Posted by  Jan Orfe on October 10, 2003 at 11:25:40:

In Reply to:  Re: Odds and Ends posted by William Stratas on October 09, 2003 at 18:57:07:

Just a quick note to say Thanks for your encouraging analysis of my rambling lack of self-confidence. (I'm feeling much better today.)
When I first looked at the pit's uneven
shape, I did not panic. The layout of required Program Elements (there were 5)
clearly hinged on making the footprints
visible, demarcated, for easy identity. Yamasaki's towers had a 208' square base, whereas Libeskind (don't ask me why) sets aside 212' and 217', respectively, which I squared off on my presentation board. Not a bad start. Except for one thing:
He didn't provide a graphic scale.
His Liberty Street ramp was shown as
12' wide on the site plan drawing. Using THAT measurement as a workable scale (1/8"=12' on my ruler, because the bar scale is useless when dealing in feet and inches for precision), I can't begin to tell you how impossible it was to compute
a simple line's length from that point on! Not to bore you to death, but when I applied my assumed scale of 1/8"=12' to the north footprint, it measured 222', NOT 212'. That's a 10' difference, and I don't have the slightest clue what to
illustrate next... basically, my composition became a crap shoot. "They" want me to keep a copy of my design? What for? And I'm supposed to feel part of the process once my presentation board is archived? Why would they do that, knowing full well the competition was flawed to begin with?
Granted, as you say, adjustments can be
made vis-a-vis merit. But come on. Some
of my elements measure 16". And finally,
the suggested scale to use in Section A
was 1"=40'. Now I'm not a carpenter, but
they depend on standardized materials,
and beautiful houses get built. And I'm
not a conspiracy-thinking type of guy, either. But is it possible the LMDC issued a bunch of bogus measurements, to weed out the amateurs on purpose??
Anyone else have problems with Mr.
Libeskind's site plan boundaries?
Orfe

Post a Response -