Silverstein's ivory tower

New York City’s construction unions are taking to the streets today, in an effort to drum up support for accelerated building at the site of the former World Trade Center. The site, long plagued by infighting and bureaucracy, is again at a standstill. The two opponents, Larry A. Silverstein and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, disagree over funding. The Port Authority is currently financing costs associated with World Trade Center 1 (the Freedom Tower), as well as public works surrounding the area including transport hubs. Silverstein, who owns the lease on the former Twin Towers, is entitled to build 3 other properties on the site.


This, however, is where it gets tricky. The economic downturn has adversely impacted the amount of prospective renters for Silverstein’s 3 new buildings. This echoes the continuing decline in business rentals in Downtown Manhattan since September 11th. As a result, Silverstein wants the Port Authority to finance his projects, as well as their own. While both agree that building more than two new structures at the present time is financially unsound, there is still contention about Silverstein’s single tower on the site.

While imprudent in the extreme to be undergoing such a major construction effort in the name of patriotism, especially in such uncertain economic times, who should finance Silverstein’s tower? Why funnel money into a project that, much like the Empire State Building, will sit half empty for the foreseeable future? Perhaps Silverstein should pay for half of the Freedom Tower and just call it a day.