Notwithstanding the merit of the proposal’s vision and its commitment to translate an infrastructure into an urban space accessible to all, the project was nonetheless controversially discussed. On the one hand, the jury appreciated the scheme’s bold proposition to tackle the ramifications of climate change by means of a construction that offers a surplus value to society – turning a problem into an opportunity. On the other hand, the issue was raised as to whether the project was not more reactive rather than proactive, addressing the effects of climate change instead of its root causes.

Debate aside, the project makes a political statement by means of an architectural and urban proposition, arguing that climate change indeed can no longer be suppressed or discarded as a figment of environmentalist imagination and that tangible solutions truly exist. Moreover, the jury considered the project’s potential as model to be applied in other contexts, with the case of New York understood as a prototype from which to learn in order to pursue similar strategies in susceptible regions around the globe, including, most importantly, regions with limited economic resources.