Study by Eli Attia Discredits Wedge of Light

[TomAuch]

http://www.phoenixproject.info/designframes.html

A study done by the architect Eli Attia shows that *the "Wedge of Light" doesn't work, because of the posistioning of the buildings across Church St.

The study is under "The nine lies of Daniel Libeskind."

(Edited by TomAuch at 11:57 pm on April 18, 2003)

[JMGarcia]

I always thought that the "Wedge of Light" is there specifically so that shadow won't fall on the "Park of Heroes" there being no building in the "Wedge of Light". The wedge provides the open space necessary for the sun to shine continually on the Park of Heroes. I never thought that the Wedge wa supposed to be where the sun never shone.

At least that's what I remember from watching the original presentation. I can't believe how stupid Libeskind has been if Attia's correct.

Other than that I'd say Attia's design looks too much like broken shards.

It does have its good points, as all the designs did, but I personally think Foster did virtually the same concept much, much better than Attia has.

Parts of it also remind me of this proposal....
http://www.point-of-departure.net/
Click on "Works" and then the numbers after it loads.

This one is quite something too. Reminds me of the UA proposal.

http://www.sydmead.com/features/wtc/

Click on the graphic and be patient with the flash which takes forever for the "next" icons to show up.

This one is pretty cool too.

http://www.seventhproposal.com

[chris]

I'd been curious whether anyone was going to do an analysis of the wedge of light. I figured it would come from the lighting design department of an architecture school.

The Hilton tower beside the site that will cast the shadow is his, so it is likely he would have questioned the concept knowing where his own building's shadow would fall.

[TomAuch]

If, in fact, Attia's correct, this could lead to Libeskind's downfall, and would be a major victory for Libeskind's opponents, (ie. Pro-Rebuilders).

[StevenRosenow]

I'd been curious whether anyone was going to do an analysis of the wedge of light. I figured it would come from the lighting design department of an architecture school.

Not only that, but you have meterology to deal with. As one who's done a great deal of study involving weather, it can be very hard to predict when it'll be sunny, and when it won't be.

Libeskind's design and "Wedge of Light" idea automatically takes on a full assumption that every September 11th will be a gorgeous sunny day. The all-in-all likelihood of that happening can be as varied as as a 5-day weather forecast for Seattle.

Good idea in thought, but when dealing with the reality of long shadows cast by other buildings in the area, and of unpredictable weather, it makes the idea illogical.

[Kris]

Quote: from TomAuch on 2:49 am on April 19, 2003
If, in fact, Attia's correct, this could lead to Libeskind's downfall, and would be a major victory for Libeskind's opponents, (ie. Pro-Rebuilders).

Yeah?

[tugrul]

Heh, the weather. Thats desparate.

I'm somewhat disappointed with Attia's design. It does share some of the thoughtful details of his other projects I've read about, but its skyline presence is lacking. It doesn't exude majesty, and it looks weak amongst the boxes of downtown.

I expected more from Attia.

[JMGarcia]

If, in fact, Attia's correct, this could lead to Libeskind's downfall, and would be a major victory for Libeskind's opponents, (ie. Pro-Rebuilders).

Are you guys still under the illusion that the architect gets to pick the height of the buildings?

In any case, did you ever hear the phrase "be careful what you wish for"?

If it were even possible for public advocacy group to get rid of Libeskind at this point, which I doubt, what would probably happen is that the PA and Silverstein would start calling the shots (they are the ones paying for it after all) and we'd end up with buildings certainly no taller that what Libeskind has proposed, probably without any sort of expensive skyline element, and the whole thing would be delayed for so long as the interest groups tied it up for decades like Times Sq. or Columbus Circle that it could put downtown into a permanent recession. Ever been to Detroit?

I still say that it will be far more productive to pressure Silverstein and the PA (Libeskind will do what is asked of him) to raise the height of some of the towers and/or beef up the Garden Tower than it is wasting time discrediting Libeskind which will ultimately get you nowhere.

What don't you spend your considerable energy lobbying for adding residential, more hotel, or other cultural uses on the site that would require an increase in tower height?

(Edited by JMGarcia at 11:13 am on April 19, 2003)

[Kris]

If they followed your advice, Silverstein might use their lobbying as an excuse to dismiss height concerns as fanatical. The only sensible thing to do is to tell them to get lost.

[TomAuch]

If it were even possible for public advocacy group to get rid of Libeskind at this point, which I doubt, what would probably happen is that the PA and Silverstein would start calling the shots (they are the ones paying for it after all) and we'd end up with buildings certainly no taller that what Libeskind has proposed, probably without any sort of expensive skyline element, and the whole thing would be delayed for so long as the interest groups tied it up for decades like Times Sq. or Columbus Circle that it could put downtown into a permanent recession. Ever been to Detroit?
(Edited by JMGarcia at 11:13 am on April 19, 2003)

Scrapping Libeskind's plan does not translate into a mandate for Silvertsin to assume power. Because Wedge of Light doesn't work, it cold be argued that the plan is a fraud, and that the public was tricked into accepting it. I don't think the LMDC will accept the Libeskind plan if the public becomes disillusioned with it, and not even the civic groups, who are so concerned about public input would allow this scandel to happen. Anyway, I don't think Silverstein and the PA would take control, since what would happen is that we'll just go through the same public process as before until we get another design. The worst case scenario would be a design with buildings the same height as Libeskind's (including the Garden Tower, because at countless public hearings and polls, and the majority of the public want to repair the skyline, and Silverstein is EXTREMELY unlikely to give us 800 ft boxes for fear of a public backlash.)

[JMGarcia]

The public has generally lost interest beyond getting something built as soon as possible, therefore I doubt a shadow on the wedge of light would prompt such public anger that the pols would get rid of Libeskind. You have to realize how transparent TTT is currently being in trying to discredit Libeskind and how many people realize it. It smacks of being poor losers and they are too close to becoming just another buzzing NIMBY noise on the fringes along with the mega-memorialists, the safety firsters, and the low income housing advocates. It smacks of being petty because you didn't get, big square, offset, twin towers so you are going to try to bring the whole process down, everyone else be damned.

In any case, there's is no way in hell that the pols are going to derail the memorial process at this point to start all over with another competition for the site plan so every wacko special interest group can get a public forum to tell them how bad they are. There is no way in hell the victim's families are going to agree to further delays in the memorial. There is no way in hell that you can go around saying, in effect, "I hate you now do what I say" and get anyone to listen.

Even if you did succeed in throwing the whole thing into chaos, you know what you'd have 3 years later? A hole in the ground with a temporary PATH station, a downtown with no transportation improvements and probably beyond recovery as a major financial center and a proposal with towers that are in no way any closer to being replicas of the twins or any taller than the current versions. The best you could hope for was different facade treatments and possibly arranged differently.

Instead, why don't you write Marriott and suggest they add 20-30 floors to one of the towers for a hotel, or write The City Opera and suggest they put their new facilities on top of the commercial space, or write the big residential developers in the city and suggest they approach Silverstein to put condos on top of the commercial space, or write Libeskind and suggest he increase the width of the spire to accomodate additional functions.

If Libeskind was holding building height down, I would be the first one calling for his removal, but he's not. Silverstein and the PA are and the only thing that'll convince them to go higher is a firm financial reward for doing so.

[Kris]

There is no way in hell that you can go around saying, in effect, "I hate you now do what I say" and get anyone to listen.

At least someone is.

[TAFisher123]

This design by Attia is no picnic either....maybe he's mad he was ignored although he could be right about the light wedge, who knows? *I for one wont be going to ground zero at 8:48 every Sept 11th to watch the sun shining on the site, will you?

[Kris]

Look! Below the trees!


What a sham!

[JMGarcia]

LOL Chris.