« April 2004 | Main | June 2004 »
May 31, 2004
Larry, that's not why I called it the 'Freedom Tower.' Any hint that the creation of the Freedom Tower is (and maybe not even was) a collaboration was effectively erased by a holiday weekend report that Daniel Libeskind's office had submitted a bill to Larry Silverstein for $800,000 for continuing design work after the his site plan ($2.25 million in fees) was completed. Silverstein countered with an offer of $125,000. Though the Libeskinds are unwilling to submit to arbitration (in the Post, the world 'sue' is bandied about pretty liberally), they do seem to be willing to use the Times as a non-binding agent, hinting they would be happy with $600,000. Silverstein is balking at the lack of adequate documentation, namely any timesheets whatsover, to which Libeskind's office is responding by saying the value of his meeting time is hard to quantify (read: 'I was busy buying my dowtown loft'). The Post cuts to the chase and calls it a 'genuis fee,' which is a more explicit derivative of how the branding people justify a cost of a logo as 'value priced.' Though this might be seen as chink in the formidable armor of Nina Libeskind, it really is an impressive bit of spinning straw into gold: released on probably the slowest New York news weekend of the year, and admitting there is pretty much no extant evidence, and asking for $800K. But willing to settle for $600K? That's cheek.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 29, 2004
Can you spare something?
As I was leaving the subway this week, I saw a man going to work. I knew he was because I know where, and when, he works. He is a neighborhood fixture, and perhaps you have seen him: tall, gaunt, somewhat wan, he hands out flyers for women's fashions, typically on Seventh Avenue in the 30's. I assume they are for women's fashions, as he has never profferred me any. Or perhaps he is particularly skilled at his job, targeting only those he deems likely prospects. He is mostly easily noted because of his height (a good six inches above the crowd) and his rather solemn visage.
He made me think of another neighborhood fixture from further back in my life here, and about what constitutes a landmark. Landmark is not the misnomer it might be, since even as people provide as much character as the fixed elements of an urban landscape, we often interact with them in the exact same way we do the lifeless, inert forms: observation and comment from afar, careful avoidance of the dangerous parts, and usually with far more ignorance than we realize about something we consider very familiar simply because we gaze upon it with regularity.
And so I remembered the person I always thought as the Can You Spare Something Woman. If my memory serves, in the early nineties, she used to patrol the intersection of St. Mark's and Second Avenue. She was very slight, with straight dingy brown hair, and the layered clothing of a homeless person, having to deal with rapid and drastic climate change and outdoor living. Even so, she seemed thin more than anything, with overcoat, wraith-like. I can recall nothing of her face, often covered by hair, or the particular way she seemed to hunch inside her coat, and, of course, from turning quickly, but only slightly away, to avoid her gaze and project that her appeal was unnoticed, an appeal that was invariably: 'Can you spare something?' It was repeated for every passerby, a measured mantra that could be heard dozen times before the change of a traffic signal.
I might say she was there always, but I was not. But she was there every time I remember being there from my first summer here in the early nineties, and then again when I returned to the neighborhood several years after that. I did see her once on University, same clothes, same petition. Returning to the office that I remarked to a friend about seeing here out of her element, though the friend could recall nothing of the woman, even as they had stood on that same corner with me. But a co-worker overheard our exchange and mentioned, with similar wonderment, about having seen her 'all the way up on 34th street.'
It occurred to me then that this woman, was, perversely, a celebrity. Given her typical locus, the density of New York and it's role as a leading media center, the nexus of St. Mark's as a tourist location but still the boulevard of hip affectation, meant that likely an extraordinary number of people, tourists, average citizenry, as well as the largish community of people who aspire to, or have, some minor celebrity, all recognized her. Projecting out from there, and considering how much of human life is lived in relative anonymity, it was plausible to conclude that she could easily be one of the most famous people who had ever lived (if fame could be counted as simply recognition by the largest number of people, regardless of insitutional sanctification in the form of media). This invisible, dehumanized junkie (that's what I always assumed) was more famous than I, or anyone I would ever know, could become.
When I moved back several years after that, she was gone. I have not seen her in over a half decade. Her absence is like that of a lost favorite locale, overtaken by development. Given her relatively dire circumstances, my conclusions about her condition are stark. And I recall my derisive comment to office mates who once complained about mice that wandered out after hours: 'Pretend it's a homeless person and ignore them.' Unlike the more romantic figures that get chronicled in the Times occassionally, her coming and passing will not be noted, and likely the outline of her story would not make anymore a compelling read than the rest of us. But she was famous once. At least to me.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 28, 2004
And I've always been afraid of what a Christopher Alexander house would look like. In a victory for white, 'middle-class' people (that is, Manhattanites who can only afford to own their country home, but cower in fear of the losing their rent stablized apartment), the West Village Houses will become an 'affordable co-op.' The West Village Houses, located in the Morton/Bank Street area (west of Washington Street), were apparently developed thanks, in part, to an effort by Jane Jacobs to bring low-density housing that is as ugly as your average suburban apartment campus or HUD project to one of the most beautiful urban landscapes in the country. Even as I am a vociferous proponent of rent control, because: A. I need it, and B. I think it is best market control mechanism possible that balances design and development interests (how does that work? Well, take a look at SoHo, where a large number of units are still rent controlled, and many more made the transition to market rate, bringing extraordinary returns to the property owners with almost no capital risk, all while retaining almost all its existing building stock, scale and character), which is what I have to say now that saying 'I'm a socialist' is unfashionable, I think that place should be razed, on the most elitist of aesthetic grounds. Even it is means that Vincent Gallo gets to sprawl in an even larger, leakier, Richard Meier apartment. Go see for yourself (or better yet, don't), it is a black hole of design quality.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Your Tripping on Your Own Feet Starts Here.
Apparently a foot squirmed out from underneath the boulder of self-sufficiency Congress had placed on the failing figure of Amtrak (well, the parts that hadn't been already covered by the slow, expensive, and very oddly-marketed Acela fiasco), and instread of waiting for some highway happy representative from the Sun Belt to do the honors, Amtrak took that self-sufficiency mandate seriously and decided to shoot it right off.
Today, The New York Times reports Amtrak is threatening to not move into the station that Daniel Moynihan spent years trying to get rebuilt.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 27, 2004
The Oylmpic Village falls plainly from the Mayne. (alternative title: Do you think ROTOndi is pissed yet?) NYC2012 went all patriotic, but not local, picking Morphosis as the architect for the Olympic Village, dissing locals Henry Smith-Miller and Laurie Hawinkson (you'd be inclinded to say, 'Hey, kids, brighten up the renderings!' but that doesn't seem to be a lesson Thom Mayne has ever learned). Unfortunately, they haven't updated the site to showcase the winner. 'The Olympic X' flash movie shows some generic Pelli-ish space planning diagram for Olympic Village (though there is a slide show here -- via Archinect). Maybe the whole high-design thing is a dog and pony show (and don't discount the suspicion; Atlanta made a lot of noise about art and design and look what that produced). We will wait patiently for the brooding, zooty renderings with copper highlights (and the signed contract) from the Bard of LA, before we offer our huzzahs to visionary design.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
$690/sq ft. That's not the going rate for some up and coming condo development in Brooklyn, that is the land cost the Zeckendorfs paid for what is "considered by many developers one of the most valuable sites in Manhattan" reports the Times. Given that residential properties that fetch over $2,000/sq ft still manage to raise eyebrows, by the time the Ceasar Pelli towers (sigh) soil the Central Park skyline, is anyone willing to put an over/under on what units on this site can fetch (note that the number quoted isn't even the final site acquisition cost, since there are some long-term tenants to buy out, taxes, and lawywers, lawyers, lawyers to pay)? $3,000? Four? At those numbers, a tiny Manhattan studio (300 sq ft) runs close to a million bucks. It's gross no matter how you slice it. Gross in a way that makes you stop in your tracks and wonder why people don't try to blow up this town every day.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
All the underpaid work you can handle. The Architect's Newspaper -- which, if you don't already subscribe yet, you should; they have reviews of lectures fer chrissake's (Moneo and dal Co in the most recent issue) and where are you going to find that kind of editorial rigor these days? Metropolis? Hah! -- has a new online offering, a roundup of competitions. Some even pay money. Opportunities range from below-market-rate housing in Norwalk (CT) to chronometers for Timex's 150th anniversary.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 26, 2004
The new diaspora, TriBeCa skate punks. After a good year or two of advertisement on its facade and one notice as being the hot new thing, 36 Hudson Street, henceforth known as the Mohawk Atelier, commenced construction this week. It is being developed by Joseph Pell Lombardi, who has done realtively innocuous residential conversions forever. Excepting the social/economic practice of this work, critical judgement of these buildings is difficult since often the only visible intervention is the window and entry detailing, a variable highly dependent on budget. In some instances the work is exquisite. The other major component of his work tends to be the inevitable penthouse additions, which are fairly pedestrian, glass clad affairs, with enough humility to be stepped back and largely invisible. I'll reserve any comments of the current out of the ground work he has going, since I can't directly recall the sites, but will do a walk by and report back. But the big neighborhood news to report is how the new scaffolding at the Atelier will affect the street life of the most precious skate/BMX scene in the universe, which is centered exlusively around the steel platform on the Hudson side of the bulding. After ten years of watching the sad spectacle of the skate punks around the Cube and concluding New York has the world's most incompetent skaters, I was duly impressed by the three foot (and less!) rail slides, grinds, or whatever else you call it when you hop a bike up on the corner of a solid surface, travel a very short distance and then almost fall on your face, produced by the very carefully attired youth of TriBeCa. I fear the already abysmal quality of extreme sports in the area will sink a little further, as the ravages of high-end redevelopment claim yet another precious stretch of streetscape in which not-criminal skaters can display their wares. Oh, the humanity.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Another fancy glass turnstile. The MTA announced preliminary plans of a new transit 'center' at Fulton Street today (to be accompanied by a presentation this afternoon; link at left). And, surprise! It's a vaguely organic shape of shimmery glass. The initial renderings (see the MTA docs for details) highlighted the glass box more than the 'oculus' that surmounts it. It looks like someone spruced up the renderings to make them look a little more happy, though in point of fact, the site (narrow streets, lots of shade) will likely make it difficult to perceive the bulk of the glass 'egg' piercing through the roof unless you are seeing it from the inside. And that is probably a good thing. I'm not entirely averse to glass blobs, but selling it as a way to pull light into the passageways underground? That's some snake oil there. Just make the hole in the roof bigger. A breakout of the costs of the elements would have been helpful, given the $750 million price tag (it may be in the MTA docs, maddeningly posted as individual chapter PDF's), if only to find out what a really nice front door costs. And note this is a far cry from the underground boulevard / regional hub imagined in the early days of post-9/11 planning (which showed a single, massive passageway that spanned the full distance from the PATH station to the 2/3 platform). 'Expanded passageways' and some new connections are promised, but the details are vague. So to recap: $3.2 billion dollars is allocated for rebuilding a regional tranist station that was just rebuilt, and to add some elevators and two new tunnels for the subway lines in the area. This is not to say that public funds shouldn't be spent on capital improvement (even if there isn't a demonstrated ROI; there a number of intangible reasons that can justify the outlay), but that only nominal infrastructure improvement is being provided by this project, and, aside from the formal exercises, isn't visionary in any way. People have (and should want) to use the subway. If an excess (in the best way) of investment is going be allowed (even though if the budget was $0 ridership would not diminish), shouldn't we aspire to more than a big skylight?
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 25, 2004
Of course it's significant? Didn't you see us ignoring it all those years? The National Trust for Historic Preservation is working hard to eschew their rep that they exist solely to validate the surly prejudices of blue-haired Southern gentlewomen against modernism by adding 2 Columbus Circle to its endangered buildings list. The American Crafts Musuem (ACM), recently rechristened the Musuem for Arts and Design (MAD), a strategically incisive move that really clarifies their mission, is proving to be particularly astute at PR as well:
"It's not a usable building in its current form, unless you plan on using it as a tomb. It's a mausoleum is what it is," museum Director Holly Hotchner said yesterday.This is not the kind of statement that gets the preservation sorts off your back. And they have a right to be angry sometimes. But there is a practical issue about when something becomes 'significant.' For buildings that are over 100, 200 years old, mere survival can become a marker of distinction. But when you push the goalposts back to 25 years, you reach well inside the expected lifecylce of any building. Take a look around today at anything new going up. Are you prepared to fight for its preservation only 20 years from now? And since most preservation codes see the envelope as sacred (mostly since they have had little legal success mandating control over the interior spaces), and that modern building practices aren't nearly as stable as those that produced the post and beam, brick structures that the Trust has been trying to save for the past three decades, there is an additional issue of being forced to preserve assembly techniques that we are only now discovering shouldn't have been attempted in the first place. Should owners be forced to absorb additional maintenance cost to preserve an failing exterior system? Since this has happened once with a Stone building, shouldn't we pause to consider that modern design that merits preservation must succeed as a building as well?
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Downtown to Jane Jacobs: Drop Dead. The Daily News reports that the number one concern of downtown residents is a lack of on-street parking. It is true that a disproportionate number of spaces are allocated to city employees (giving them untaxed, uncalculated benefit that is worth $6,000 a year in some areas) relative to other neighborhoods. [Insert boilerplate rant about the foolishness of owning a car in Manhattan]. Some people even consider it a luxury that they can live car free. Anyway, note to downtown residents: I hear there's plenty of parking in Westchester County. Give it a look see.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Thousands of architecture fans, now out of pocket.*
Hot on the heels of Lock's nifty new venture, Archinect goes and gets itself a face lift. Sporting the Media Temple Mafia treatment, it stands as the best resource of however you want to call the 'Not-Architectural Record' crowd. Almost ten years after Princeton Archtiectural Press gave it a go with Architecture Online (a private dial-up BBS that was a little too leading edge in aspiration), it looks like architecture fans may finally have something of an online community. Given the pace of launches this week, we may be witnessing a mini-bubble. Except, this being architecture, no one is going to make any money.
*I was told once that the phrase 'out of pocket' referred to a prostitute who operated without a pimp. The former (and lamented by some) tagline of Archinect was "Pimpin' architecture since 1997."
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 24, 2004
Paulson Ex Machina. Everyone one goes home happy, and in the shade. Goldman Sachs is apparently moving quickly to secure the goodwill of the BPCA (Battery Park City Authority), CB1, PS 234, and any other acronym-rich semi-public authority by issuing a catch-all million dollar payoff. Follow the money: Goldman wants to build a new tower on this side of the Hudson, since apparently they won't be using much of the one just across the border in Jersey City. The BPCA requires "every building constructed under its auspices include ample community space" which is news to us, unless Applebee's and the UA Battery Park is considered 'community space.' Goldman, which likes its facilities tighter than some unmentionable part of a nun, wants no part of this quasi-socialist mandate (or they really don't want an Applebee's). Just across the (West) street, Scott Resnick is looking to build one of those nasty residential towers a la Costas Kondylis, and PS 234 is jazzed up cause they want their kids to be able to play in the sunlight or something. They are looking for a Community Center (which is inevitably a non-partisan haven from real estate finagling), but the razor thin margin on $2,000/sq ft. condos is making it a tough nut to crack. In steps the beneficent GS, which needs some good press this week. They write a check for a nice, round, million dollars, which, given the stated desire for a 18,000 sq ft of Community Center, means that a whopping $55/sq ft is being donated. Since GS is building as of right, and the BPCA never met a developer they wouldn't bend over for, it's still an order of magnitude more than Resnick has offered: the final sale cost for his site has yet to be revealed, and the implicit subsidy from the city (given the rumored below market agreement in place) makes one large large seem positively misery.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Ignore all the people/cargo metaphors please.
I should have thought to look here when writing up the FutureShack item from last week. The LOT-EK people are up in Toronto pitching their wares and demonstrating that architects are just as crass and insensitive towards the downtrodden here in the first world as well. They try to mitigate it by showing that you can make lots of other things as well, even ones that rich folk might buy. I don't think they quite have the handle on value engineering their concept, nor leveraging existing production capacity. Given the highly intinerant lifestyle of many homeless, I think they should look into something lighter and more transportable. Hey -- I know! Cardboard boxes. Think about it: light, cheap, modular, and allows for even easier expansion. Maybe they can get Gehry to make the furniture.
It's an admirable effort, but falls short of the wit and panache evidenced by the planners of the Atlanta Olympics in '96, who researched a plan to house and relocate the homeless with unused rail cars. Do I need to connect the dots on that one?
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 18, 2004
FutureShack. So far not garnering any local coverage (near as I can tell) the Washington Post does a fair job of writing up a new exhibit at the Cooper-Hewitt, as part of their Solos series. This installment is modular, highly portable housing unit by Sean Godsell entitled FutureShack. Based primarily on shipping containers (what is it with architects [though, really, you need to see this which looks like the Semoitext(e) series got VC money circa 1999] and shipping containters? They really aren't scaled to human inhabitation. I know this because I tried to make something out of one too), it attempts to address mass production, portability, ease of assembly, etc. Won some awards too. The Post notes that not everyone sees it as the mysterious grail of housing for the impoverished (you know, it's not the lack of $15,000 in savings that prevents those who make $2 a day from obtaining housing, it's the lack of decent design options.). And the name should indicate that the author perhaps isn't quite perfectly in tune with those who are similarly interested in this problem. Aside from his absurd claim that a portable generator for air conditioning will solve the problem of heat gain in building a house out of steel, I think it presumptive to criticize other aspects of its functionality until I see it, since it's just across town. So see for yourself, and I'll try to get back with an update (maybe I'll wait until August to test the passive ventilation).
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Thoms of Mayne. The Times does a sprucing-up-the-flagging-career bit for Thom Mayne, who is on tap to complete a building for the Cooper Union (if memory serves, it is the site directly north of the Great Hall, which involves a tear down of the existing, unmemorable engineering building). A elder stateman who practices in the region once said to a friend in reponse to a query about their work 'Hmm? Oh, yes, I remember them. I never understood why they used so many bolts.' Well, words to that effect. I don't have the haughty aristocractic mien to pull off the paraphrasing adequately.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 17, 2004
What are the two things a plumber needs to know? Shit runs down hill, and pay day is on Friday. That's a joke I learned in an evironmental systems class. In New York, plumbers also know Copper is King. But not for long, perhaps. New York City is in the process of revising its building codes, top to bottom. The overall goal is to be consistent with the national Uniform Building Codes, which in principal should streamline design and construction. The only two items that are up for revision that are mentioned in detail are the requirement to use copper plumbing in buildings over three stories and that New York has stricter standards for fireproofing (the length of time before a structural member fails, and the amount of resistance materials have seperating dwellings in multi-unit buildings in New York is twice the national code). The only thing revisions to this code would produce is a reduction in construction cost, but no improvement to the quality of construction (the second sheet of fire-rated drywall also adds much needed sound attentuation) nor any increase in safety. The Real Estate Board mouthpiece implies that these changes will lead to a windfall of affordable housing. Let's all take a deep breath and wait for that to happen (via Anil).
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 16, 2004
No one can get it right. That isn't intended to be a specific criticism; I am of the belief there is an inherent futility in trying to create a memorial for the WTC site. The Times, which has played a complicated role in trying to set an agenda about the discussion and process that stands awkwardly among providing a populist voice(something they are never good at) for the families, maintaining their preeminence as cultural arbiters by championing various 'high design' concepts and appeasing the money (in the form of developer interests, something the they are better at than most think), is trying to maintain an open dialogue by asking Landscape designers to offer alternative proposals organized around the simple query 'Why Not a Park?'(offered as part of their 'Architecture' issue of the Magazine; it's also nice to see that the issue isn't simply a survey of high-end interiors). The proposals manage to look both naive and hyper-aware of the simple absurdity of the program (would you have a picnic in such a park?). They tend towards the 'activist' response, though Ken Smith, who has the favorite (at least in terms of web voting) is least inclined towards this, evident in his title ('Respite'). Field Operations proposes a complete reimagining of lower Manhattan that looks like rejected Superstudio imagery or story boards for 'The Day After Tomorrow.' Julie Bargmann and D.I.R.T. Studio have a well-reasoned idea, one that might even be the genesis of a ritual that could perhaps be an act of remembrance and honor that has enough precedent in our culture (tree planting as act of hope and remembering) to make the campaigning for such an idea palatable, but it is undermined by cartoony visuals, which I expect were intended to try and make the project as explicable as possible to people other than fussy architects. It's an impossible presentation quandary, and their response is not a failure, but nor does it resonate in the same way as the concept itself.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 14, 2004
Porn and Liberty Bonds, both hard to come by in Times Square. The Times reports that financing has been secured for their new building in Times Square, but apparently it won't be an extended journey on the government gravy train that funded the site acquisition (and this was a deal that raised truly bipartisan hackles, though of course the freepers couldn't help but make jabs to the effect that liberals weren't adequately outraged). Developer Bruce Ratner (who is busy buying some really expensive apartments in Brooklyn this week) had requested that the building be funded in part by Liberty Bonds, further proof that real estate developers would piss on any grave they can to make a buck, but was denied, forcing him to go elsewhere (GMAC, specifically). Now, you can attribute this to good government oversight, or wonder suspiciously if there was a little quid pro quo going on elsewhere.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Next, a social register of the Cube skate punks. It's a little buggy and pretty slow, but that shouldn't stop you from seeking out one of the more interesting experiments in the social geography of New York, One Block Radius.
a project of Brooklyn artists Christina Ray and Dave Mandl [known collaboratively as Glowlab], is an extensive psychogeographic survey of the block where New York's New Museum of Contemporary Art will build a new facility in late 2004. Engaging a variety of tools and media such as blogs, video documentation, maps, field recordings & interviews, Glowlab creates a multi-layered portrait of the block as it has never been seen before [and will never be seen again].Via Everything NY. They also will be giving a walking tour of the block tomorrow.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 13, 2004
The big, bad FDR. Well, Boston thinks it's a good idea! Normally, such a sentiment wouldn't hold sway here in the big city, but since that's referring to the Big Dig, we're supposed to be all impressed, just like we were supposed to be when Robert Moses told us it was such a great idea to build all this shit in the first place. The Old Gray Lady does her usual PR/Google placement service by listing bunches of people she knows, or at least met at parties, most prominently SHoP (that's a bunch of people named Sharples who designed the Porter House and the new bridges over West Street), who are talking about dismantling the lower section of the FDR (south of the Brooklyn Bridge), so that the most desolate stretch of lower Manhattan can be reunited with the most desolate stretch of waterfront south of 96th Street. Of course, the plans don't end there. Expect all manner of zooty renderings from cleverly-named architects to distract us while the backrooom workings are set in place to produce another pukingly ugly development. You're co-opted(tm)!
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Incidental Insight. The Times has a piece on the status of the US Embassy in Berlin (apparently the plan to hire Jeff Koons to make a humongous stainless steel 'Surrender Monkey' fell through). This is not a 'local' story, but the accompanying photo provides a good in-progress view of the Monument to the Murdered Jews of Europe, which was designed by Peter Eisenman. Eisenman's weakness has always been too much of a gap between drawing and form (or, sometimes, a too literal transformation). Though I'm in no position to judge, and indeed don't even necessarily have a negative conclusion to present, it is an interesting image to see after all these years of wireframe CAD renderings projected at a much lower angle.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 12, 2004
ICFF. The Architect's Newspaper provides a round up on ICFF, which kicks off Saturday at the Javits Center (the print-only version has an extensive listing of events and related parties). Note, ICFF is for 'trade' only, so you'd better hurry and get some fake business cards printed (tip: use a Williamsburg address and lots of radius corners for the graphics).
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Richard Schwartz and his calculator. For a by the numbers tabloid piece on the WTC site, read this. It's the usual pap: pseudo populist voice (they lawyers are vultures! the PA is a poorly run bureaucracy!), laments lost goals presented as fait accompli, even as they are still heavily contested. And it's unfortunate, since he also makes several compelling arguments. The lawyers are vultures, and the Port Authority, net, has benefited New York far less than New Jersey. And the Calatrava station is a boondoggle, even allowing for a newfound desire for design excellence. He provides only an implied alternative, which is that infrastructure investment should be minimized so we can provide subsidized office space (there is currently so little demand for space that adding several million square feet of new space would depress Class A so much rents that the buildings would end up underwater from Day 1) in a neighborhood that, excepting a one time blip in the late 90s (that was already tapering, before 9/11), had been a contracting commercial real estate market for two decades. But we must build, we must. Underwhelming commercial real estate is what makes this country great. If that's so, Richard Schwartz should move to Tysons Corner.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
More signs of the apocalypse. This is passing car wreck gross and fascinating. Only in New York, right? Ugh. (via Gawker)
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Errata.
A few declarative statements after a couple weeks of beta testing this site (for all three of my readers):
1. Though, like most small scale online publications in the area, this site relies heavily on regurgitating and occassionally commenting on the articles of larger, more legitimate publications, this is not the full scope of my intent. In some instances, I think this is useful, since some aren't as widely read as others, and, having a narrow focus, being a repository of current news isn't a bad thing for the casual reader. That said, I started this with the full intention of providing 'original' criticism, reseach, maybe even interviews. Over the next few weeks, expect to see that, hopefully 2-3 times a week.
2. As noted at the bottom of this page, I'm no one you would recognize, but nor am I obsessively private. Should you run a WHOIS (and that happens a good couple of times a week) search on this domain, it's all there, black and white.
4. Photo policy. We don't run photos. I'm ambivalent about this practice, particularly when I get to the point of discussing items that are not directly newsworthy (meaning, someone else posted a photo). My initial concerns were about bandwidth (absurd, I know, but it's more of a highly rational aesthetic about layout and programming; photos seem profligate somehow) and design. As things progress, I will revisit this, but for now, if someone else doesn't have the materials online, you won't find them here.
3. Comments, correspondents, criticisms, all welcome. I haven't opened comments because of spam and maintenance, but anyone who makes the effort to comment or provide extended feedback can expect to have some audience for that beyond me. mail@'thedomainname'.com is where to send it.
5. And, lastly, thanks for listening.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 10, 2004
In case you didn't make it to CUNY last week. In this week's New Yorker Adam Gopnik (who also recently did a round-up of the 'new Times Square') talks with Jane Jacobs. It's pretty worthless, but she tells a good joke, and unneccessarily characterizes herself as vindictive for still not liking Robert Moses. I guess I have a vindictive future to look forward to.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
An Uneven Exchange of Power. The Storefront for Art & Architecture hosts a exhibition of Armin Linke (his site has an interesting tool for building a print on demand book based on your surfing). Opening was this past weekend (sorry, wasn't paying close enough attention).
Found always via this Permanent Link.
White Box. White Elephant. The Telegraph repurposes a Vanitry Fair article this month about the problems with 173-176 Perry Street, the twin residential towers designed by Richard Meier. Since the lawsuits have not started to fly, nor settle, yet, it's purposely vague about where responsbility lies. Some of the frustrations noted, including the near impossibility of relocating plumbing, lie squarely with the Meier, but the rest will likely get caught up in the network around him (associate architect, engineering, and construction manager). Though it is amusing to read about all the water problems, which makes it seem almost historical, a rehash of the criticisms leveled at the International Style with their impossible flat roofs. You would think Meier would have learned to detail these things by now. I bet someone is looking real close at the construction documents at the site next door.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 9, 2004
800 feet tall, but slender. There's no deal yet, but Pataki has opened his wallet, and Harry Cobb took out his pencil. Goldman Sachs has spared downtown another reinterpretation of the squat, anonymous, spec office tower by Ceasar Pelli, and instead offers up a tower that "acknowledges the universe [and] infinite space" brought to us by a master of the tall corporate tower. With all that infinite space, you know what that means: both a Hudson News and a Starbucks in the lobby (yeah, sure; have you been a GS building? They barely let the employees in, let alone some snotty barista).
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 7, 2004
I've Never Been to Long Island*.
I've never understood the naming strategy behind Queens West. Unlike, say, the supercilious East Willamsburg, trying to inflate the brand value of your location by explicitly associating with one of the less desirable part of the city stikes me as counterintuitive. Why not try Manhattan East?
Anyway, some NJ Real Estate developer is huckstering what will be another anonymous and bland mega complex with 'amenities' (read: a treadmill in a closet and some concrete planters) to sit just south of Queens West. Jay Valgora, from the obliquely named V Studio, gets some face time in the write up (finally, after leaving Rockwell eight years ago in a snit over a lack of recoginition). The V Studio is brought to you by WPP, via the WalkerGroup. There's really no point to mentioning that, but since it's a bland article about a bland project that even the firm designing it can't be troubled to post an image of, I've got to mention something. People will have to stare at the dung pile for generations. Like a professor used to say, architects should be required to put their name on their work. Right out in front. Sure, it might seem vainglorious at first, but think about it. For decades, as people gaze with disfavor on this project, they might wonder, 'Who did this?' And it could be right there: Jay Valgora is his name, ladies and gentleman.
*Can't find a script to provide the full ref, so go rent it.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
WTC in the news.
The recent travails of Larry Silverstein, and Pataki's announcement this week have led to a spate of coverage on the WTC site:
Is Silverstein Down to One At Zero Site? New York Observer
NO MONEY, NO LOVE? The Slatin Report
A Pause to Think Wall Street Journal
World Trade Center Leaseholder Vows To Stick To Rebuilding Plan NY1
A Fresh Start at Ground Zero New York Times
Rising Above Ground Zero, Tower Slowly Takes Shape New York Times
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 6, 2004
Too bad they aren't as elightened when it comes to their clients. Hugh Pearman reviews the 'Gherkin', Norman Foster's (sorry, Lord Foster's) new tower for Swiss Re, insurers of the WTC. But don't get excited. Apparently you will never be allowed in, even though a spokesperson observed that if they simply charged admission, they might be able to recoup their entire investment. Perhaps they could open a year late and give the proceeds to Silverman (via That Brutal Joint).
Found always via this Permanent Link.
There's only room for one self-aggrandizing George in this town.
Just as I'm taking a poke at Larry Silverman, it gets announced that the Freedom Tower will get underway this July 4, not the during the Republican Convention, as had been previously reported (via Gothamist). Likely Pataki, fearing that the Preznit is becomeing more a political liability each passing week, pushed up the sked for maxmium self-interest. That, and with Larry "It wasn't just a loss for me, but a loss for all of us" Silverman's woes and gnarled death grip on the site, anything that makes it look like he is in any way necessary will be done. And a Karen Hughes-eqsue note to anyone who thinks having Time Warner Center Redux straddle what should be a place of honor is an abomination, remember, "after September 11, the American people are valuing development more and realizing that we need policies to value the dignity and worth of every development." Don't be a terrorist: love Big Pataki.
UPDATE: The LMDC hits all the high notes in its press release, also available in a poorly executed timeline.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Jane Jacobs. The grand dame of American architectural criticism, and who has a new book out ( curiously, Wired has Francis Fukuyama review it), lectures at City College tonight. Shepard Hall (Great Hall), Convent and 138th, 7:00 PM.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
It takes an (Olympic) Village. Tonight, Louis Becker of Henning Larsens Tegnestue of Copenhagen, one of the five finalists in the design study for the NYC2012 Olympic Village competition, lectures on recent work and process. 6:00 PM, the Center for Architecture (536 LaGuardia Place).
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 3, 2004
A $2300 studio? No, the Big House.
Last year, the United States spent $57,000,000,000 (that's billions) on prisons and jails. Figuring the inmate population to be reasonably flat since 2002, that's about $28,000 per inmate, or $2300 per month. For a studio not much larger than one you might find in Manhattan.
Meanwhile, over at HUD, which has a comparatively measly $38,000,000,000, but serves a larger population (3 million) and has a slew of additional program requirements, they do the math for you: it costs $130,000 for subsidize housing for an urban household over a thirty year period, which comes out to $361 a month. Too bad it's easier to get into prison.
UPDATE: Well, turns out the efficiencies realized by HUD are about to get better. We'll have to get back to you with new numbers, but, as you can imagine, they are going to be less. Maybe we can build more jails with the savings.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
CB1: Left Side this Week. Right Side next. Oh, the difference West Street makes. Goldman Sachs is making noises (read: fishing for tax abatements) about 'relocating.' Seems the behemoth they are building in Jersey City, which they are aren't even sure they need (I'm working from memory here; there was an article when this story broke in December to the effect that much of the building might be sublet or warehoused), might not be enough stave off their march into more 'accomodating' environs (read: tax abatements). Community Board 1, in such a tizzy about Scott Rudin's 350 foot tower just across the street, seems to think the 800 foot tower proposed for the last commerical site in Battery Park City is just peachy
“You’ll never see me oppose a tall building in my neighborhood,” Goodkind said. “Contextually it seems to be what Battery Park City is all about.”The EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) even argues that the shadows might be a good, helping fielders in the softball park in the bright summer months. Only two things cause trembling around here: that Caesar Pelli be invited back for the hat trick (both 30 Hudson, the official name of the cross the river digs, and the World Financial Center are his spawn), and that they city dangle abatements on the order of those offerred to the NYSE. Let's be real here. It may be only a PATH station away (there is even talk of a private ferry), but since it seems like half of TriBeCa is inhabitated by GS bankers, do you really think they would consent to working in New Jersey? Even the Journal, which has considerably more leverage over its staff, couldn't make it work (not the best linkage; there was another Off the Record aritcle I could not find that detailed the fact that some staff rejected bonuses in the neighborhood of $30K to permanently relocate to the New Brunswick offices).
Found always via this Permanent Link.
May 2, 2004
If only we had developers with as much sagacity. I was going to say designers, but we do have some of them. And since the idea that the government help house its citizenry is viewed as sedetion, I can't point fingers there either. Jonathan Glancey takes a look a Prince Charles' nostalgically-correct suburb, Poundbury. And in the second para manages more wit than we get in a year from Preparation H.
what more and more of us wants is a box of our own, whether thatched with roses around the door, or fabricated in concrete with big windows and designed by earnest young architects sporting important glasses and shoes as difficult as the unpronouncable names of their e-world practices.