WTC Memorial - by Michael Arad (Architect) and Peter Walker (Landscape)

I have to say that what I remember most about "Ground Zero" (as opposed to the nice clean pit we have now) was the facade, it was the only thing left of the towers and yet as a lonely survivor it was cut apart and gone whereever it has gone.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/at...1&d=1147479521

This is what I remember and when you get down to the basics, what does everyone remember? Is is a forgotten staircase that "led" people to safety in the dark? How many people actually used THAT staircase? I don't mean to diminish its significance but there were 8 million victims of 9/11 and even as someone who was there every day I don't feel any special connection to this staircase as I do to the footprints.

There is NOTHING more relevant to a WTC Memorial than a giant skyscraper, that's what the place was all about, that was its only significance to ALL NYers, not just trade center businessmen.

That's the one. Stuff like that has been preserved, but I don't know how bit a piece could be recreated. I am pretty sure that a piece of the WTC facade post 9/11 could be recreated from what they have. That should be the center piece of the memorial, even if it is simply a piece of a RA version.

The other thing that was impactful to many people (and to me) was the fountain, which should be returned to a RA fountain. These items would add to the power of the memorial and EVERYONE would get it.

Reflecting absence is a fine background for a couple of authentic artifacts, strategically placed.

The staircase, most people would never know existed and if it were moved, no one would notice. It's actual position is unimportant to what it symbolizes. Cost of dealing with it is important. Other than wanting it to obstruct construction, I don't know why anyone would insist on its current position.

Reflecting absence has been reworked in so many ways, and so many times, to consider reworking it again is a misguided, desperate, attempt to correct the condition created by design in the first place. Simply put, the design fails on too many levels to continue to try to correct it.

Violations of the rules of the competition
Inability to fulfill the Memorial Mission Statement and Program
Feasibility
Cost
Safety
Historic preservation of the footprints
Incorporation of Historic artifacts

Lets face it, the only option that can truly fix the situation properly, is to rerun the WTC Memorial Competition using the existing design boards that did follow the rules.

Some Rules were NOT meant to be broken.
The LMDC HAS FAILED US.
RE-RUN The Memorial COMPETITION
The proposed Memorial design "Reflecting Absence"

FAILS TO; Contain the ARTIFACTS
FAILS TO; Acknowledge all those who aided in rescue, recovery and healing.
FAILS TO; Leave the Slurry Wall open and prominent.
FAILS TO; Fulfill the Memorial Mission Statement and Program
FAILS TO; Outline the Footprints at 211ft 10 in.

The ORIGINAL Design "Reflecting Absence" should Have Been DISQUALIFIED for violations of the rules.
The LMDC's failure to in-force the rules, and address cost and feasibility issues, is now apparent.
An empty symbolic vessel for remains is unacceptable.
Please support choosing a new Jury AND RE-RUN THE MEMORIAL COMPETITION

Was there a specific rule regarding "cost"? If so, what was it?

Thanks for pointing that out to me Lofter, there has been so many violations, and abdications of duties, regarding "Reflecting Absence" it is difficult to remember who screwed what up.

The fact that the design has gone through so many revisions says it all.

Have questions?

Read the rules, and the Memorial Mission Statement.

The Rules

http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/about_guidelines.html

The Memorial Mission Statement

http://www.renewnyc.com/Memorial/memmission.asp

Instead of ignoring the two documents used as a basis for the memorial, read them, argue your points using them, and you will see the light.

deja vu

But, cityslob, I'm not really looking for "the light" ...

The question you might want to delve into is whether or not any of that stuff you mention is binding in any way ... or simply a guide to move things forward.

You are treating those documents as if they are "laws".

I'm not sure they fit into that category.

Everything else at the WTC was done wrong, but the Memorial Guidelines are the truth. They are the one piece of absolute purity before which we must all bow. If the Memorial guidelines had been honored and obeyed, all else would have been right. The memorial would have been perfect and universally accepted. Peace would have emanated out from the WTC to the whole world. Global warming would have been stopped.

The Urban Development Corporation Act of 1968 or "UDC Act" section 10 "Findings of the corporation" 10h states "in the case of all projects, the corporation shall state the basis for its findings."
Meaning, public benefit corporations cannot do whatever they want, they must state the basis for what they are doing.
The Memorial Mission Statement and Program with the Guidelines are the basis for the findings in this case. So in effect, any violations of those documents would indeed represent a departure from the "Stated Basis", soooooo any violations of the Guidelines, or the Memorial Mission Statement and Program are indeed a violation of the law.

The UDC act was put in place to fight corruption, to make corporations follow what they say they are going to do, after they have stated why they are doing it.

Has the LMDC done what they have said? I think not.

Also, any changes or alterations to the Master Site Plan needs to be approved by the board of directors of the LMDC, and then those changes are required to be discussed in a forum open to the public for dialog.

The LMDC has only done that once, at pace university, and they got slammed by the public at large.

The LMDC has made countless changes to the plans, with no formal approval, and no public forums to those changes as required by law.

Those laws are once again, to fight corruption.

Given the fact that the LMDC has not once, had a dissension to any votes they have taken from it's board members, I would say the LMDC is corrupt as hell.

And certainly not worthy of your defense.

If anyone out there thinks that section 10h has merit, take a look at the teeth on section 10d (3)

Urban Development Corporation Act 174/68

Chapter 174 of the laws of 1968

S 10. Findings of the corporation. Notwithstanding any other provision of this act, the corporation shall not be empowered to undertake the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation or improvement of a project unless the corporation finds:

(d) in the case of a civic project: (1) That there exists in the area in which the project is to be located, a need for the educational, cultural, recreational, community, municipal, public service or other civic facility to be included in the project; (2) That the project shall consist of a building or buildings or other facilities which are suitable for educational, cultural, recreational, community, municipal, public service or other civic purposes; (3) That such project will be leased to or owned by the state or an agency or instrumentality thereof, a municipality or an agency or instrumentality thereof, a public corporation, or any other entity which is carrying out a community, municipal, public service or other civic purpose, and that adequate provision has been, or will be, made for the payment of the cost of acquisition, construction, operation, maintenance and upkeep of the project;

If it is so clear cut then it would seem a lawsuit would swiftly bring LMDC to its knees and force it to get in line.

But that has not been done -- and I'd bet that lawyers on the opposing side have checked this out, yet they have taken no action.

methinks that indicates that the lawyers see it as an unwinnable case.

Issues of this sort are generally based on result, but the legal actions are based on process. Even if the offending result could have been legally and properly achieved, legal attackers will look through all of the details of process for any technical violation. In a situation where some people are going to fight you no matter how reasonable you try to be, the natural tendancy is to minimize communication because each communication becomes the possible material for a later law suit.

Under attack, an agency or an individual shuts down communication and goes to the laws to do precisely what is required and no more.

The extremests in these discussions have threatened action since day one and the LMDC quickly went into defensive mode. They could have and should have been more open in discussing the reasoning behind their decisions. But under attack, the niceties dissapear.

Citislob, are you upset with the process or the outcome, or both? If they had ignored parts of the mission statement and offered full explanations for every action, would you have been happier? There are reasons behind decisions that have been made, some good, and some bad. But that's my opinion and you and everyone else will have their own opinions. You're legal discussions have nothing to do with good decision making. They are rationalizations to attack the LMDC because your vision and the LMDC vision are different. The process is simply the vulnerable spot for attack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lofter1

If it is so clear cut then it would seem a lawsuit would swiftly bring LMDC to its knees and force it to get in line.

But that has not been done -- and I'd bet that lawyers on the opposing side have checked this out, yet they have taken no action.

methinks that indicates that the lawyers see it as an unwinnable case.

---

There is no money to be made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jake

I have to say that what I remember most about "Ground Zero" (as opposed to the nice clean pit we have now) was the facade, it was the only thing left of the towers and yet as a lonely survivor it was cut apart and gone whereever it has gone.

http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/at...1&d=1147479521

This is what I remember and when you get down to the basics, what does everyone remember? Is is a forgotten staircase that "led" people to safety in the dark? How many people actually used THAT staircase? I don't mean to diminish its significance but there were 8 million victims of 9/11 and even as someone who was there every day I don't feel any special connection to this staircase as I do to the footprints.

There is NOTHING more relevant to a WTC Memorial than a giant skyscraper, that's what the place was all about, that was its only significance to ALL NYers, not just trade center businessmen.

---

Me?

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1...00097qu.th.jpg
http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/2...00158ta.th.jpg
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/6...00154du.th.jpg
http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/9...00147bo.th.jpg