Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolCzech
We're talking about the most significant skyline in the United States, America's face to the world. It's beyond mere office buildings: it will be practically a national monument. And damn it, we can't allow grey little faceless bureaucrats run this thing into the ground.
|
Oops, too late. The fact that we are having these squabbles in the first place means it already happened a good while back. And the fact that is this way also proves that it has degraded the WTC into mere office buildings. If it was a national monument, we would possibly have seen new
and these squabbles would have never happened. It wouldn't feel right to declare the new WTC a monument while rejecting the former as mere real estate. But that time has long past.
The best we can do is to take that last sentence of yours
and add the word
"further" to it.
Also, what will the word be on June 11? Did that Silver statement mean that the
plan will likely remain as is? Then again, I remember that when the selection process narrowed between THINK's WCC and the Libeskind design, the LMDC and Co. favored the THINK plan but Pataki (and Bloomberg?) overrode it. The PA could ignore the consensus and "stump" them.