Americans have been struggling with pluralist democracy since the birth of our republic. Alexander Hamilton asked in Federalist Paper #1 whether we are "really capable" of "establishing good government" through "reflection and choice," or... forever destined" to make political decisions by "accident and force." Our efforts to rebuild lower Manhattan during the first 24 months following September 11th demonstrate resoundingly that the answer is "reflection and choice."

Reconstruction began almost immediately. City and state agencies removed million tons of debris that had once been the World Trade Center, screened the debris for body parts, examined it for evidence, and carted it away. Property owners either restored to occupancy or tore down neighboring buildings that had been damaged in the attack. The New York State Department of Transportation rebuilt West Street, one of the Manhattan's two north-south highways. The City Department of Transportation resurfaced numerous city streets that had become impassable. The Con Edison Company installed temporary electric conduits on top of city streets and sidewalks to supply electricity, then restored original service below city streets and removed the above ground conduits. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority restored two subway lines and completely rebuilt two subway stations. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is rebuilding and will reopen the PATH RR system, which carried 60,000 commuters from New Jersey to lower Manhattan, in November. As we approach the second anniversary of the attack, all this may seem normal. In fact, it required extraordinary effort on the part of all concerned.

A parallel step in rebuilding was initiated by Governor Pataki and Mayor Giuliani. They created the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC) to expedite. The job the LMDC faced was daunting. It had to supervise the restoration of a crippled business district, the creation of a public realm around which that business district could grow and prosper, and the reconstruction of the 14 million-square-foot World Trade Center, while at the same time managing the establishment of a suitable memorial to the events of September 11th. These tasks were particularly difficult because of the weak and declining demand for space in lower Manhattan.

In February 2002, when I took my job as Vice President for Planning, Design and Development at the LMDC, Con Edison had begun building the electric power transformers that would restore the substation that had occupied the base of #7 World Trade Center over which the Silverstein Organization had built a 2 million square foot office building. That structure had been built in the bed of Greenwich Street. Most residents, businesses, and workers of lower Manhattan, as well as leading civic organizations were demanding that the severed ends of Greenwich Street be reconnected. They believed this would reunite the Tribeca area north of the World Trade Center site with the office district to its south and relieve the heavy, north-south truck and bus traffic that passed through the area.

I spent February and March of 2002 devising a strategy that would allow this to happen and simultaneously enable Con Edison and the Silverstein Organization to rebuild. I was able to bring together the City's Law Department, Planning Department, and Mayor's Office to work with Con Edison, Verizon (which had equipment in the bed of Vesey Street), Silverstein, and The Port Authority. This was an unprecedented degree of cooperation among entities that previously had frequently been at hot war with one another.

My involvement with #7 World Trade Center underscored the need to reconcile 21st century demands for a pedestrian-friendly public realm with the existing configuration of downtown streets crowded with cars, buses, and trucks making their way through the narrow, skyscraper-lined canyons of lower Manhattan.

We needed a 21st century site plan that tied together the Path rail system with city subway lines. It had to create a grand place of arrival and departure for tens of thousands of commuters who would once again pour in and out of the World Trade Center area. The resulting street pattern had to create sites for the Port Authority's leaseholders to build marketable office buildings, retail stores, and hotel facilities. Perhaps most difficult of all, the heart of the nation's third largest downtown had to grow back around a memorial appropriate to the events of 9/11.

The LMDC began by hiring Peterson/Littenberg Architecture and Urban design. The firm was selected because it was particularly familiar with the area. In 1994, working for the Battery Park City Authority, the firm had prepared a master plan for all of lower Manhattan that won the PA (Progressive Architecture Magazine) design award. Over the next three months it examined a range of alternatives with and without structures where the Twin Towers had stood.

In May, Beyer Blinder Belle joined the search for a suitable site plan. The firm was known for urban design and restoration. It had been responsible for the renovation of Grand Central Terminal and Ellis Island. It examined alternatives that precluded erecting any buildings on the footprints of the Twin Towers.

When the Port Authority and the LMDC decided to present concept plans to the public, both firms presented a large selection to choose from. They decided to show four schemes by Beyer, Blinder and Belle that left the footprints not rebuilt and two by Peterson Littenberg that did build where the towers had stood. Both agencies explained that these six schemes were "concept plans" intended to "illustrate ideas for land use, infrastructure planning and building massing… not architectural designs for proposed buildings."

When these six schemes were presented to the public in July of 2002, they were quite unpopular. However, a consensus quickly developed around some fundamental principles. People wanted their skyline back. They wanted a street grid (rather than the 16-acre superblock that had stood on the site) and a variety of open spaces of different sizes (rather than one large windswept plaza). They wanted a suitable memorial to the events of September 11th. They wanted the redevelopment plan to treat the footprints of the twin towers with respect.

Only one element among the six designs had widespread support: transforming the state highway, known as West Street, into a grand boulevard as proposed in the "Memorial Promenade" scheme prepared by Peterson/Littenberg.

The LMDC decided that the only way to obtain better results was to open the process to the world's most imaginative designers. In August issued a formal request for designers whose work demonstrated "risk-taking and inspiration" in order to produce "innovative designs." Submissions came in from every continent except Antarctica. Altogether, over 400 teams responded.

The seven teams of designers were selected to develop plans for the reconstruction of the World Trade Center. In mid December each team presented its work to a press conference televised around the world. The next day the LMDC opened an exhibition of drawings and models of the schemes at the Winter Garden in Battery Park City. They also were displayed on the LMDC website, which had 2 million unique visitors (7 million hits) in the first two weeks following the press conference.

In February, at another internationally televised press conference Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg announced that they had decided to proceed with a design by Studio Daniel Libeskind. Its poetic evocations of the "Freedom Tower" set against the Statue of Liberty, "Wedge of Light," and exposed slurry wall resonated with the public. The scheme is centered on a grand piazza enclosed by a railroad station, a memorial and museum, a performing arts center, and a convention hotel. This piazza will give the canyons of lower Manhattan what most cities possess: a main square. It will do so by making the intersection of Greenwich and Fulton Streets the most desirable location downtown.

Reconstruction is a long way from being finished. But the process of rebuilding Lower Manhattan is evolving much the way I think that the American Constitution evolved: out of the realties of the situation and the tug of war among very, very disparate interests.

Not everybody liked or voted for the Libeskind plan, just as not everybody liked or voted for the Constitution. A large enough consensus, however, came together to adopt it. As was the case with the Constitution, each of the parties involved in the future of lower Manhattan has in mind a quite different idea of what consensus means and how to implement it. The job ahead for all New Yorkers is to see that the inevitable changes that will be made are the result of "reflection and choice, rather than "accident and force." I believe we will succeed and in the process make lower Manhattan even better than it was before September 11th.

Editor's Note: The American Institute of Architect's "Eye on New York Architecture" website named E-Oculus took note of a speech Alex made in June shortly after leaving the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. An article named "No Official Title (but still with lots to say)" noted "his devotion and passion about rebuilding Ground Zero and redeveloping Lower Manhattan have not diminished." The piece quoted Alex as saying in answer to a question, "I am very proud of the LMDC making design so essential, and that I achieved what was necessary. My work is over. Now it's up to LMDC and Daniel Libeskind to carry on."

Check it out: www.aiany.org