Rebuilding New York

Grid, October 2001

“In pure technology terms, the World Trade Center model of commerce seems no longer necessary,” wrote “New Economy” columnist Amy Harmon in the New York Times on September 17. “and if much of ‘Wall Street’ ends up moving permanently to its currently temporary quarters in Jersey City, or dissipates more than ever into cyberspace, it may indicate just how much the physics and physical realities of the financial system have truly changed,” she added.

Such sentiments are no doubt widely reflected in the financial community, especially outside the New York metro area, and chillingly suggest how daunting is the task of rebuilding after the Trade Center disaster.

It’s not just about reknitting the human infrastructure lost in the deaths of 4,000 people, and the ties severed among their families and colleagues. Perhaps as much as 12 million square feet of the estimated 27 million square feet currently sidelined can be up and running again in weeks or months. But replacing the space represented by the Center itself–even if the old buildings were just replicated–will take years, much longer than businesses will willingly occupy temporary facilities.

The natural instinct is to simply replace the lost office space–and as quickly as possible. Speed is of the essence, but if lower New York is to maintain its primacy as a financial capital, it will have to do more than rebuild. It will have to rethink what a financial capital is. Finance is the most globalized of all businesses and the most mobile. It’s not just funds that are mobile, however, companies are. The utility of a dense, downtownlike environment will be questioned.

Some say this tragedy means that the era of the skyscraper is truly over, that we should disperse ourselves across the landscape to reduce personal risk. Yet the very magnitude of the loss tells us a great deal about the efficiencies downtown offered, not only to name-brand firms, but to the hundreds, if not thousands, of less-well-known businesses on which Wall Street has always depended.

The very density of talent in a mind-boggling variety of fields–from surgeons to demolition, from civil engineering to information technology–was instantaneously deployable for rescue and reducing the effects of the disaster because it was all located only blocks away.

Downtowns have revitalized in recent years because they are serving a new role. Manhattan has evolved from a central business district for the five boroughs of New York City into a new kind of urban hub serving specialized economic, social and cultural functions for a vast metropolitan region that in the view of some experts stretches from Southeastern Connecticut to eastern Pennsylvania. Emergency relocations went not only to space in suburbs as far as 60 miles from Manhattan, but to London–that’s how globally intertwined the city now is. Rebuilding New York is, therefore, a national issue, not merely a local one. If the city cannot make its case as a business location irresistible, the density of expertise that has allowed it to serve as the global financial capital could–no doubt over time–shift not just from downtown to Midtown or New York to New Jersey, but from America to London or elsewhere.

Only as banks and brokerage houses assess their losses with clear heads will they begin to get a full picture of the value of being part of a community with enormous depth of expertise pressed into the tight confines of Manhattan’s tip. They should consider that value carefully and bring their conclusions to the deliberations that are already underway as to the kind of place the World Trade Center site could be.

Whatever rises out of the ashes of he twin towers should be more than a symbol; it should anchor a revitalized, 21st-century downtown. New York City must face unflinchingly the longstanding issues, mostly infrastructure-related, that have driven away businesses. It must rebuild itself as a financial capital of the future, a place companies will feel compelled to be. Should the rebuilt area include a station for a future commuter-rail extension from Grand Central Terminal? Can a one-seat ride to Newark Airport be created out of a revitalized PATH train?

A rethinking of the financial center needs to go beyond the ideas that have been floating around for a long time. For example, do we need new kinds of physical transactional environments to augment the fast-developing electronic ones? An examination of Wall Street’s future should include a hard look at what kinds of physical spaces foster the informal face-to-face schmoozing that builds financial capital. Everyone knows that deals are sealed on golf courses, that job-opening news is conveyed on lunch breaks, that great ideas are born over drinks and that alliances are forged at fundraisers. But doesn’t it all start with the kind of solidarity created in large-scale communities like Lower or Midtown Manhattan?

There have already been calls for monuments and memorials, but perhaps the most fitting commemoration would be to create the most inspiring environment imaginable in which to do business. As much as we now miss its presence on the skyline, we can’t lose sight of the fact that the World Trade Center was a little-loved architectural mediocrity that largely failed in its mission to shore up lower-Manhattan’s status as a financial capital. It’s time to engage the nation’s best planning and design minds to create a place so compelling that businesses will feel they must be there. Some of the worlds’ most talented architectural and engineering firms make their homes in New York but have been scandalously bypassed in major efforts over the last two decades.

Certainly many competing ideas will emerge over the next weeks and months. New York could look to Berlin for means to sort them out. In Berlin, sophisticated planning and development efforts with quality-based, competitive design selection and an enormous national investment have, in a few short years, largely reversed the depredations of a world war and five decades of neglect.

The city’s commitment has also fostered such extraordinary and meaningful works of architecture as Sir Norman Foster’s Reichstag, Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum and Frank Gehry’s DG Bank. Even the commercial development that many critics decry as bland has been designed to a much higher standard than prevails in New York. Berlin still has a long way to go to restore its status as a vital and economically diverse world capital, but it has put itself back on the global map.

Both President Bush and Congress have made a substantial commitment to rebuilding lower Manhattan, but the purse strings may turn out to be more tightly held than is now apparent. If New York succeeds in making a case for the national value of its financial district, then it can expect the nation to undertake a Marshall-style plan on its behalf. If lack of imagination or politics–as-usual carry the day, the city may witness a slow inexorable seepage of its unparalleled energy. Nor will a failure of resolve and imagination go unnoticed by the global businesses that have invested heavily in Manhattan.

New York has a huge pool of talent to apply to these problems, but that talent has seldom been brought to bear in common cause before. Forging a unified rebuilding effort may prove to be the city’s most difficult challenge, but the results of such an effort could be the terrible tragedy’s greatest legacy.

Home Hot Topic Articles Books Consulting About JSR
	Rebuilding New York Grid, October 2001 “In pure technology terms, the World Trade Center model of commerce seems no longer necessary,” wrote “New Economy” columnist Amy Harmon in the New York Times on September 17. “and if much of ‘Wall Street’ ends up moving permanently to its currently temporary quarters in Jersey City, or dissipates more than ever into cyberspace, it may indicate just how much the physics and physical realities of the financial system have truly changed,” she added. Such sentiments are no doubt widely reflected in the financial community, especially outside the New York metro area, and chillingly suggest how daunting is the task of rebuilding after the Trade Center disaster. It’s not just about reknitting the human infrastructure lost in the deaths of 4,000 people, and the ties severed among their families and colleagues. Perhaps as much as 12 million square feet of the estimated 27 million square feet currently sidelined can be up and running again in weeks or months. But replacing the space represented by the Center itself–even if the old buildings were just replicated–will take years, much longer than businesses will willingly occupy temporary facilities. The natural instinct is to simply replace the lost office space–and as quickly as possible. Speed is of the essence, but if lower New York is to maintain its primacy as a financial capital, it will have to do more than rebuild. It will have to rethink what a financial capital is. Finance is the most globalized of all businesses and the most mobile. It’s not just funds that are mobile, however, companies are. The utility of a dense, downtownlike environment will be questioned. Some say this tragedy means that the era of the skyscraper is truly over, that we should disperse ourselves across the landscape to reduce personal risk. Yet the very magnitude of the loss tells us a great deal about the efficiencies downtown offered, not only to name-brand firms, but to the hundreds, if not thousands, of less-well-known businesses on which Wall Street has always depended. The very density of talent in a mind-boggling variety of fields–from surgeons to demolition, from civil engineering to information technology–was instantaneously deployable for rescue and reducing the effects of the disaster because it was all located only blocks away. Downtowns have revitalized in recent years because they are serving a new role. Manhattan has evolved from a central business district for the five boroughs of New York City into a new kind of urban hub serving specialized economic, social and cultural functions for a vast metropolitan region that in the view of some experts stretches from Southeastern Connecticut to eastern Pennsylvania. Emergency relocations went not only to space in suburbs as far as 60 miles from Manhattan, but to London–that’s how globally intertwined the city now is. Rebuilding New York is, therefore, a national issue, not merely a local one. If the city cannot make its case as a business location irresistible, the density of expertise that has allowed it to serve as the global financial capital could–no doubt over time–shift not just from downtown to Midtown or New York to New Jersey, but from America to London or elsewhere. Only as banks and brokerage houses assess their losses with clear heads will they begin to get a full picture of the value of being part of a community with enormous depth of expertise pressed into the tight confines of Manhattan’s tip. They should consider that value carefully and bring their conclusions to the deliberations that are already underway as to the kind of place the World Trade Center site could be. Whatever rises out of the ashes of he twin towers should be more than a symbol; it should anchor a revitalized, 21st-century downtown. New York City must face unflinchingly the longstanding issues, mostly infrastructure-related, that have driven away businesses. It must rebuild itself as a financial capital of the future, a place companies will feel compelled to be. Should the rebuilt area include a station for a future commuter-rail extension from Grand Central Terminal? Can a one-seat ride to Newark Airport be created out of a revitalized PATH train? A rethinking of the financial center needs to go beyond the ideas that have been floating around for a long time. For example, do we need new kinds of physical transactional environments to augment the fast-developing electronic ones? An examination of Wall Street’s future should include a hard look at what kinds of physical spaces foster the informal face-to-face schmoozing that builds financial capital. Everyone knows that deals are sealed on golf courses, that job-opening news is conveyed on lunch breaks, that great ideas are born over drinks and that alliances are forged at fundraisers. But doesn’t it all start with the kind of solidarity created in large-scale communities like Lower or Midtown Manhattan? There have already been calls for monuments and memorials, but perhaps the most fitting commemoration would be to create the most inspiring environment imaginable in which to do business. As much as we now miss its presence on the skyline, we can’t lose sight of the fact that the World Trade Center was a little-loved architectural mediocrity that largely failed in its mission to shore up lower-Manhattan’s status as a financial capital. It’s time to engage the nation’s best planning and design minds to create a place so compelling that businesses will feel they must be there. Some of the worlds’ most talented architectural and engineering firms make their homes in New York but have been scandalously bypassed in major efforts over the last two decades. Certainly many competing ideas will emerge over the next weeks and months. New York could look to Berlin for means to sort them out. In Berlin, sophisticated planning and development efforts with quality-based, competitive design selection and an enormous national investment have, in a few short years, largely reversed the depredations of a world war and five decades of neglect. The city’s commitment has also fostered such extraordinary and meaningful works of architecture as Sir Norman Foster’s Reichstag, Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum and Frank Gehry’s DG Bank. Even the commercial development that many critics decry as bland has been designed to a much higher standard than prevails in New York. Berlin still has a long way to go to restore its status as a vital and economically diverse world capital, but it has put itself back on the global map. Both President Bush and Congress have made a substantial commitment to rebuilding lower Manhattan, but the purse strings may turn out to be more tightly held than is now apparent. If New York succeeds in making a case for the national value of its financial district, then it can expect the nation to undertake a Marshall-style plan on its behalf. If lack of imagination or politics–as-usual carry the day, the city may witness a slow inexorable seepage of its unparalleled energy. Nor will a failure of resolve and imagination go unnoticed by the global businesses that have invested heavily in Manhattan. New York has a huge pool of talent to apply to these problems, but that talent has seldom been brought to bear in common cause before. Forging a unified rebuilding effort may prove to be the city’s most difficult challenge, but the results of such an effort could be the terrible tragedy’s greatest legacy.
© copyright 2006 James S. Russell \| terms