Pelli Clarifies Position on Trump Project

My views as presented in Leon Whiteson’s article (“Skyscrapers: From Here to Eternity,” March 27) are correct on the general issues, but not as they address Donald Trump’s proposed project for the Ambassador Hotel site. I do not remember ever being interviewed on the matter, of which I know very little.

If these comments were taken from the question and answer session after my recent lecture at Cal Poly Pomona in Los Angeles, then my views were part of a general exchange in which the audience had much more to say than I did on the matter. I don’t remember uttering the expressions attributed to me.

First, I began by saying that I know very little about the project. Second, I said that a commercial development in the mid-Wilshire District would be vastly more appropriate than a school. Third, when asked about a proposed full-fledged shopping center, I wondered about its feasibility in a location so far from the freeways. Now I understand that the proposed mass transit system has a stop on the site.

Fourth, I never spoke of a prime historic section of Wilshire Boulevard. Except for the hotel itself, there is not much left of any historic value. Fifth, although I have fond personal memories of the building, it is not one of significant architectural value. Sixth, I have the greatest respect for Donald Trump’s abilities as a developer. I would not pretend to have more wisdom than he does about the project. Seventh, it is obvious that a healthy ego is a required quality in attempting a project of that scope.

Eighth and last of all, not only am I not against the project, I would have been happy to serve as the architect, although I believe he has retained the quite capable firm of Pereira Associates for this undertaking.

I hope these statements clarify my views on the matter.

CESAR PELLI, New Haven, Conn.

Editor’s Note: Leon Whiteson interviewed Cesar Pelli privately, as well as attending the lecture at Cal Poly Pomona.