Tuesday, September 19, 2006

The Battle For Ground Zero, Part 168

Yesterday, I noted that the Port Authority wouldn't be siting its offices in the Freedom Tower, and that the PA Chairman would rather resign than force its workers to work at the site. It's a curious position for him to take considering that the Port Authority already forces quite a few of its workers to work at the site - the PATH employees who operate the PATH system. Apparently Cocia doesn't want the backoffice folks to work at the site because of the emotional burden they carry from working there after 1993 and 2001.

Today, there's quite a bit of reaction to that news, with many questioning whether anyone would actually want to work in the building. Many point to the fact that the Freedom Tower would continue to present a high profile target, which had been previously targeted by the Islamic terrorists in the past, and continues to be targeted (see the tunnel flooding plot that would have flooded the bathtub that was broken up over the summer).

What gets lost is the fact that it isn't just the WTC complex that remains a high profile target, but all of NYC. While the Freedom Tower is being designed to be far safer and more robustly designed than the WTC complex, terrorists might still be able to overcome whatever defenses have been arrayed and commit a mass casualty event.

Never mind that these questions never really went away. They were asked nearly from the outset of the reimagining process of what would be built at Ground Zero. Some folks thought the entire site should be turned into a memorial space, some thought that office space would somehow demean the meaning of 9/11 (though many of those same people refuse to publicly utter that it was Islamic terrorists who murdered the nearly 3,000 people at Ground Zero on 9/11 and instead call the event a tragedy). Ultimately, the Port Authority determined that a combination of memorial space and office/retail space should be built at the site.

Meanwhile, Moody's has signed to take half the space at 7WTC, which means that the building is quickly filling up to capacity. 7WTC was built without any specific clients signed to occupy the building and many lambasted Silverstein for doing so. It looks like Silverstein was right in his vision to rebuild, knowing that businesses would flock to his top notch office space in Lower Manhattan.

Meanwhile, Felix Salmon wonders about the ethics of being paid to rebuild at the site, but then using that money for other purposes (like relocation or building elsewhere). It's a question that hounds quite a few businesses, including insurance companies, and agencies alike.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

No comments: