LMDC launched a comprehensive outreach campaign, Plans in Progress. This campaign featured an exhibit of the plans at the Winter Garden, which attracted over 100,000 visitors and generated more than 7,000 comments; two public hearings, simulcast to locations in all five boroughs and Long Island, the first one carried live on NY1; a public meeting in New Jersey; a video of each team describing their plans, distributed to libraries throughout the City; and the posting of the plans on LMDC’s website,, which attracted 8 million visits and 4,000 comments.  By the conclusion of the campaign, the LMDC had received 12,000 comments, the majority of them (approximately 65 percent) relating directly to the site plans and/or specific elements of site plans.  Of the 65%, approximately 90% were favorable comments regarding the site plans.  The remainder of the public comment relates to individual site proposals and other general comments unrelated to the site plans.All of the public comment received was read, categorized and is subject to ongoing analysis. A comprehensive final report of all public comment will be released along with the single site design concept.   In general, the public comments reaffirmed the need for an appropriate and fitting memorial to those killed on September 11th, a tall symbol or symbols to restore the Lower Manhattan skyline, more civic and cultural amenities and open space and the integration of the World Trade Center site with the surrounding community. Quantitative and Qualitative AnalysisLMDC and Port Authority planning staff and consultants evaluated the eight designs based on the following 12 quantitative and qualitative factors, including public comment, and numerous subcategories: ·        Memorial Setting: How well does it provide an appropriate memorial setting?       ·        Program: Does the design meet the program requirements?·        Parcels/Street Pattern: How well does the design establish practical street, block and development parcels.·        Public Response:What is the public response to the design?·        Vision: How well does it support the Mayor’s Vision Plan for Lower Manhattan?·        Connectivity: How well does the design connect with its surroundings?·        Phasing: Does the design allow for phased development over time?·        Public Realm: How effective is the addition to the public realm? ·        Private Development:I s the design an attractive environment for private development?·        Unresolvable Issues: Are there components that are unresolvable?·        Resolvable Issues: How significant are the issues that can be resolved?·        Cost: What is the estimated cost of publicly funded elements of the plan? Each design was also analyzed for its compatibility with necessary transportation and infrastructure improvements.  The following experts participated in the analysis: ·        Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Kuhn Architects.- overall design concept evaluation and transportation and infrastructure analysis·        Hamilton Rabinowitz & Alschuler (HR&A) – marketability of commercial office space and retail space; constructibility of commercial and retail components within market conditions·        Sam Schwartz Company – Vehicular and pedestrian movement on and around the site·        Allee King Rosen & Fleming (AKRF) and The Louis Berger Group – Preliminary environmental review ·        Turner Construction and Federman Construction (FD+CC) – cost analysis for public realm investments, including unique features of each proposal·        Mueser Rutledge – Foundation engineering and slurry wall stabilization·        Vollmer Associates – Traffic impact and cost in the 9A West Street corridor·        AKRF, Inc. & Croxtan Collaborative Architects, P.C. – Environmental and Sustainable Design Analysis.Over the next several weeks, these two design concepts will undergo more extensive analysis. Each team will be asked to adjust their plan to address issues identified in the initial analysis. As part of this review, the Port Authority and LMDC will consult with various stakeholders, including the New York City Department of City Planning, Westfield America, Silverstein Properties, Brookfield Properties, Battery Park City Authority, and the New York City Department of Transportation.  A design concept and its underlying transportation, infrastructure and land use plan will be identified by the end of February followed by another period of public comment and refinement. Once the plan is in place, an international memorial competition will be launched in spring 2003 and much of the on-site underground infrastructure and transportation work can proceed. The LMDC and Port Authority thank the following individuals and firms who participated in this historic effort. They set the highest possible standard with their hard work, dedication and vision for the future of New York:Peterson/Littenberg Architecture and Urban Design, New York, NYStudio Daniel Libeskind, Berlin, Germany

Foster and Partners, London, England

Richard Meier, Peter Eisenman, Charles Gwathmey, and Steven Holl, New York, NY


Reiser Umemoto (New York, NY); Foreign Office Architects (London, England); Greg Lynn FORM (Los Angeles, CA); Imaginary Forces (New York, NY and Los Angeles, CA); Kevin Kennon Architect (New York, NY); UN Studio (Amsterdam, Netherlands)THINK Shigeru Ban (Tokyo, Japan),  Frederic Schwartz (New York, NY), Ken Smith (New York, NY),  Rafael Vinoly (New York, NY) with  ARUP (New York, NY), Buro Happold Engineers (Bath, England),  Jorg Schlaich (Stuttgart, Germany), William Moorish (Charlottesville, VA),  David Rockwell (New York, NY),  Janet Marie Smith (Baltimore, MD) Skidmore, Owings and Merrill (SOM) (New York, NY)with Field Operations (Philadelphia, PA
and New York, NY), Tom Leader (Berkeley, CA), Michael Maltzan (Los Angeles, CA), Neutelings Riedijk (Rotterdam, Netherlands), and SANAA (Tokyo, Japan) together with artists Inigo Manglano-Ovalle, Rita McBride, Jessica Stockholder and Elyn Zimmerman
The design submitted by the team led by SOM withdrew their plan from consideration.

Voice your opinion!

To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of Buildings, create an account today!

Sponsored Recommendations

Building Better Schools

Download this digital resource to better understand the challenges and opportunities in designing and operating educational facilities for safety, sustainability, and performance...

Tips to Keep Facility Management on Track

How do you plan to fill the knowledge gap as seasoned facility managers retire or leave for new opportunities? Learn about the latest strategies including FM tech innovations ...

The Beauty & Benefits of Biophilic Design in the Built Environment

Biophilic design is a hot trend in design, but what is it and how can building professionals incorporate these strategies for the benefits of occupants? This eHandbook offers ...

The Benefits of Migrating from Analog to DMR Two-Way Radios

Are you still using analog two-way radios? Download this white paper and discover the simple and cost-effective migration path to digital DMR radios that deliver improved audio...