wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Gridlock at Ground Zero

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

New York Times reporter Charles V. Bagli, discusses the politics and funding issues surrounding the development at the World Trade Center site. Plus, Miriam Greenberg, assistant professor of Sociology at UC Santa Cruz and author of Branding New York: How a City in Crisis Was Sold to the World, explains the similarities between development at the site now and in the 70's.

WNYC Talk to Me Lecture Series: Miriam Greenberg on Branding NY


Comments

  • [1] hjs from 11211 June 30, 2009 - 10:33AM

    is there any need for more office space?


  • [2] mike June 30, 2009 - 10:34AM

    How is Silverstein able to fleece the Port Authority over and over again? When is the public going to stop him?


  • [3] mike June 30, 2009 - 10:35AM

    I thought he got a huge insurance payout. What about that money?!


  • [4] hjs from 11211 June 30, 2009 - 10:36AM

    didn't the chinese demand the name change for the building formally known as the "freedom tower"


  • [5] Tom from UWS June 30, 2009 - 10:42AM

    If building seems slow now, it's because decisions were made too quickly and thoughtlessly in the first months after 9/11.

    The plan is for a billion dollar memorial and a fortress office tower unlikely to appeal to tenants and answering no need. Had more thought been put into the needs of New York and the region we could a project with inherent value - for instance, a major memorial medical complex specializing in burn and respiratory patients that would honor the victims and first responders.

    How much better a way to memorialize the lives lost with a USEFUL plan that we could be proud of every day. Instead of a 1776-foot high spire, we'd have a new symbol of our strength, compassion and intelligence. And every time a patient was brought in from around the world, that world would see our greatness and generosity at work.


  • [6] Michael D. D. White from Brooklyn Heights June 30, 2009 - 11:02AM

    Is all the space planned to be rebuilt at Ground Zero really necessary? The question is more pertinent (together with the fact that the answer tilts towards “no”) given the fact that most of the shortcomings of the new design relate to trying to squeeze in an almost impossible amount of density made more difficult given the laudable reestablishment of the street grid and the creation of the memorial and improved transit hub.

    See: Tuesday, August 5, 2008

    TWO, AND FRO?-http://noticingnewyork.blogspot.com/2008/08/two-and-fro.html

    Also, it is more ironic that we are now asking this question about whether squeezing in all this extra density is desirable given that, across the street, the venerable Battery Park City master plan was overridden and the quality of BPC unfortunately significantly affected by squeezing in the new very dense Goldman Sachs building with a special Bloombergian deal.

    See: Monday, February 23, 2009

    Un-funny Valentines Arriving Late: Your Community Interests at Heart-

    http://noticingnewyork.blogspot.com/2009/02/un-funny-valentines-arriving-late-your.html


  • [7] Norman Oder from Brooklyn, NY June 30, 2009 - 12:47PM

    To clarify the exchange between Andrea Bernstein and Charles Bagli regarding Atlantic Yards:

    Yesterday, the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) announced a public hearing to be held on July 29 and July 30. That will be followed, most likely, by approval of the project by the ESDC board in September.

    However, just today we learned that the Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, has accepted the appeal in the case challenging eminent domain for Atlantic Yards. That hearing will be held in mid-October.

    That narrows the window of opportunity for developer Forest City Ratner to have tax-exempt bonds for the arena issued by the December 31 deadline.

    Norman Oder

    AtlanticYardsReport.com


  • [8] Tal Barzilai from Pleasantville, NY July 01, 2009 - 06:55AM

    The offical plan over at the WTC site is nothing more than a joke and a boondoggle. The only freedom the Freedom Tower represents is the fact that then-governor George Pataki had the freedom to pick it over the public decision, who opposed it greatly. Being at many of the public hearings invovling this topic from the begining, I have hardly hear anyone speak out in favor of this project when it was first mentioned and wanted the Twin Towers rebuilt instead, while Daniel Libeskind's plan was ranked all the way at the bottom. Other things about the official plan is that it contains a number of unnecessary things such as streets, station house, and even a memorial that was highly hated and the costs for all of these just keep going up. Having the Twin Towers rebuilt wouldn't just save money, but also time, plus there would be no need to demolish any existing foundation work, because it can always be retrofitted to go with it. Also, it can even be made to be more environomentally friendly by widening the windows to all for more sunlight, which will reduce the need for turnning on any electrical lights that Freedom Tower would need for its first 20 floors because of that concrete bunker that will block all sunlight, though it was built out of paranoia because of the connected streets on the assumption of vehicle bombs that a superblock can easily prevent.


Leave a Comment

Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. WNYC reserves the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the WNYC.org Comment Guidelines before posting.

Your comment


* required
The information entered into this form will not be used to send unsolicited email and will not be sold to a third party.
 
Back to Episode