World Trade Center’s future is still very much up in the air

6th August 2013   ·   0 Comments

By Christopher Tidmore
Contributing Writer

Those who were expecting a decision on the future of New Orleans’ World Trade Center at last Tuesday’s hearing were disappointed. The three-hour meeting in the City Council chambers provided no clue as to which of the three bidders would be awarded the building and property, yet one thing did become clear. The vaulted plan, supported by allies of the mayor, to build a Tricentennial Park on the Riverfront—and tear down the 50-year-old office building—did not enjoy a single speaker testifying in support from the general public.

In fact, the most noted moment of the July 29 hearing came when Betsy Stout of the Louisiana Landmarks Society warned that the demise of the WTC could be known to future generations as “Landrieu’s Folly.”

As she explained in an interview with The Louisiana Weekly, “There have been many developments along the riverfront over the years — some we think of with fondness, like the Moonwalk,” named for the current mayor’s father—not a celestial body. “But,” Stout continued, “if we spend public money to tear down this building and build a ‘thing,’ it will be known as Landrieu’s Folly.”

The Tricentennial Park enthusiasts advocate an open park onto the Poydras/Canal intersection, containing within what has been described as an “iconic symbol of the city” similar in spirit, if not design” to St. Louis’ Gateway Arch. But, no one has clearly explained what the structure would look like.

To understand the confusion, one map of the proposed park displayed a green space with a big question mark drawn in the center. The reason, according to some in the crowd, was that the structure which they had proposed earlier—and which looked kind of like a Chinese fingerpull—very much resembles a similar geodesic structure in Asia. Hardly an original construction; hence, the map’s question mark.

In theory, the Tricentennial Park project would be tied into another phase of Convention Center Development on the upriver side of the convention center, yet the presentation by advocate Darryl Berger appeared confused on that point and others.

For example, Berger stressed that jobs were the important thing, and how the park proposal would bring more jobs. However, several of the attendees in audience wondered how his proposal would bring more employment that the two proposals to convert the World Trade Center in to a hotel and apartments. He had no clear answer, though, as to how the on-going use of the WTC, as opposed to its demolition, would mean fewer more permanent jobs than the maintenance of a green space could offer.

Regardless of the criticism behind them, Tricentennial Consortium spokesmen Allen Eskew, Ron Forman and Ray Manning joined Berger in pushing for bringing down the 33-story former office building. They argued that turning the WTC site into a public space open to the river would lure millions of new tourists to the city. That, the Consortium members concluded, proved a better use than a hotel or apartment complex.

The Tricentennial bid promises the city $1.5 million per year, guaranteed by the Audubon Foundation and the Convention Center Board. The proposal would scale down the ferry station, linking the Aquarium and Woldenberg Park in an open plaza to the Riverwalk and to a potentially new phase of the convention center that would cover the parking lots abutting Poydras at Churchill Circle. (Though, this last proposal remains at the drawing-board stage.)

The two competing plans to redevelop the WTC keep the building intact, promising the city roughly the same amount of rent, though over a longer period. The James Burch proposal for a hotel, apartment, and entertainment complex in the existing building offers the city $1.25 million a year during construction and then $1.5 million a year for 95 years, adjusted every five years for inflation up to two percent a year. That adds up to $388 million over the 99 year lease.

The Gatehouse Group, seeking a W Hotel in the WTC, puts up $10 million up front, with the possibility of a continue share of revenue; though, it has warned that “unforeseen” environmental problems could reduce this sum somewhat.

Betsy Stout and Louisiana Landmarks emphasize that they are not affiliated with either group. They just want to save the classic modern structure. As she noted, “There are two proposals to keep and restore the facade of the building and redevelop the inside — two private groups. One of them [Gatehouse] proposes a W Hotel along with many condos and penthouses. This group offers the city a one time up front $10 million payment. Their big downside is that they do not have financing lined up, so that the project may fall through if they cant get it.”

“The other proposal, known as the Burch proposal, is to do a very high end luxury hotel along with several apartments, a Kermit Ruffins Jazz club, Danny O’Fla­herty’s Irish Pub, a John Besh restaurant, and a New Orleans Cooking School on the ground floor. This group has initial financing already and letters of confirmation regarding further financing. The Burch proposal offers a minimum of $1.5 million a year, recurring revenue for the duration of the lease, which may go up depending on prevailing interest rates, etc. Both of these proposals do not require Tifs or any tax breaks or financing from the city; they would both qualify for Federal Historic redevelopment tax breaks.”

“Ask yourself the question,” Stout challenged this reporter in her interview, “Is it selfish to propose taking millions of dollars of public money in this financially struggling city and state to tear down this building in order to put back green space and to build a ‘thing’ at the foot of Canal St.? What about when there are two good proposals on the table to redevelop the building using private money and put it back into commerce as a hotel and apartments, thus increasing the taxpayer base of the city?”

“What about when the money offered by the private developers could pay to enact the consent decree for the prison and police department? It is entirely possible to create much of the green space in Berger’s diagram without tearing down the WTC. It would be very possible to say YES to one of the private proposals and still allow the Convention Center to fund better green space and street orientation at the foot of Canal.”

One associates historic architecture in New Orleans with Caribbean influences of the Vieux Carre’, the Row Houses of the Faubourg Ste. Marie, Creole Cottages of the Marigny, or Planter Mansions of St. Charles Ave. and Bayou St. John. But, the WTC is as least as important architecturally as any of those, Stout argued. “It was built in 1968, so that is nearly 50 years old, which is the line for an historic building. But its importance lies in its designer, Edward D. Stone — a famous MODERN architect, who is now dead. He designed the modern parts of Rockefeller Center in New York, and the Kennedy Center in Washington DC, and many other buildings.”

“New Orleans has very few modern buildings of note – none built by famous architects like this one. Our most famous modern building was the old convention center [The Rivergate], torn down to build the casino. Many New Orleanians don’t appreciate modern architecture, which makes many people say that we are stuck in the past, but for students and lovers of architecture, this is an important building.”

Stout’s colleague Mary Lou Christovich noted at Tuesday’s meeting that the WTC was completed in time for the city’s 250th birthday in 1968, and it would stand as “a tragedy” to demolish it for the 300th anniversary in 2018.

Deputy Mayor Cedric Grant promised that a decision should be known by August 14, when he and the other committee members, CAO Andy Kopplin, William Gilchrist, director of place-based planning for the administration; Jeff Hebert, executive director of the New Orleans Redevelopment Authority; and Cynthia Connick, executive director of public benefit corporations, convene once more.

The three proposals will be judged according to a formula awarding 35 for the merits of the proposed redevelopment, 20 percent for the developers’ qualifications and “performance history,” 20 percent for financial capacity and 25 percent for the financial feasibility of their proposal. Grant and company can only recommend, however. The final call on the WTC would come from the New Orleans Building Corp board led by Mayor Mitch Landrieu personally.

Hearsay is rife as to which proposal the Mayor would ultimately endorse. One banker, who spoke to the Weekly on the promise of anonymity, said that his financial group did not make a bid, convinced that the mayor wanted the green space and the iconic monument as a permanent legacy of his administration. That would match his current green place proposals for the Duncan Plaza City Hall property, should the Civic Center/Big Charity project come to fruition.

It would also leave the mayor open to charges like Stout’s “Landrieu’s Folly” comment, though, if the $25 million in Convention Center funds that were originally earmarked to take down the WTC and build the park did not come through. A bill to allocate those monies to the Tricentennial Consortium passed the legislature, only to be vetoed by Bobby Jindal. The governor had originally sought the excess capital in the Convention Center accounts to plug holes in the state budget.

The mayor would gain points with organized Labor if the Burch proposal was embraced, according to some sources. One insider noted that a portion of the financing comes from union pension or investment funds. Were Labor groups to finance the project, they would surely expect that the hotel would be unionized.

That could prove a boost to their efforts in the rest of the hospitality industry here in New Orleans. Currently, hotel workers are not unionized, despite many unsuccessful organizing pushes over the years. And, the mayor who brought labor into the local hospitality industry, could benefit from labor’s appreciation in his future political endeavors.

This article originally published in the August 5, 2013 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper.