> I just hope emotions won't override the need for safety. Tall buildings are dangerous. As far as I can see the only practical reason for building them tall, is to save space. But this is America, not Japan, not Hong Kong. We have plenty of space. There is no reason to build a World Trade Center on a small island in the mouth of a river. By moving it just a few miles north and west, it can be built in wide open spaces, where a lower, wider building (think Pentagon) can do the job.

There is none of this open space around Manhattan. You'd have to drive over an hour to find a plot of land large enough to build a four-story office building that would accomodate the number of offices and workers who used to work at 1WTC and 2WTC. The NYC Metro Area is incredibly over-built.

> Another problem with tall buildings is that a fire on a lower floor cuts off avenues of escape. What if those planes had hit 50 stories lower?

Those planes couldn't have hit much lower at the World Trade Center. They would've impacted on several of the surrounding buildings when they did. The hit on the north tower was high because 7WTC was in the way. It was fortunate that one was hit first. The south tower was hit lower; the time between the first and second plane allowed time for people to evacuate that building. If they hit the south tower first, the death toll would've been higher in that building. (But on the other hand, the north tower's top floors would've been evacuated).

With regards to a fire, the WTC towers were designed to withstand the impact of a plane hit when the buildings were created. Since the construction of the World Trade Center, planes became larger.

I worked at 1585 Broadway, up on the 42nd floor. In the event of a fire on, say, the 33rd floor, the building would've evacuated the floors around the 33rd floor. Those of us up on 42 would've remained while the fire was contained.

> Howard

-FP