In many ways, of all the pieces of the developing World Trade Center site, none of them - not the Freedom Tower, the memorial or the other proposed buildings - are as important right now as the project that was supposed to go up across the street: a gleaming new $2 billion headquarters for Goldman Sachs, one of downtown's largest and most prominent employers.
The 40-story tower, the first significant new investment by a financial firm anywhere near the site since Sept. 11, would have signaled to the world that not only had Lower Manhattan recovered from its psychic wounds but also that it remained an international symbol of capitalism, rebuilding officials, real estate executives and financial industry experts said.
But the investment bank pulled the plug on its plans last month, citing security concerns and general confusion over plans at the trade center site, and has begun a furious search for alternative sites, possibly in Midtown.
The final straw in Goldman's decision to pull out was a state plan to bury West Street-Route 9A in a tunnel that would have ended at its headquarters' front door. The state has since abandoned the plan. Now, the city and state are scrambling to lure the investment bank back downtown.
But with the future home of Goldman in doubt, downtown executives, real estate executives and some city officials say, so is Lower Manhattan's primacy as a vibrant financial and commercial center.
As the New York Stock Exchange moves toward an electronic trading system - reducing its role as the anchor financial tenant in Lower Manhattan - and after decisions by other firms to leave, Goldman's commitment was the most pronounced and important signal that the precinct was here to stay. That message, some fear, is now deeply in question.
"It would be devastating for Goldman to leave downtown," said Michael T. Cohen, chairman of the executive committee at GVA Williams, a real estate company based downtown. "The large employers who occupy millions of square feet downtown are almost impossible to replace. You can chip away at it with Bowne or HIP, but you would lose not only what's there, but also Goldman's prospective growth."
In interviews, more than a dozen people directly involved in the process made clear that a lack of coordination among agencies and governments as well as a failure to take Goldman's concerns seriously were the principal contributors to Goldman's decision to look elsewhere. Although those interviewed, including state, city and police officials, would not speak by name because of the delicacy of the talks surrounding ground zero, they all agreed on the core issues that they said led to the unraveling.
Considering that the Times completely overlooks the brand new 7 WTC, which is nearing completion at the North end of the WTC site, the Times is prematurely signalling the end of the downtown financial district.
Of course, downplaying the role of Lower Manhattan, it is a subtle prop to the Times' Midtown property, which is in need of tenants. Luring Goldman Sachs from downtown would be a major coup and allow the Times to reach their financial goals.
There are serious problems associated with the rebuilding efforts, and the 9A roadway/tunnel situation was a clumsy effort on the part of all involved. There was serious community resistence to the tunnel, which would have meant longer construction than a roadway at grade. The problem is that a tunnel would have meant expanded parks and linkages between Battery Park City and the East Side of 9A (West Side Highway). However, since the tunnel proposal was killed (along with practically everything else relating to the WTC project), the chief priority for the City should be in getting Goldman Sachs to reconsider and build on the site it had originally proposed.
In the meantime, the Governor and Mayor must stop the squabbling and get down to brass tacks about what to do with Fiterman Hall, which is still in need of a rebuilding plan, and what the new Ground Zero master plan will look like.
Time is a wasting away.
No comments:
Post a Comment