WTC Tower One - by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill

[JMGarcia]

Libeskind, Childs to Unite on Trade Center's Freedom Tower

July 16 (Bloomberg) -- Architects Daniel Libeskind and David Childs agreed to collaborate on the world's tallest building at New York's World Trade Center site, settling a dispute between leaseholder Larry Silverstein and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the property.

Childs, of Skidmore Owings & Merrill, will serve as design architect and project manager of the 1,776-foot Freedom Tower, and Studio Daniel Libeskind, which was named the Port Authority's master architect for the site, will be ``collaborating architect'' Kevin Rampe, executive director of the Lower Manhattan Development Corp., announced after eight hours of talks that ended after midnight New York time.


Silverstein and Libeskind reach agreement on ``Freedom Tower''

By JENNIFER FRIEDLIN
Associated Press Writer

July 16, 2003, 2:20 AM EDT

NEW YORK -- Architect Daniel Libeskind and representatives of developer Larry Silverstein agreed early Wednesday to collaborate on a design for the 1,776-foot "Freedom Tower" planned for the World Trade Center site, officials said.

The collaboration gives architect David Childs, who has done extensive work with Silverstein, the lead role in developing the tower, which is to be the world's tallest.

It was unclear what effect the deal will have on Libeskind's design for the tower, which was part of a proposal for the site chosen over eight others. The agreement has yet to be signed, and no terms were disclosed.

Childs, a consulting partner for Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, will serve as the design architect and project manager leading the team that will design the tower, officials said.

Libeskind will serve as a contributing architect for the concept and schematic design of the tower.

In a statement read by Lower Manhattan Development Corp. President Kevin Rampe outside the agency's offices, officials said the "Freedom Tower" would be designed in "a manner consistent with the Libeskind vision."

"I think it was a great meeting today," Rampe said. "We saw a tremendous amount of collaboration between Daniel Libeskind and David Childs."

The announcement followed a nearly eight-hour private meeting at the downtown offices of the LMDC, which was created after Sept. 11, 2001, to oversee the rebuilding process.

The meeting included representatives of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the site, as well as representatives of Silverstein, the trade center's leaseholder. Silverstein did not attend.

Libeskind, who had been present during the discussions, did not attend the announcement.

His wife and business partner, Nina Libeskind, reached by telephone, said the statement reflected what happened and declined to comment further, other than saying that the meeting was "extremely positive."

The agreement appeared to resolve at least some of the conflicts between Libeskind and Silverstein, who have clashed over Libeskind's vision for the site.

Libeskind's had envisioned an off-center spire at the top of the tower, while Silverstein said such a spire would increase construction costs. It was not clear whether that aspect of the tower's design would be altered as a result of the deal.

Libeskind's design for the trade center site also includes other office buildings surrounding the empty ground where the twin towers stood.

Wednesday's announcement did not touch upon any other aspects of the plan, though Silverstein has voiced concerns about the commercial viablilty of Libeskind's proposal.

Gov. George Pataki has indicated that he would like to see steel on the centerpiece tower erected by 2006.


Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press

[JMGarcia]

Perfect Complement to a Grand Design
By EDWARD WYATT
NY Times

Daniel Libeskind has already secured what has been called "the commission of the century." He has the plans, the contracts to carry them out and the backing of important patrons, from Gov. George E. Pataki on down.

And now, Mr. Libeskind has one more thing that could help him make his vision for the World Trade Center site a reality: an architect's license.

Last week, Mr. Libeskind passed the national architecture licensing exam, one of the requirements for being a registered, licensed architect in New York State. As a result, he can legally prepare blueprints for and oversee construction of anything from a kitchen renovation to a 1,776-foot tower.

"I'm a New Yorker, and I'm a New York architect," he said in an interview yesterday. "I started my architectural education here at Cooper Union, and now I've come full circle. That was very important, that I do everything possible to be properly accredited by all the authorities."

Though it might seem odd that the winner of the design competition for the site was not a licensed architect, people in the profession say it is fairly common for high-profile architects to be unlicensed.

"The world's great buildings are done by great designers, not by people with licenses," said Alexander Garvin, who was the vice president for planning, design and development at the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation during the design competition. An adjunct professor at the Yale School of Architecture, Mr. Garvin is not licensed.

Neither was Minoru Yamasaki, who designed the original World Trade Center, including the twin towers. Mr. Yamasaki employed the architecture firm of Emery Roth & Sons to produce the development's detailed construction drawings.

The defenders of the licensing requirement include the authorities at the American Institute of Architects and the New York State Department of Education, which licenses more than 14,000 architects — as well as doctors, nurses, acupuncturists and shorthand reporters.

Mr. Libeskind qualified for his license based on his design and building experience overseas, where he holds several professional licenses. For his New York examination, he was required to present and discuss drawings and related materials for three completed buildings that he designed. He chose the Jewish Museum in Berlin; the Imperial War Museum in Manchester, England, and the Felix Nussbaum Museum in Osnabrück, Germany.

"What I brought to the exam were technical materials," he said. "They were not just pretty pictures of buildings. At our studio, we've done all the working drawings for our buildings ourselves. I'm a great believer in not farming out those responsibilities to another office."

[Fabb]

Libeskind's had envisioned an off-center spire at the top of the tower, while Silverstein said such a spire would increase construction costs. It was not clear whether that aspect of the tower's design would be altered as a result of the deal.

Nothing is clear, really.
About the spire, Silverstein is stating the obvious. Unless it's finally used as an antenna.

[Freedom Tower]

If it was used as an antenna wouldn't that be even better? Wouldn't they have to then make the spire thicker to hold the antenna, and taller to meet the 1776 foot mark?

[NYguy]

NY Post...

FINALLY! DEAL REACHED TO REBUILD GROUND ZERO

By WILLIAM NEUMAN

July 16, 2003 -- Officials early this morning hammered out a deal allowing design work to get under way on the 1,776-foot tall Freedom Tower planned for Ground Zero.

After more than seven hours of exhausting negotiations, the agreement broke a deadlock between Ground Zero developer Larry Silverstein and the site's master planner, Daniel Libeskind.

Under the accord, Silverstein's architect, David Childs, will become the "design architect and project manager" for the world's tallest building.

Libeskind will have a more limited role as "collaborating architect during the concept and schematic design phases," said Lower Manhattan Development Corp. President Kevin Rampe in a brief 12:45 a.m. press conference.

He stressed that Libeskind will be "a full member of the project team," and called the deal a "historic collaboration."

Rampe refused to say who would have the final say if disagreements arise over the design or appearance of the tower - but a written statement makes it clear that Childs will be in charge and "leading the project team."

Typically, on a project of this size, the "design architect" and his client would make the final decisions. *

Libeskind and Silverstein have been at odds for weeks over who will control the building's design and how much it will look like the sketch presented in Libesknid's site plan - an angular building with a needle-like, 1,776-foot spire attached to one side.

In contrast, Childs has been working on drawings that place the skyscraping structure directly on top of the building, rather than beside it.

The two sides met at the LMDC's offices, adjacent to Ground Zero, with officials from the LMDC and the Port Authority brokering the compromise.

Much of the negotiating took place directly between Libeskind and Childs, a partner in Skidmore Owings & Merrill. Silverstein did not attend.

Both sides appeared to give a little and gain a little. Libeskind was given a place on the design team, although he gets no guarantee the building will look like the one he envisioned. Silverstein, who will pay for the tower with insurance proceeds, allows Libeskind to take part, but retains apparent control for his own architect.

"This collaboration will facilitate the development of the Freedom Tower in a manner consistent with the Libeskind vision," the LMDC statement said.

Childs has designed several skyscrapers, but Libeskind has no experience with tall buildings.

[NYguy]

Quote: from Fabb on 7:27 am on July 16, 2003
Libeskind's had envisioned an off-center spire at the top of the tower, while Silverstein said such a spire would increase construction costs. It was not clear whether that aspect of the tower's design would be altered as a result of the deal.

Nothing is clear, really.
About the spire, Silverstein is stating the obvious. Unless it's finally used as an antenna.

Silverstein clearly makes sense in this case. *There has already been a deal signed to place the broadcasters back at the top of the WTC, so there will be broadcast antennas.

But as far as the tower goes, it wasn't really necessary for the broadcast tower to extend to ground level - especially if it would block the views of the office workers on the west side of the office building.

I fully expected and still expect a design that will only feature the open space at the top.

[NoyokA]

In contrast, Childs has been working on drawings that place the skyscraping structure directly on top of the building, rather than beside it.

In reality this ploy, corporate and money-saving, could result in a greater skyline presence.

[Kris]

Who knows.

[NYatKNIGHT]

Has Childs done a tall building that isn't symmetrical?

[dbhstockton]

This means that the final product is not going to look much like Libeskind's vision. *Neither Childs nor SOM is not capable of Libeskind's unique kind of expressionism (I guess you could call it that). *I do have a feeling that the public will like what comes out of this process, though.

[Agglomeration]

If all this is true, then the trade center competition held last February was barely even worth it :angry:. I woudn't be surprised if sometime later Libeskind got sick of being shortchanged and decided to withdraw from the project altogether.

[Fabb]

Quote: from NYatKNIGHT on 11:52 am on July 16, 2003
Has Childs done a tall building that isn't symmetrical?

Not done yet, but 7WTC is not symmetrical.
But I understand what you mean though.
He'll just have to learn.

[Jasonik]

I'm glad SOM is doing the tower, they have so much experience.

At the risk of appearing cynical, ever since I heard Vinoly speak at MIT I've had the gut feeling that Libeskind is being used, as were all the entrants, to create a context for the memorial competition, period. *

I don't think the final development will stray too far from the basic land use parameters laid out by Libeskind, nor will the aesthetics depart radically from the jagged, shardlike forms.

Someone said (sorry) that the Libeskind design is basically a BBB scheme with 'architectural flavor crystals added.' *It has always been a plan and not a final draft.

New flavor = SOM Supreme

[TLOZ Link5]

That may be, but the public interpreted BBB's plans as an actual design, as opposed to just land-use proposals. *The Post has made it a personal mission to lambaste Libeskind's design for looking to Memorial Plaza-ish—at the expense of THINK's design, which would have killed the skyline with its giant chicken-wire tubes; not to mention the fact that all of the commercial space was crammed into a clutter of mid- to low-rise buildings at the eastern edge of the site. *Can anyone say, "hypocrisy"?

[Chris2005]

Hey, does this mean that construction will be able to begin sooner at the WTC site??