« June 2004 | Main | August 2004 »

July 30, 2004

Bronx cheer. Only $100 million dollars. That's the cagey sell from the only convict to own a baseball team. So we should trust his word. Anyway, just as the RPA observed when they opined that investing in the Jets stadium, one of the oft hidden cost to team subsidies is that, like whiny teenagers, when you hand money to one of them, the other ones put their hand out. So we've got Bobby angling for $600 million, Brucey making his way towards about $200 million, which makes the fairest of them all, George, seem like the cute and precocious one (sort of like the Oliver of New York owners). Figure that the Dolans and Fred Wilpon can squeeze the city for at least that much (and what about the Giants? when do they get theirs?), we're looking at over a billion dollars to help out businesses that all make a profit, even by the shady accounting practices they employ, and that aren't going anywhere. No chance. This isn't Baltimore, fer chrissakes; each one of those teams would lose half their market value outside of this metro area. Local television contracts, higher ticket prices, and increased merchandising sales are calcuable amounts, not the speculation of some blowhard in the back pages of the Post whining about the Dodgers and heartbreak.

The details are fuzzy: the city and state would pitch in for a new Metro-North stop, and highway improvements, but the status of the existing stadium is unclear: it might be parking lot, it might not. If not, the team isn't planning to build one. No one says if the city's portion includes cost of a parking structure. No one says how maintenance and upkeep of the unused stadium will be finanaced. No one is even bothering to justify the revenue grab this callously represents: even though the Yankees have the highest attendance in baseball, they are cutting 6,000 seats in this plan, since the benefit of luxury boxes will more than make up for sticking it to those who brought you. The kicker is that the Yankees won't be paying for any of it. They will instead get credit against their revenue sharing contribution to MLB, getting to subtract the $40 million debt service from their yearly Bud Selig induced tax; last year, their share was $60 million, which means, basically, that if they hold steady with earnings, they could pay for all of the new stadium. So the city is hedging the Yankees future earnings potential (which is further offset by the fact that if the Yankees earnings dropped enough, they would get a net benefit from revenue sharing). Man, with deals like this, its amazing George was so sloppy as to get arrested.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

All's fare when courting the LIE vote. So the federal government approved the reallocation of the remaining LMDC/Liberty Bond for the construction of the George Patakie Re-election Tunnel. $2 billion is left, and it is being handed over, with no detail on if that remaining sum is a current surplus, or if any other initiatives in progress will be defunded. One would assume at least that John Zuccotti isn't getting his West Street tunnel. But beyond that, it's a lot of rah rah about how Long Islanders can get to work easier. Those very same Long Islanders who have been exempt from the 'commuter tax' since Pataki entered office. And those same Long Islanders who will suffer a five (yes, five!) percent increase, thanks to fare increases rolled out by the MTA yesterday. Before you get too upset about this 'give with one hand and take away with the other' gesture, please note that unlimited weekly Metrocards are going up fifteen percent, and monthly, ten. This pales in comparison to the unlucky stiffs on Staten Island, who will get with a fifty percent uptick. Why is this increase necessary? Well, in part because the MTA is engaged in a capital campaign, part of which is crucial (continued station renovations and upgrades) and some of which is going to expanding that system. The two projects that are most extensively funded and developed are -- wait for it -- rail connections to Long Island. Even though subway riders already bear a greater portion of the cost of their ride through their fare(s), almost $5 billion (four of it the portion of the airport connector that isn't funded by the Liberty Bond money, and the rest for the East River Access project connecting LIRR to Grand Central) from this new increase -- which, it appears, will further extend that discrepancy -- is being allocated to help the reddest, richest two counties in the state.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

What's that about the Libeskinds again? Oh, right, they're short. In a town filled with vanglorious personalities of all stripes, a large number of whom are stature challenged, how is it you can't get through a thousand words about a Libeskind without a reference to their height? One can only assume the complex favor pulling and negotiating that went on to generate the profile of li'l Danny's wife, Nina (too bad she doesn't have a name that can conveniently be diminutized) didn't go so far as to insulate against the snide little jab that comes at the end. Otherwise, it's some standard fare Lives stuff, a rehashing the 'they met at camp' cuteness, and dances around the lawsuit. Not that anyone, even the Post really, is saying Silverstein is particularly aggrieved in the dispute (no one seems to feel fondly toward the man), but the Times goes even handed, paraphrases an unnamed official who declares them both jerks.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 29, 2004

All that's left is a dishy Gawker peice on how being an assistant there sucks. Rounding out what seems to be an all RedHo/IKEA kind of day is the show at the Urban Center (457 Mad), Ikeagrams, which consists of alternative proposals for the area IKEA wants to take over, developed last year by grad students in Ben Pell & Ted Brown's studio at the Syracuse (via The Architect's Newspaper). Through September 15.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Ikean't wait. We haven't lived here so long that we can claim to have watched that many neighborhoods crest the tide of gentrification, rising our caucasian entitlement boat right along with it, but we've been here enough to feel frustrated that we didn't strike decisively in this place or that. It's a downside to being a fan of navigating the city on foot as both a practical matter and as a form of entertainment. Of course, we forget that this doesn't signal any inherent ineptitude, only that we have always lacked the familial largess that has sowed the seeds of so many 'Lives' that will cause fleeting anger for the interminable future.

But, in a victory for soiling precious neighborhoods of the future, or only signalling that the next round of gentrification will be truly suburban, the Ikea Red Hook plan got a little boost (though the extent won't be known for several weeks, when the final vote occurs) yesterday at its planning hearing, reports the Daily News. It took some free shirts and bus rides to get the vote out, but they managed a roomful of supporters. Given that it will bring jobs and cheap, poorly manufactured (but attractive) furniture to what is still ostensibly a working class neighborhood (as well as being reasonably accessible to large swaths of Brooklyn that truly are), you can see why it upsets some people, particularly those who fear it will obviate the opening of a West Elm. But the opposition may have a point about the surface parking; given that hundreds of millions of dollars is being pursued to ferret out the last vestiges of parking on the Hudson River, isn't letting Ikea have the cheap way out (which is par for the course for them) a little short-sighted?

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 28, 2004

This can't be for us, it's far too nice. Though we aspire to exclusive previews and hot items like any good proto-media source, for now we have to rely on chance for leading edge news. And so it was, walkng by the local office of Allied Works, the folks working on the renovation of 2 Columbus Circle (the putative new home to the Museum for Arts and Design [MAD]). When the blinds aren't drawn, you can espy a pretty developed model, and, less easily, see some renderings of what were probably schematic stage concepts. Given the polish of the model, it's likely the latest and greatest. And from what we saw, there's good chance that great is an adjective we will want to use over and over.

The final form will be determined by the fact that the bulk of the original floorsplates and structure will be retained, so the overall effect, from the exterior, will be a reskinning. But how that will be manifest can produce a number of different effects. The renderings are more immediately striking, a series that show a progression of opacity, the most drastic revealing an iridescent skin that retains the overall form very precisely, but manages to completely invert the stolid character of the existing building. Though it is a simple concept, the result is commanding (and contextual, give the sequence of buildings initiates, which include Swanke-Hayden Connell's Steelcase showroom, the David Childs Ego Exercise Center and the Gulf+Western building)

The model appears to be more opaque, with what are probably large stone panels interlocking in an exaggerated zipper pattern (this is a motif that recurs in Cloepfil's work, attributable in part his experice with Mario Botta and Mitchell/Giurgola). The panels themselves are score vertically through the pattern, but this is not a jarring, but a complimentary gesture.

It remains to be seen MAD can complete the funding in time to secure the site (which is still somewhat contested, more on the money side than the distraction of the campaign to delcare the building a protected historic site), and that which we got a little preview of is still far from a resolved building, but the impression we were left with was an exciting one. Given the dearth of compelling ideas and visionary owners in this city, it does give something to look forward to. The only time we seem able to build a quality building is for a musuem or similar cultural space (see: Scandinavian House, Seaman's Museum, American Musuem of Folk Art, etc.), and that's unfortunate, but the perhaps the high-profile location will inspire the land barons inhabiting the distaster across the way to more a more nuanced understanding of what good design is.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 27, 2004

Pellucid. The first memory I really have of reading architecture criticism that resonated with me was Michael Sorkin calling Paul Goldberger a dick. Well, okay, it wasn't exactly that. Maybe he was speculating wistfully on the time when we wouldn't have to listen to his turgid enamations at the Times, in rather graphic terms (please, if someone has a copy of Exquisite Corpse, could you look it up? I swear I remember a column where he was wishing for his death). Being young, impressionable, and mostly ignorant (at least two of those qualities are still in ready supply), I came to two quick conclusions: Michael Sorkin was cool and Paul Goldberger was not.

Consequently, my opinion has not changed much, even after I made the good faith attempt to test this thesis first hand. Given that I was just recently slagging Cesar Pelli, Goldberger's paean to the Goldman Sachs tower (just being finished in Jersey City) in this week's New Yorker challenged me to think a little harder on both counts.

Goldberger's point is basically that Jersey City sucks, and that the sad striving of city leaders over there trying to compete with the Financial District has led to a development plan that is a thousand miles wide and a foot deep. Not knowing the Jersey City waterfront, except for what is visible from this side, it seems like a plausible comment. Then he makes the bizarre claim that the Goldman Sachs tower is 'the most beautiful' in New Jersey -- and that it is part of New York. Even though the rest of the article is about how tepid the Jersey City waterfront is compared to Manhattan (so much so that Goldman is building a second tower because no one -- meaning the bankers -- is willing to do the reverse commute, even it is five minutes from TriBeCa by ferry), he wants us to see this particular part as somehow ours, because, if I'm reading him correctly, from certain vantage points in midtown, you can't tell conclusively it isn't in Manhattan. I assume the reverse of this has been happening in Jersey for years, people saying that the Worldwide Plaza is the most important tower in East Weehawken.

Then he gets really nutty, going on about how Pelli has finally reached some Third Age of tower design bliss (shortly after the finished the Petronas Towers, maybe?), after some false starts, including the Carnegie Hall Tower -- which I had forgot, to the point where I even felt sheepish in calling him a hack the other day, since that is one of the few large buildings in this town that I like. But to hinge this argument on that hulking mess across the river? Please. He dismisses everything else on the Jersey City skyline, which leads me to believe he has never walked down Water or Pearl streets. I look at that same waterfront every day, and quite frankly, I'm surprised its (relative) quality. Though some of it is decent, none of it is exceptional, least of all the Pelli building, which is monstrously out of scale, meeting the ground as poorly as the other recent perverse exercise in entasis, the SwissRe tower in London. Given how mediocre much of the spec office space is in Manhattan, it's not much of a stretch (or pun) to invoke the canard about glass houses.

The back pages he inhabits are a pretty innocuous place for Goldberger to dodder around, and so I'm not going to exhibit the same punk energy Sorkin did (even if I think it was cool). But take a look at his last paragraph and think about substituting 'post-William Shawn New Yorker' for Jersey City and see how it plays. Maybe that man has more wit and subtlety than we give him credit for.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Maybe they are worried if they rename the subways, no one will figure out how to get there. Providing more ammo that they aren't a fusty, out-of-touch barnacle on the shell of New York culture, the Met is once again threatening to withhold support of the renovation of the Lincoln Center. And, again, the renovation of the ostensibly most important urban arts center in the country might be stalled by a dispute over parking. That's right. Parking. As you lather yourself up in superiority over how we don't fall victim to the narrow individual interests that scuttle visionary thinking out in the sticks, each time you walk by the rusting (okay, it's water damage, but whatever) hulk on 65th street, remember that no progress is being made because of concerns not that, not unlike a country fair or a NASCAR race, the bumpkins won't be able to get out of their cars on time.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

First, they have to figure out how to cancel Dr. Zizmor's contract. Sure, the whole concept of this is gross, particularly given the sad state of local, state and federal support (let's hear it one more time people; if you don't think a $250 billion dollar highway bill isn't a car subsidy, they you should get all your 'market price' produce from Europe) that make such recommendations necessary, but we still can't let this go by without quibbling on one point. The naming rights of Union Square aren't worth anything? I'm sorry, but people paid to put their name on football stadiums in Tampa Bay and Indianapolis. Perhaps they should acknowledge what the real problem is: god forbid people express any independent will in the face of corporate mandate, but they won't do it becuase the last major rebranding effort in New York (6th Avenue) still hasn't worked entirely, and that was the city doing it. Of course, now that all the trains are automated, you can insure the success of the Levitra Bedford Street stop.

Back in the real world (not the one where the crazy old coot suburban father of your friend rants that the interests of shareholders -- which typically means guys who think living on Hilton Head and wearing pleated chinos with Polo shirts tucked in is the apex of civilization -- trumps everything else in the universe, even if it means taking another chunk out of our culture irrevocably), the Daily News provides some background on the mysterious dark territory beyond the Essex Street platform on the J/M/Z, and the interesting historical nugget that there was an actual Delancy family, and they ran a cherry orchard.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 26, 2004

LMDC to downtown: Don't throw out the HEPA filters yet. Someone, in the form of Rep. Jerry Nadler, has finally started asking some hard question about the Deutsche Bank demolition. The 130 Liberty Street structure, which was damaged (though, more appropriately, should be listed as 'destroyed' since that will be the eventual state) in the WTC attacks, was purchased by the LMDC this year, and is slated for what is being called 'deconstruction.' Though fans of mid-eighties architecture might note the sick irony of a developer finally embracing decon on a large scale, the process, even completely devoid of what prompted it, is far from a joke.

Documents obtained by Nadler indicate that there may be levels of contaminant in the building (particularly asbestos) that range as high as 150,000 times EPA limits. This makes the actual process of demolition complex and expensive. Kevin Rampe and the LMDC was typically high-handed in its response, arguing basically that the estimates presented by Nadler were artificially high because Deutsche Bank was lying to land a favorable insurance settlement. That Rampe would accuse Deutsche Bank of basically perjury is interesting. The alternative is worse, which is that even though everyone agreed that the building, in its current state, was impossible to reinhabit (and any renovations were near impossible to calculate), to the point that they weren't even sure how to destroy it, the LMDC stepped in and made a bureaucratic decision to assume responsibility without any EIS, engineering studies or bids from contractors. Don't they have some fiduciary responsibility? If so, this would seem to be a considerable breach. Even though they are projecting a completion date, they aren't releasing a demolition and transport plan, instead only vaguely claiming that precautions will be taken (which apparently will be minimal; the netting in place was intended to prevent remnants from falling, not to provide any environmental encapsulation) once they start and figure out what's exactly inside.

Regardless of all this, like the WTC attacks themselves, this process will be an engineering landmark because never before has a building of this scale, constructed in the era between traditional materials and the current awareness of what harm may come from modern building materials, has been taken down. It's an inevitability that will come up over the next 40-80 years, as large buildings reach the end of their useful life (a calculation that in many cases might be more financial than structural; most of these buildings are steel-framed, but a gut -- meaning stripping to the frame -- renovation would produce many of the same problems as complete demolition), this will begin to be a considerable issue. One that was pretty much ignored when zoning for behemoths like this.

What you get instead it the push over the past decade to create 'Demolition Porn' -- where a typically publicly funded facility like a sports stadium, built with the promises of decades of service must be destroyed after less than 20 years to make way for newer, larger, gargantuan subsidies of private enterprise -- which is simply a bait and switch process to make others pay for clean up. See, when you demo via implosion, upwards of 20% of the structural materials (mostly concrete, and, often, concrete mixed with a number of carcinogenic substances found elsewhere in the construction) will be pulverized and thrown into the air, borne conveniently away from the site by wind, leaving everyone who lives or works in the area covered by a fine dust that would, on most job sites, be considered hazardous, and not because they contain deadly substances, but merely due to the size of the particulate (thanks to the incomparable John Young for this analysis). But the upside to the contractor is huge: in exchange for a small pickup full of C4, your disposal costs go down considerably. Though nothing is being projected on a similar scale for 130 Liberty Street, you can be sure one of the reasons it was not was due to the incredible violence of the act, which would have been impossible to suggest in that particular location.

None of this information bodes well for downtown residents, who will get to watch another building be destroyed from the WTC attacks, in sickeningly slow motion, watching and pondering it piecemeal, questioning all the attendant issues that no one was able to process in the moment, but became readily apparent after the fact. The response of the LMDC and their lack of sensitivity to this -- ranging from simple decorum for what might be emotionally charged to outright callousness of the actual, measurable, potential for physical harm to workers and residents -- borders on appalling.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Magic Carpet Ride. A friend who moved to town a number of years ago, intending to live out one of the various myths of New York living (in his case, showing up with the proverbial $100 and the clothes on his back -- a gutsy move no doubt, but one that was abetted by our couch and steady fiscal underwriting -- with the goal of becoming a star; he's getting close, so there is something to be said about chasing dreams), and just after he got here, he spoke rather arrogantly about how he was truly going to consume all that the city offered in its rich tapestry of arts and culture, in a way that we were evidently failing. We had all gone to college in a southern backwater, and then lived there a short while. Therefore, the contrast of what was available here bode well for a transformation that was incomprehensible to our heretofore provincial lives.

Of course, as any wage-slave liberal arts grad learns, it's easier said than done. The spring our friend arrived coincided with the Biennial, and we smiled chidingly when we predicted that, unemployed and living smack in the middle of Manhattan was no guarantee (relating the experience of looking at listings, thinking 'oh, I have weeks to do that' and then of course not -- the worst example of this being the Gerhard Richter at the Dia, which was up for nine months without successfully inducing our attendance). And of course it wasn't. Almost ten years later, we aren't sure he's been to a single Biennial.

We have learned, thanks to the intercession of other, more determined friends, that it takes a certain amount of focus and attentiveness to make it to this or that show. And thus it was with such focus that we trekked up to Grand Central to catch the Rudolf Stingel show before it closed.

The Stingel installation is a 27,000 square foot carpet that fills Vanderbilt Hall (which is the hall you pass through if you are entering from 42nd Street). Stingel refers to much of his work as painting, though it is typically created using actual or perverted forms of manufacturing. In this case, it is a custom carpet, derived from a stock pattern typically used in hotels. The repeat area is several flowers of varying sizes, set against a variegated background. It's hard to discern where the intervention is, aside from the coloration, though, given some contract interiors work these days, that too is open to question. The palette is muted pink, blue and beige, with the flowers starkly offset in black. Looking squarely at it is slighly more intense than a typical carpet, and garish. Viewed obliquely, the overall effect is surprisingly subdued. The limestone of Vanderbilt Hall is richer in hue, the net effect being that for a moment, one might think they walked into a well-intentioned maintenance idea gone awry.

The sheer magnitude of the piece (a characteristic of a number of the installations that have been there over the past few years) is impressive, but it is competing with the most commanding public space in New York. Thus, aside from perhaps a direct assualt on the majesty that is Grand Central, we can't imagine what might stand at least as an equal to the space.

The peice is also undermined by the limited access: the transverse doors are closed, and when we were there, the eastern portion was roped off by TensaBarriers, creating a stark visual detriment. Lastly, and not insignficantly, we gave up being capable art critics a long time ago, resigning ourselves to the complex intersection of hieghtened aesthetic sensibilities overlaid with a liberal dose of postmodern cynicism, so any judgement is suspect and hopelessly subjective. All we could think to do was have a seat.

This wasn't so much a test of art, but also public life. We have found, to a disappointing degree, that many places don't like it when you sit on the floor (a similar experiment in Union Station, in DC, resulted the Privileged White Guy treatment -- a guard asking in a careful voice 'are you all right sir?' instead of poking us with the butt end of a baton). But both the art and the sanctity of GCT survived us placing our ass squarely in the middle of a big piece of art. What is so striking every time we visit is how the space manages to absorb noise and create a subduded, warm, atmosphere. The carpet certainly helps this, and it is a retrograde, rec-room kind of experience to sit with arms splayed, leaning back and watching the late afternoon commuters hustle through. And whereas on strictly formal terms, we have a 'no decision' on the art, we think you should go and judge for yourself, if for no other reason than to go an hang out there for an hour or two. Rather than rushing through to catch a train (should you actually have any reason to go north of the city), it's a wonderful place to wander around. And, like us, after a quiet oasis of art, go and get good and drunk at the Campbell Apartment. It ain't cheap, but it's worth it. You'd better hurry, since the carpet comes up at the end of the week.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 24, 2004

Lobster, wine glasses, and nary a building in sight. We're going to take the day off, topically speaking, to delve into areas better left to those typically showing more breadth and depth. But we wanted to point you, to, of all things, emanations from the Conde Nast empire, namely, the August issue of Gourmet.

In it, you will find some writing that seems so out of place for what anyone might be inclined to dismiss as a basically a sleeve for food porn and product placement that it verges on stunning: David Foster Wallace offers thoughts on the Maine Lobster Festival, musing on, in great detail -- and in a way that makes us appreciate his writing syle in a way that hundreds of slavish write-ups could not -- the possbility that cooking lobster is barbarity on par with the moral and social structure of the Romans and Mayans, and an article about the purported significance of design in wine glasses being basically bunko (with hilarious asides about such research blinds that included adding food coloring to a white wine and convincing professional tasters it was a red). Aside from the fact that both of these articles attack many of the implicit assumptions about the life of the gourmand head on, they are also sharp and intelligent writing.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 23, 2004

Real estate rhinoplasty, redux. Maybe I'm getting old, maybe it's the possibilty of a nascent interest in conservatism the convention will bring, but every time I read more about the Clemente Soto Velez Cultural Center, my willingness to stridently support the city protecting facilities such as this erodes. Sure, we watched helplessly as CHARAS got swindled, though thankfully the progress on that potential eyesore seems to have stalled. Now come the news that Alan Gerson is developing his own plan to try and appease the short-sighted, egotisitical and self-centered artists (oh, wait, that was redundant, wasn't it?) who can't seem to strike an agreement on their own, even under the threat of possible eviction (which the city is so far shielding them from). Gerson thinks it might work, but cautions "We won’t satisfy each group 100 percent." Well, gosh. Those folks seemed so reasonable, I wonder what sort of totalitarian strictures The Man is inflicting on them.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 22, 2004

Here I sit happy hearted, for once the design wasn't martyred. The Times does a little write up on the bathrooms in the Times Square subway stop. Key to the article is the largess shown by Boston Properties in paying for the attendant. It's a clever sleight of hand, as if there was no precedent for hiring people simply to serve the interests of the public, while at the same time making it seem like every other person in the employ of Boston Properties is the result of an absolutely letter-perfect rational process that was thrown into complete disarrary because the city was so hard nosed as to mandate this beneficence. I'm sure the cost of lawyer's time spent hammering out the agreement would pay for the attendant for the next ten years. Anyway, fuck developers, etc. Let's talk shit here.

Whereas the Times Square restrooms are notable for their convenience (if waiting in line to be buzzed in qualifies as convenience) and not for design, if you are seeking high quality rest stops that aren't in SoHo bars or Ian Schrager hotels, you can repair to the Solaire. The Solaire is the apartment building in Battery Park City that has been getting a lot of press lately because it is so 'green.' All things being relative, the claim that it is the 'greenest apartment building' in the country is probably valid (if you don't count Arcosanti), but it also doesn't mean we should run out and build acres of Solaires. As buildings go, it's not awful (that's about as close as I get to praise most days); the last in a trioka of buildings with similar massing that front Rockefeller Park and the Hudson River, and the best, though the hewing such distinctions is tricky work. Each building makes a half-hearted effort to break down their monolithic character with various tricks, none of which rank higher than minimal interventions on the facade to create a more variegated pattern that you see on, say, a Costas Kondylis apartment block, though it's far too early to determine if they have any staying power as an idea. They're still brand spanking new, and if you walk a little further south to the Marina, look south for an example of a building that one might have said the same about fifteen years ago and see if you think it has weathered well. The best thing that can be said about them is they manage to be rather unobstrusive for being so ungainly, and the slight curve they follow is an arbitrary site plan gesture, but is effective in mitigating the fact that the three building are near identical in mass and footprint.

It turns out that there must have been some similar bathroom for building deal with the Solaire, for, on a recent afternoon, bathrooms that were being serviced in the park proper directed me to public restrooms on the Northwest corner. I walked over skeptically, and sure enough there was one of those BID rent a cop fellows. But I got no grief marching past him into the area marked only by a taped up sign. Inside is one of the best public restroom spaces I have ever seen in the city, be it design, cleanliness or conservation. Motion sensor lights (long life bulbs in wire mesh chages) and fans, waterless urinals (they even come with a polite little sign saying they are safe to use) automated sinks and hand dryers. Every functional detail has been well considered for its environmental impact and future of abuse. That would be in and of itself an impressive standard for such a facility, but the materials selection and execution are first rate as well. The tile work is sharp (well considered and really well installed); the entry is frosted, striated glass rectangles set in a stainless storefront framing (the assembly might be stock, but I doubt it. The detailing is way too precise and well proportioned). A range of practical blue-grey colors add up to being cool and inviting (and a nice relief on a sunny day). Like the interior of the Time/Warner center, it's a solid example of what a good, corporate firm can do with all their well educated and underpaid talent. In this case, it is Cesar Pelli's team. I don't like Pelli's work very much, mostly because it is mediocre, but moreso because I recall an essay he penned for Inland Architect back in the late eighties, when he decried the habit of architects who made a small name for themselves doing solid regional work getting enough noteriety to enable them to then run around the country putting up basically the same building over and over. I wonder if he remembers that article from time to time, and how he rationalizes his work now. But I can't fault him for that bathroom. The rest of the building is some pretty obvious moves, but if you need to step out (or in) for a moment when downtown, it's enough to make you feel like you live in a real city for a moment. Perhaps they should rename it the Miraige.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 21, 2004

Brooklyn hipsters get specialized lingo for 'Negro'. Gawker has the details on one of those end of civilization as RISD grads know it pieces on the opening of the new Target. If you were wondering if the thousands of liberal arts education dollars spent enlightening suburban kids to the plight of the black man had any beneficial effect, read no further:

I was accidentally wearing my 'defend brooklyn' shirt which is about police brutality but aparently it was read as an anti-gentrification statement despite... once this joint is open to masses of brooklyn trash who make Pathmark unusable, I will never again be able to admire the rows and rows of blue greeting cards and purchase them with matching envelopes or peruse the aisles of Gatorade without witnessing parents beat their children in the middle

Notice how she (helpfully pictured so you can stay away from her at the next Polyphronic Spree show) cleverly says 'brooklyn trash' so we won't think she is being race specific. Sure honey, we were completely fooled by that one. Too bad no one beat you (or didn't beat you enough) so if you couldn't at least demonstrate a whit of intelligence, you might at least have the good sense to keep your mouth shut.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

It a maze, but there's no prize for making it out. The early results of the 'creative bollard' thinking that's been going were quietly evidenced on Broad Street over the past week, as the final stages of a renovation are nearing completion. At the northern (where Broad becomes Nassau at the Wall Street juncture) and southern ends most of the traffic control barriers were large, rectangular planters with a pebbled concrete finish prone to deterioration at the edge. Now, a few replacements have appeared, in the form of abstract lumps covered with a bronze-like finish (I have spent some time staring at and running my hand over it to try and figure it out, but the presence of men with semi-automatic rifles made me a tad apprehensive about detailed inspection), likely some type of anodized aluminum. They are clevely chamfered in an asymettrical pattern so that if they are rotated, two adjacent barriers look unique (two or three are adequate to clog a sidewalk). They are an improvement over the various form of planter the city has used elsewhere, but, again, their presence is mandated by an unenlightened attitude about vehicular traffic, and thus are condemned to look instrusive and fundamentally ugly (given what prompts their use and how they function).

You can also see what an example of what the checkpoint booth of the future looks like at the intersection of Nassau and Pine Streets. These weatherproof lean-tos (if I'm going to continue to write about downtown, I really need to become more conversant in this security jargon) come in a wide variety, from ugly to uglier. Surely, budget concerns and the belief that someday they can be removed mandate spartan digs, but perhaps the city can force the winners of the street furiture RFP to come up with something better. The Nassau Street version looks like it was recycled from the cheapest aluminum windows they could find, finished in that shade of brown that makes you think whomever first spec'd it really actually hated making windows. Aside from its unfortunate color, uninspired form, and bland detailing, there isn't much good to say about it, except that painting the barricades themselves black doesn't help their appearance either. But if someone thinks this is a good idea, then they should factory finish the metal so it doesn't look like it was brush-painted on-site.

And a note to the Park Row activists: the police must be taking everyone's anger seriously. Temporary barriers constructed on Pearl Street are being replaced by surface-mounted curbs with standard park (black, wrought iron) fencing. If you look closely, you can tell it could be removed without too much fanfare, but at a distance it really looks like they found themselves a new parking lot. And, really, you should all quiet down. A cop or a fireman can't properly do his or her job unless they are parking their private vehicle on a sidewalk somewhere.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 19, 2004

Spliffy. Last week, we did a guest spot at Curbed, taking hip shots at the High Line proposals, based on a slide show the Times presented. Now that more images are available, and a show (which I haven't seen) at the Center for Architecture, through August 14, a more detailed assessment can be made. The additional information has not dramatically changed my initial impressions, so knowing -- or not -- what I wrote last week has relatively little signifcance here (though review of the images will: I'm not going to commit a lot of space to recounting the particulars of the project).

NB: For the purposes of concision (and my lack of adequate information to claim my annotations would be complete), I refer to each of the projects based on the lead design firm only, and the impressions here are based on more detailed review of the images, not any competition materials.

Diller, Scofidio & Renfro: The predominant motif of their design is both a literal exposure of and formal reference to the incision the High Line makes, and its repetition through materiality (the structural members that run parallel to its length and the rails they will be supplanting). The exposure includes cantilevering the tail ends of structural members at the Gansevort terminus -- maybe. The most glaring weakness of this proposal is the omission of structural members and other construction details where they are clearly necessary (such as handrails) which obscures the intent of the more dramatic interventions, such as an ampitheater that soars into the air sans any significant structural support. In some instances, the lack of detail isn't relevant, but for those signature pieces, the appeal of this entry would be severely compromised, as the elements aren't particularly striking less the engineering showmanship. The other place the presentation technique significantly compromises itself is the (rightly) derided vignettes of potential use, one of which might be a De La Guarda performance, or simply a rendering with people bizarrely shown hanging from the sides of adjacent buildings.

The long strands of vegetation and interstitial concrete are intriguing, but the overall impression is that lines were inscribed on a site map, and where they intersected due to shifts in orienatation, an event was attempted visually, then alternating types of plant life were inserted to provide some variety. Of the two times these images succeed, only one can be attributed to design, the aforementioned terminus. The axonometric view displays a simple and striking formal arrangement that is what one typically associates with and expects of their work. The other is the perspective view of what I believe is in the vicinty of Chelsea Market. It displays little in the way of design whatsoever, but is one of the few views in any of the submissions that reveals how satisfying opening this space up to pedestrian only access can be.

Steven Holl: Holl is the sentimental favorite, a local who has had only limited opportunity to exercise his considerable talents, and who also happens to be the person who should be credited with first publicizing the idea of transforming the High Line through adaptive reuse, way back in 1981, publishing a project for a Bridge of Houses (along with one for Melbourne, Australia).

So it's not surprising, given the long gestation, that his submission is at once the most plausible and perhaps the most compelling as well. Understanding just how fruitless pursuing a visionary concept can be (his original proposal wasn't simply a formal gesture, but also included an analysis of costs provided mixed-income options), he qualified his option as being eminently viable, with almost a quarter being realizable in the near-term, for less than the budget the High Line currently is projecting. His images don't necessarily project a consciously inexpensive solution. There a number of rather dramatic interventions, but the pragmatic requirements (an entry ramp and plaza) have a very elegant simplicity without seeming obvious or cheap. He also takes pains to illustrate almost every view with how people would interact with the project specifically, showing use that doesn't drastically segregate path and planting. The weakest element is the terminus, which has a stair tower (possibly the portion developed by Vito Acconici) that spirals up with an odd and rigid geometry, while being overgrown with plant life. It certainly accomplishes the goal of providing a view, but it does not exactly resonate they way many of his very simple formal gestures do. But this is not unusual -- many of his most commanding works did not immediately communicate their potential in drawing form.

Zaha Hadid: Perhaps the Archinect folks decided to do an abbreviated presentation of Hadid's concept. Maybe there is more to be seen at the show. But from there is to see, it's hard to discern an actual response to the program requirements. Instead, it is seems to be one of those force-fit situations where the designer was predisposed to deliver an idea that was going to work, no matter how awkward the intervention. Granted, the images aren't necessarily awkward (not at least by her standards), but simply aloof. The two places where attention is lavished are those most detached from the High Line itself: the terminus structure (which is entirely new, unlike the other participants), and an elaborate access/entry ramp (at 18th Street, currently a surface parking lot; Holl also has an entry here, so imaginably some additional property acquisition was part of the program). The existing structure barely turns up in the renderings, and then only to serve as a background datum upon which her trademark angular slabs are spun, overlaid, or subtracted. Her attitude about the extant site is most evident in terminus, where a new plaza in constructed directly above the rail bed, which is awkwardly incorporated into a glass sheathed space that is likely a lobby. If the judging was based on what creating an interesting large scale interventions to be randomly sewn into the city, this might be a viable entry (albeit one I still wouldn't find that compelling), but as a response to the preservation and evolution of the High Line, well, maybe she lost the competition brief.

TerraGRAM: TerraGRAM's images stand out, not simply because of their decision to mask them all as a circle, but because they don't look like some Ridley Scott dystopian night (granted, in Holl's scheme, his use of black and white photography to provide contrast of the design intervention only incidentally causes this). In their High Line vision, the sun shines, and for this alone one might be inclined to give it favor. Their design relies heavily on vegetation, and the sunflowers (which they argue will help reclaim the vitality of the soil) that dominate the southern terminus are vaguely threatening (sort of like a Residents performance gone haywire). The little they show of their planting scheme is unfortunately a sort of industrial English garden: a lot of look and don't touch, as the pathway meanders through seemingly isolated pockets of planting. I'm predisposed against guided pathways in any form, and these lack any sense of freeform pedetrian ownership of the space. Granted, they only show two views, but both are pretty spartan in terms of furniture and don't seem real respectful of the typical way groups of people like to meander (side-by-side, rather than in single file).

They show a nice treatment of the underside, in terms of organization and detail, but from what I can piece together in the FAQ at the High Line site, it seems most of the private property beneath the structure will remain that, with little control over what goes on. So the parade of parking lots and taxi support services will remain, obviating the nice, bright passage way they project. Their terminus is straightforward, and consequently pretty successful, accomplishing with little fanfare what is the desire of anyone who inhabits or perambulates the city: a heightened vantage point with maximum glazing.

UPDATE: Links have been modified to point to the complete presentation boards at the High Line site.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 17, 2004

But who will think of the developers? Sure, everyone worries about the children. But what about John Zuccotti? He can't buy any love, though I am sure he is trying. Brookfield Properties, owning what might prove to be the largest white elephant in downtown (right after Larry Silverstein), the World Financial Center, found out Thursday that their hope for a West St. tunnel was all wet, when Gov. Pataki emerged from a kayak ride on the Hudson to announce he wasn't going to drive the decision making. Given that CB1 got off the dime and voted no on the tunnel, that only leaves the LMDC, which (even though Zuccotti is a committee member) will be hard pressed to fly in the face of CB1. The reason there isn't a whole lot of support is that it's an expensive alternate to grade level improvement (about six times as much), and the net benefits are neglible to most residents, as 90% of the frontage that will be directly connected to downtown is commercial, namely Zuccotti's WFC. Most residential zones are north or south, and their connection points would likely become more dangerous, as residents fear the tunnel will encourage speeding (have you ever take a cab down the FDR and into the Battery Tunnel? You know what they mean).

Meanwhile, the upside for Brookfield is huge: their retail (which has been struggling one way or another since the complex opened) would be an easy walk from the huge tourist impact of the memorial, and basically any other amenities constructed would be their front door. And they could certainly use it. Even though they are currently reporting near 100% occupancy, and they've even managed to get some rah rah press touting this, there actually hasn't been much occassion to test their long-term viability, as most of their major lessees don't come up for renewal until 2005. Their major tenants, Dow Jones, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch are warehousing or subleasing big chunks of their space (not that this is unusual, but given the slow drip of financial services relocations away from downtown, they might not find it necessary to retain such large portfolios in the future). Others who returned after the damage from the WTC attack did so with generous subsidies from the city and state. When most of the major leases come up for renewal they will be competing directly with almost 4 million square feet (the WFC towers comprise just under double that) of Class A space across the street that will be very aggressively marketed. It's certainly provactive to claim that a property that is 99.5% rented is on the verge of being a disaster, but small shifts can have a major impact. Just ask the folks who sold Brookfield their downtown portfolio (which also includes One Liberty Plaza, which is on the other side of the WTC site), Olympia & York.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 16, 2004

Unsophisticated, but well endowed. Well, we already knew that Glenn Lowry thinks you are a provincal overachiever (but he respects your Montessori education). Turns out he also thinks you are rich. Michael Kimmelman did what looks like a real piece of criticism (I had to look twice to make sure it was the Times), assessing the state of New York museums, and revealed that our new, hung, MoMA will set you back $20 bucks. I'd make some blow job/Times Square sort of joke, except that would give Mr. Lowry some ammunition to call me juvenile.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 15, 2004

We do what we can. Because the idea of coalescing ten pages of notes is daunting, and the press of time and relevance, and the fact that Felix has done hell of a job providing a succinct and thorough recap (posting before I even got off the subway) of the New York New Visions panel Wednesday morning on the state of the WTC site, I'm only going to add some sporadic comments. Make sure to read his piece if you are interested in what the big picture looks like -- or doesn't given the seeming indeterminacy of many major points.

A. First, this panel was advertised as 'off-the-record', I don't think it is unfair to reiterate points I have already made, most of which were not clarified by yesterday's session. And no one will be attirbuted (even though the AIA taped the event).

1. Who is in charge? Well, that would seem obvious -- the PANYNJ and, through them, Silverstein, but this still is not something people want to state directly. I suspect financing is the rub here (if Silverstein expects a big handout, shouldn't the public have a say?). Much was said about discussion and committees and whatnot, but each time a presenter testified to the ongoing dialog, it stuck me as vacuous, since there is, after all, a major peice of construction underway. Speaking about ill-defined program discussions that may eventually drive a physical plan is an interesting abstraction, but shouldn't they be working against projected Freedom Tower workplan and how it will enforce a level of decision-making? The takeaway here is that someone (if one comment is illustrative, the blame would be laid squarely at the feet of our coat-carrying governor) has mandated a schedule for the Freedom Tower that does not jibe with program development for the rest of the site, even at the literal expense of having to retrofit the Freedom Tower into the final master site plan.

2. Who will be doing this was even more unclear. Libeskind apparently still has some sort of relationship that is intended to vet the progress of new structures (one thing that was cleared up was that design guidelines for the cultural facilities are currently being written and are expected to be released in RFQ or RFP form in the coming months), and he clearly has his head and heart in the right place about that, but who (in the form of the 'client') will then enforce his recommendations was not explicated. It's crucial, since there was a lot of very austute dicussion about footprint versus diagram and how that would affect traffic, particularly in how people would circulate to and from the PATH station (both tourists and commuters). The below grade plan reveals both the complexity of the programming decisions and its awkwardeness. Just orienting the concourse for the PATH station and the new buildings would be a challenge. When you add to that the mostly below-grade memorial, and the 50% below-grade retail you start to realize how dramatic some of the juxtapositions will be. Can people enter the memorial from the PATH platform? A memorial that is dogmatic in its circulation fails more often than not, so it would seem impossible to mandate exiting the concourse to get to the Memorial. The other option, marching past Au Bon Pain and the Gap, is even less attractive.

3. The introduction of Calatrava was possibly a craven desire to get a high impact concept model in front of a public that was angry at the tepid proposals (which may or may not be a fair characterization; it may have been a poor articulation of them actually doing a fair job) from Beyer Blinder Belle. The only evidence I have for this conclusion is that there were conflicting comments about what is going on now -- it is either being 'scaled-down' or it is being adjusted becuase his initial schematics were based on inadequate information. Additionally, beyond the dramatic image of the entry hall, there doesn't seem to be much resolution about anything: circulation, entry condition (one or two significant entry points), distribution of services and what will consitute the 'great hall' (either the at-grade entry or subterrenean concourse). I tend to be highly critical of the work of Gehry and Calatrava because I suspect their primary interest is egocentric form manipulation that they then assign others to plug program into. What I heard yesterday does not contradict this assumption.

4. The general hestitation and equivocation about decisions reflects poorly on one person: Pataki. We need to blame someone, and I'll start here. The people in that room had a real good idea about the fluidity of the puzzle the are trying to assemble, and they are working with major portions still in great flux. The tool they really need is time. And they have very little, which will result in cost overruns, causing the site to be trapped in partial or constant construction for perhaps as much as a two decades, and attenuating even further the already minimal design quality that exist in many areas. The best example of how this plays out is the two big 'holes' (conceptual and physical) that represent Towers 4 and 5. Only in the past four weeks has the state of their financing been resolved (there is none), but a plan was already in place that was trying to accomodate their infrastructure needs and integrate them into already very crowded support services planning. But now, no one knows when or how they can be built, so what is the alternate? Build temporary retail or public buildings at grade so 30% of the site isn't enveloped in construction fencing while the city waits (and let's be honest, the original WTC was a steal for the first twenty years it was in business; only in the late 90's did it even start to become competitive in the downtown market, and it's not likely we will see those conditions again anytime soon) hopelessly for a market that won't come? Not building the infrastructure would be short-sighted (even more so than the perhaps foolish belief that the space is needed at all), but if it takes 20 years to fill that hole, then it isn't. All these decisions need to be rendered because Pataki wants 'steel in the sky' by 2006 because he has political aspirations, not because there is anything else to be gained by accelerating the project (as opposed to the addition of a committed tenant). This isn't a radically new way for politicians to operate, but rarely has the evidence of such egocentric and thoughtless mandates been so clearly evident.

5. The focus on trying to fit the puzzle together has clearly prevented the people at that table from addressing the planning issues the site creates. That, or there needs to be another panel that reviews the macro planning issues that are going on independent of this gruop. Budget issues and the reality that they are working within a very dense and mostly immutable urban district, along with a lack of wherewithal for good planning practice (not much steel in the sky from a traffic calming plan), means that most of the traffic problems the site will create are not being addressed. Some of them are very typical and only the idealist -- me and the RPA -- really expect them to be resolved (every time a new large building is constructed, taxi and car service access becomes a problem). Others, such the routing a much larger number of buses into the downtown core than have ever been historically evident, and the loss of several access points for trucks, along with the attendant issue of increased security review, are likewise being addressed in only the most cursory way (at the regional planning level; the problems created by the buses are very evident in the streets bounding the site, but if you are waiting until you get to that point to plan, it's too late). And, overall, it seems to be an accepted and unchangable assumption that the return of the street grid was barely considered to be an opportunity to create pedestrian malls. Instead, it's cars, cars, and more cars.

I agree with Felix's observation that the panel was representative of some very capable people. And these issues will be resolved, but my experience with designing in the context of large committees means that the force of time and circumstance will dictate many decisions, and that is typically indicative of a lack of a center (either a good leader or a well-constructed committee). The most quietly troubling thing I heard was one observation that in the end, not all these decisions can be made by consensus. I understand, and even agree with that sentiment at times, but there is a marked difference between tempering a decision thoughtfully because all the interested parties have worked to compromise their disparate interests and letting the powerless yammer until you get tired and then move forward with a decision that was rendered in absence of their valid input.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

That's funny, cause I send all my checks to South Dakota. Following up with plan to bail on downtown, Citigroup unveiled plans for a new building across the street from its Queen's Plaza location, the Daily News reports. A Citigroup flack notes "We have our single largest, most profitable business - our credit card business - headquartered right here." (flack? well, okay, president).

No one is credited with the design and it's just as well. If the photo is any indication, it will be as bad as everything else Citigroup has done. Hell, they probably only merged with Travelers because their headquarters was as appreciably unattractive as the sore thumb out there in Queens. They should walk down the street and check out what MetLife has done. It's not much more than standard fare contract interior on the inside, but the exterior isn't a blight on the skyline either.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

ABG: Longer than you think. The Architect's Newspaper -- have you subscribed yet? See, if you don't, good things like this, you know, go away; unlike the less good things, us, namely, who stick around well past our welcome -- has started posting their lead article online. This issue, they take a look at the sadder than even we presumed tale of the African Burial Ground memorial. The finalists we re-reported on last week were announced in May (the Trib article was apparently in response to a couple public feedback sessions that were held after the announcement), nearly seven years after the RFP was opened. A timeline is provided that details the relative progress of other high profile memorials (the Oklahoma City bombing and the projected WTC Memorial schedule) showing the relative efficacy of each program, and it ain't pretty. The GSA claims the lag is relative to research being done at Howard University, which is now complete. There is a construction completion date, but no intermediary milestones that might be relevant (such as the date a winner will be picked and commission awarded). And no accomodation for revising the budget (which stands at $1 million, the figure proposed seven years ago). Considering that the GSA supports a percent for art program in many of their projects, and the cost of the project that led to the discovery of the remains (290 Broadway) was $276 million, raising the budget to at least $2.76 million doesn't seem unreasonable. But it is of course unlikely. And you don't even want to start drawing comparisons with budgets under review down the street, where, depending on how much sitework you want to assign, maybe 300 times as much is being allocated at the WTC.

There are also far better renderings of the proposals, but our original conclusions still stands: the modestly of the site mitigates the impact of any complex structure, and the formal gestures, which generally embrace the symoblic modernism that is the predominant memorial aesthetic seen in the this country since Maya Lin's Vietnam Memorial, beg for more space to express what, in some cases, appear to be striking and effective concepts. The one element that seems left out, which potentially could transform the space, is some physical manfiestation of the actual size of the burial ground (which extends well beyond the site boundaries) which would make more apparent the impact of this community at the time the area was in 'active' use -- estimates are that 10 to 20% of the population was of African descent at the time, a drastically different picture than we are typically allowed in the whitewashed images of colonial America.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 14, 2004

Citigroup to downtown: Drop dead. So how much office space do we need downtown? Citigroup announced it was pulling 1,700 jobs out of downtown today, sending most to Jersey City, and a smaller number to Long Island City. Chase is also expected to ship more jobs from downtown as the Bank One merger is completed. Goldman Sachs will be consolidating most of its operations (currently spread over four major locations) into one building (and sending the spillover over across the river to a building nearing completion). And Larry Silverstein is building two new towers, which will add to 3-6% to the available inventory (that's counting 7WTC and the Freedom Tower only), which currently stands a nearly 15% vacant. Unless a major new tenant relocation from outside the district (the best prospect for 7WTC right now is the SEC, a relocation that won't positively impact the overall vacancy rate) happens in the next two years, we can forsee vacancy rates hitting 18-20%.

And what no one is discussing in detail is that much of what remains downtown in the financial services industry is highly susceptible to poaching. Two major factors impact this: security concerns (which mandates redundancy and/or distribution of support services) and the unwinding of leases and operations contracts. The huge investment in network infrastructure and space acquisition that occurred only 4-8 years ago was generally done at a premium, at the tail end of the hottest commerical real estate market in a generation. The subsequent falloff resulted in staff reductions and some fundamental changes in how the FIRE segment operates, niether of which has reversed itself, even though the markets have done tremedously over the past year. And the concomitant implosion of the telecom sector means that firms have the leverage to move just about anywhere and be competitive. Physical proximity was a premium as recently as five years ago. The rise of ECN's (Instinet, et al), and their cutthroat margins means that a trading floor might be better located in a shed building in Omaha (capital of call centers, which means that there is a huge amount of cheap fiber underfoot) rather than an anonymous tower on Water Street. Analysis and trading desk support can be shipped to India. The local culture of the downtown district is programmatically highly insular and monoculture focused -- since the markets don't take a lunch break, you end up with bland, cloistered, buildings with huge floorplates. Street life is anemic. A train tunnel and 10 million square feet of office space aren't going to change that. When you take a look at the type of office space that exists downtown, how it is used, the relative amount of cultural, housing and consumer space alloted, you end up with a profile not dissimilar to places none of use want to live -- Tysons Corner, 287/87, etc. What's good for commerical, speculative office space landlords is not good for the city. The typology is antithetical to what draws people to the city and keeps them paying for the privilege.

Setting aside this neo-socialist vision where representatives of the majority of the people, rather than the majority of the money, determine was is best for their shared space, I'll retreat and kowtow to the the magical forces of the free market: show me the lease. I will be humbled and testify to the error of my thinking. Bring it.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Now this is how you do a bitchslap. It's been a smackdown kind of week in the arts world. Now, a lawsuit has relatively little pugilistic value, but you would think the literary types would get a bigger charge out of the terse words that get bandied about in court papers instead resorting to slap and tickle at chi-chi eateries (the whiff of Mailer wafts through the dining room).

Not to be outdone but those damned scribbling men, yesterday Studio Libeskind made good on their threat and threw down in a big way, filing suit against developer Larry Silverstein for the fee they demanded back in May. The Observer has the dish, and the Times has the details. Nina Libeskind outlines the rationale for the amount, and it is pretty rational (using generally accepted billing standards, though their claim of 25% of schematic development will be hard to quantify, not due to their failure to document, but because of the impossibility of establishing what is the signficant intellectual contribution to schematic plans, and who provided it), and they clarify their position vis-a-vis timesheets: namely that they don't keep them. For anyone. Let's hope they have a real good employment lawyer, 'cause everyone knows you don't keep timesheets to please clients, but to fend off the government (how many office have you been in where CAD jockeys and model builders were exempt employees?). Libeskind gets a vote of confidence from Rampe in the article, and another one this morning when they sat side-by-side at the New York New Visions roundtable at the Center for Architecture (recap hopefully this afternoon).

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 13, 2004

The Atelier Stripped Bare by Her Developers, Even. I wish I hadn't slept through Statics. I'm constantly amazed at what comprises adequate structural support for buildings undergoing renovation. The Mohawk Electric building, which is getting a fussy new TriBeCa worthy name and face lift, big time, has been slowly deassembled over the past couple weeks. I had assumed they would strip the floors to the joists, and start the renovation from there. The skeleton was slowly revealed (the windows were the first to go) and was striking, particularly at sunset. All the interior wood had been painted white (to likely maximize interior light levels), so the play of shadow across the wood running in all three dimensions was starkly evident. But then, on the north side of the building, the joists came out, leaving only the major interior columns and beams. I understand post and beam construction, to a point (it's pretty obvious), and all of it works in compression, so as long as it's heavy, it probably isn't going anywhere, but still. In another week or so, it's going to be a brick shell. A hell of a sight (catch it while you can). And I still wonder about those joists. Buildings from the turn of the century (particularly those for manufacturing) used dimensional lumber you just can't get anymore. With the proper flooring, the provide a solidity and sound attenuation that's hard to beat. Nonetheless, make way for the corrugated floor pan and concrete pour. Hell, maybe they should just get Gursky to take a picture of it and glue the print on the facade of a brand new building. And afterward, walk up to 116 Hudson, where you can see the old and new happen side by side -- well, old there is a bit of a dodge too. It isn't even a brick shell, the center having been cleanly ripped out months ago. They don't make them like they used to, that much is for sure.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Good art always arises from struggle. But when do we get to the art part? The Times picks up the deliciously nasty tale of art and preening self-interest going on at the Clemente Soto Velez Cultural and Educational Center in the Lower East Side. The Villager ran a piece on this last month, which is even richer in detail. Either the Times took pity, and glossed over the fisticuffs in front of NY1 cameras, or everyone got wise to the benefit of good press, and kept their mouth shut. Because nothing makes people lose sympathy faster when the Sandman comes calling, in the form of Keith McNally, than seeming to piss all over what is basically one hell of a sweet deal. You've got one side invoking the mystery of Latino machismo and the other carping "But it isn't affordable if you can't use it" even though this complaint came from someone drawing salary from the withheld rent. Here's a wacky idea: I'm sure there is no shortage of artists who would be willing to play nice in order to get a classroom sized studio for $500/mo. Mind you, these aren't homesteaders who moved in back when they were finding socialites with dead bodies in their trunks. The center was organized only ten years ago, and many of the artists have been there less than that.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 12, 2004

Now into the hands of dissemblers. The Times provides a pretty thorough picture of the work currently slated for the WTC site. Though it implies the inevitability of progress, the article is written very specifically about the immediate needs, which would be the precursor of almost any construction, it invokes the future via the senseless mantra of Guileless Pataki 'Steel in the sky by 2006' without providing much in the way of how or what that steel would be for. While the amount of detail (given the numerous previous articles) on how a tieback functions is welcome and likely unprecedented -- imagine Public Lives stories in twenty years about how the regular coverage inspired the scions of New York elites to abandon fashion and film for engineering -- a similarly detailed discussion about the state of financing is perhaps more relevant at this stage. Given Silverman's grab at the (remaining) money, cleverly framed such that the entire project is presented is needing assistance (whereas previously he claimed the Freedom Tower was fully funded), it throws and even more dense smokescreen in front of the process. My knowledge of the LMDC plans is not exhaustive (meaning additional research might clarify some of these), so the still unanswered questions loom: Who is 'officially' -- contractually -- responsible for site planning? Is the LMDC financing site improvements or Silverstein, as leaseholder? And who has authority here? The role of site improvements is even more crucial than building design, and PANYNJ still owns the site. Are the recently awarded cultural components going to own their facilities (seems unlikely)? What portion of the construction costs are they going to provide? When will comissions be awarded for that portion? And so on. There is a New York New Visions roundtable on Wednesday (details) that might explicate some of these issue (Childs, Arad and Kevin Rampe are scheduled to attended. No Libeskind.), though the coalition is an independent organization of designers, without any force of authority, so the attendees are acting out of courtesy and professional interest. It's being listed as 'off-the-record' and I'll make an effort to clarify this before it's over and hopefully be able to provide a recap.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

We've got high hopes, high hopes. Curbed promises detailed takes on the High Line finalists all week long, in anticipation of their formal presentation this Thursday. Hopefully, they have better access than the Times does. Here's the early line (no pun intended): Holl in a walk. It's buildable, he's got the history, and, excepting surveys run by Thoman Krens and Peter Lewis, is the most admired American architect working today, and doesn't have a significant public commission in the city. If he doesn't get this, then I guess every conspiracy theory about the mendacity and ignorance of the design community and its hangers-on is true.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

More 'Street Art'. Deitch Projects (the Grand Street location, 76), is featuring work from Steven Powers (aka ESPO, and the author of The Art of Getting Over which we don't really know, save for seeing it on the design/alternative art display at St. Mark's Books). Following a motif he has apparently been developing, much of the work is in the form of signs, clearly fabricated by the sign specialists further east on Grand, or their compatriots, which blanket the exterior. The iconic imagery is both obtuse and one dimensional, but the effect of the garish colored awnings piled up so absurdly is certainly striking, and entertaining, and is an interesting contrast to the polish that is SoHo. They really work when drunken and shrill scenesters stumble along underneath as you look at them, though I don't think this is something you can request, but must rely on serendipity.

I hate to use the dreaded phrase 'if you go in for this kind of thing' but given the language he seems to be setting up, the paintings inside are more effective. My advice is to go at least at night (they have thoughtfully left the interior lit well enough to see the paintings), or twice (day and night). The signs are all interior-lit, consistent with their more pedestrian brethern, and they dominate the streetscape in the dark. Plus, you can stand smack in the center of Grand Street to take it all in.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Apparently they hand out nostalgia and psychedelics at these events. The Daily News reports on a recent symposium dedicated to establishing guidelines for the development of Governors Island, a project, like the new Pennsylvania Station, that is an example of the extraordinary statemenship of the late Sen. Moynihan leading to positively provinical and embarassing inaction (the legend is that he convinced Clinton to sell the island to the city for a $1 during a helicopter flight; even though Clinton agreed, the foolhardy response of the city and state necessitated another five years of negotiation). As it stands, there still aren't any plans for the island, though a wide range of ideas have been put forth in the past half decade (a casino, campuses for most of the major universities, an generic resort, both public and high end private housing). So the Governors Island Alliance had some clearly hippy dippy event that produced the startling recommendations that it remain car-free, and that they build a hill, which they are calling a glacis, likely to acknowledge the former use of the island as a military iinstallation, or as a symbolic gesture to ward off the inevtiable cries of 'What the fuck?' the first of which enamanates here. We're all for car-free everything, but this is really the low hanging fruit. It's an island, without any vehicular access. Car-free Central and Prospect Parks would be a more worthwhile way to spend one's afternoon than sketching water parks and other urban planning workshops fantasies. They bothered to say horse-drawn carriages would be better than cars. No wonder OMA's vision of neo-Orwellian excess persuades people planning large-scale urban redevelopment. When opposed with carriage rides and log flumes, which would you pick?

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 9, 2004

Trying hard to not make a back of the bus joke. My Google skills are average at best, but given the specificity of the event, it seems I can conclude only the Tribeca Trib covered the presentation "last month" (they didn't even bother to dig up a date; jesus) of five finalists for a proposed memorial at the African Burial Ground on Duane Street. The interesting things is, attendees clearly were in favor of nothing. Not as a matter of critical opinion of any one proposal, but as a concept. The competition, being run by the GSA, didn't muster support of the majority of folks willing to show up for the presentation. Instead, they are asking the site be left as is, with the possibility of relocating the memorial elsewhere.

One image, and supporting text, is available for each entry at the ABG site, though the renderings range from servicable to poor (given the quality of the image provided to the Trib, this is an unfortunate administrative oversight). The entry from Rodney Leon of AARRIS Architects is the most successful, given the constraints of the presentation -- and the site. The entry featured in the Trib, by McKissack & McKissack (a radically different image from the ABG site), while polished, falters when you consider the size of the site (far smaller than you might imagine from the Trib rendering). The actual scale of most of the solutions run the risk of seeming trite, mostly due to modest scale, potentially appearing koisk-like. I find that scale it is the trickiest element in memorials. The Irish Hunger memorial and the Museum of Jewish Heritage (both in Battery Park City) strike me as poorly scaled. Too much squeezed into too little space. That, and the ever increasing number creates a conveyor belt/World's Fair sense of consumption of memorial. So I'm with the angry dissenters. The site as it stands is dignified and reserved. The blank space is compelling and slightly confusing, which I don't think is inappropriate symbolism.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Gird yourself for lots of heated denouncements at the unneccesary appendage of 'street.' Meanwhile, over in the Metro section, we get the kit article on street art. The Times works their senstive liberal cred by finding a girl, in a field more male-dominated than late night talk show hosting, to blather about her 'work.' The slide show is better than what you get for the downtown gardens, but should you sit though it, and have some time in the afternoon, try to catch the (closing today) Andrea Fraser show at American Fine Arts (530 West 22nd) -- and yes, go see the porn across the street -- as an interesting antidote. Not for anything the egnimatic Swoon says in particular, but just as a apposite take on when the -- any -- artist speaks.

Meanwhile, Kirk Semple manages to hit all the high notes, and produces this interesting (and new, to me) nugget about the Wooster Collective: it is run by a marketing executive. He stays local, and generally misses the inevitable (and frequently nutured) arc from deliquent artist to shill for corporate advertising, while taking juvenile jabs ("Ask street artists to talk about why they do what they do, and brace for a torrent of rationalization") that don't actually resonate when presented with evidence. Moving outside the States, he might have to actually consider what subversive is, in the form of figures like Bansky. But here, it plays a lot like what it is: inarticulate, bored, middle-class kids looking for the last vestiges of rebellion and some useful portfolio pieces for getting that art directing job at Kirshenbaum Bond, all the while thinking they are gaming the system, instead of the other way around.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

It's a good day to kick an unwanted English guest out of your apartment. 228 years ago today, colonists destroyed a statue of King George III located in Bowling Green. To commemorate this, the Times offers up a mixed bag in the form a round up-cum-history lesson about the parks downtown. We get some detail on the just finished work, some previews of what is to come, and we learn one crucial thing: to get interviewed by the Times, you better have some righteous real estate. We hear from an owner in the American Thread Building and a fella who has an upcountry estate. But curiously, no one is identified as a "renter in Independence Plaza." So that part is pretty worthless, as is the piss poor slide show -- skip it and go for a walk. It is far greener downtown than those photos would lead you to believe, and they mostly contradict the main argument of the article. The history lesson is servicable, especially for someone as ignorant as me regarding the city's history.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 8, 2004

My position is self evident; it is a position. Community Board 1 met on July 1 to decide something regarding the West Street Tunnel plan, the $900 million proposal to bury the stretch of West Street that faces the WTC site. People are decidedly mixed in their support (including even Battery Park residents who don't think it will do much to create a stonger connection to Downtown; a logical conclusion, since the Downtown they are adjacent to doesn't have much to do if you don't trade securities), save John Zuccotti, who, surprise! is the chair of the company that owns the World Financial Center. Since that makes him something of an underdog, you should be comforted by the fact that he is on the Development Advisory committee at the LMDC.

In the meantime, over at CB1, they decided this is issue requires... more discussion. Next month, CB1 intends to hold a seance to call the spirit of Ionesco to see if they can find a way to make Robert's Rules works, or barring that, make their indecision a little more interesting to watch.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

A day late, a dollar... er. Um. A little late, but this -- not-so-little Danny Libeskind's response to the Times Magazine sort-of profile -- seems to escaped the attention of most, save for the sharp eyed folks at Architecture Week. His point sees to be similar to an argumentative gambit a friend of many years has determined I employ with distressing frequency. When presented with absolutely contradictory or inadequate evidence, I have a tendency to reply, if not in these exact words, then some unneccessarily prolix version thereof: "So... I was right." It doesn't work any better for me either.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Sued as the News. NY1 reports (though they are probably re-reporting this Times article) that 'Newsstand Owners' (the NNOA, though they don't seem to have a web presence) are suing the city to prevent implementation of Local Law 64, passed in 2003 (0569-2003A -- and PDF here). Local Law 64 is part of an omnibus effort to 'clean up' what is referred to typically as 'street furniture' (Newsstands, distribution boxes, benches and public bathrooms), a process that is still in the RFP stage.

The basic thrust of the legislation is the establishment of a city-wide franchisee that would assume responsbility of street furniture management, with the trade-off of allowing advertising (currently prohibited) in return for better facilities and the construction of public restrooms, though, notably, this is not required as part of the legislation, which covers only newsstands. When first proposed, the intention was not to disenfranchise current owners, but to require them to reconstruct their facilities based on a uniform design, and then surrender the ad space to the franchisee (who would be funding the bathrooms, which would also have advertising). The NNOA is suing because the legislation, due to more stringent restrictions of where facility can be placed, might mandate the closure of 20% (based on their estimates) of existing newsstands, even though the first paragraph of the legislation indicates there is a good chance the overall footprint of each would increase (need room for those ads!). So much for taking back the streets.

This initiative has been underway in one form or another for several years. You might remember the bathroom near City Hall, which was a prototype developed by JCDecaux, which came very close to getting the contract without competitive bidding (or, rather, a highly structured RFP that made it impossible for almost anyone else to bid). Wayne Barrett of the Voice busted the city on this, and they went back to the drawing board and came up with Local Law 64. Last year, Matt Taibbi gave a good overview of the JCDecaux fiasco and took a sharply critical stance of the new effort.

Whereas the prototype in City Hall Park seemed dandy to us (and we really like the public restrooms in Paris), the payoff, as it is currently structured, doesn't justify the scale of this trade-off. The economy of scale being proposed, coupled with a rather timid qualification that any new designs must be approved by the art commission -- which can only act under the rubric of guidelines set by the department of consumer affairs -- means we may end up with another example of the mallification of our urban experience. Even though it may be yet another example where our irrational pride in idiosyncratic and often foolish urban traditions trumps efficiency, but with the prevelance of B&N and Starbucks handling the accessible bathroom issue, here's to hoping the NNOA succeeds with its Bronx cheer to Local Law 64.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 7, 2004

Don't Look Now. While everyone else is busy trying to get a peek at the best attended ground-breaking ceremony in city history, John Young spent the weekend exercising his free speech rights, posting two new additions to his 'Eyeball' series, which aggregates publicly available information on potentially sensitive sites, the Statue of Liberty and NYC Bridges and Tunnels.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

It's the capacity, stupid. Today's profile in the Times' Public Lives is Clark Hampe, director of terminal planning (which can be an interesting oxymoronic title, read a certain way) at Penn Station. The focus is mostly on a timely subject (the recent announcement that most of the entrances/exits will be closed during the Republican National Convention), though buried in there is an interesting comment:

In recent years, as ridership has grown significantly, the railroads have clamored to send more trains into a station that has essentially reached capacity.

This is interesting because some big monies are being proposed (with some already committed) that have some potential impact on this situation, namely the LIRR Grand Central connector (also called East Side Access), and the 7 line extension (as part of the Hudson Yards plan). The reason being is that Penn and GCT are crucial nodal points (intra- and intermodal junctions at both locations), and both are already operating at near capacity. The Regional Planning Association lays out the numbers in one of the three reports they generated in anticipation of the Hudson Yards announcement. Their calculations indicate that the 7 line might not be severly overburdened for 10-15 years under the current proposals, but the transfer point at GCT (critically, the connection between the Lexington Avenue line and the 7) will be almost immediately. And it will likely stess capacity at Penn Station, as commerical development is front-ended (meaning commuters will be added to before residents). The East Side Connector should, in theory, offset some of this, since Long Island commuters would connect directly to the East Side, but unless they work within walking distance of Grand Central, they will only intensify conditions on the Lexington Avenue line, which is already functioning at its logical capacity (conversion of the line to full computer control as is happening on the L might not enable the addition of even a single train at rush hour).

What are the possible solutions? Given the current dispersal of workforce, the two strongest contenders an accelerated commitment to the Second Avenue subway line, which could add a connection to the LIRR at 63rd street, as well as the 7, and an additional Hudson River tunnel that would not run to Penn Station. Though the numbers aren't stellar (at its peak, only 50,000 commuters used the Hudson crossing via PATH, though that may have to do with the relatively limited reach of PATH relative to New Jersey Transit trains), the WTC terminal makes the most sense. Given the commitement to a $2 billion dollar showpeice terminal, some actual capacity benefit might be nice. But those aren't the current money plays right now. Yet we are stuck with an ill-defined and conceived East River connection for LIRR to downtown (the downsides of which are track compatibility issues and a reduction of subway service). The $2 billion is burning a hole in Pataki's pocket, and you can bet pouring it into the hands of suburban voters is a far more attractive carrot that improving infrastructure that doesn't have a big ribbon cutting ceremony scheduled in your next term.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

New learning center opens in Queens. Maybe. It's a press release about the opening of a new addition. Er, no, it's a press release about an exhibition opening that will run briefly and then will really open when the addition is actually finished. Yet all of this won't take place until November, and it's in Queens, so you can forget all about it.

Anyway, that's what happens when the Daily News mangles the message of New York Hall of Science. That, or the NYHS needs to review their press relations skills. There's a nice big rendering of (actually, the previous page, and it will be gone tomorrow) what you can expect come November. Looking at it, one can't tell what comprises the addition, though the tower that rises out of the center is similar to 'organic' mess rising over Astor Place (though there and here, it's just latent moderist yearning). In rendering form, it's pretty undistinguished 'Interactive Learning Center' fare -- attempted 'sculptural' forms defining major spaces, sorta moderist detailing that is supposed to convey a technocratic aesthetic. Like EPCOT, or, um, the New York World's Fair. So at least it's respecting the vernacular.

Inside, aside from the baseball exhibit, you can see the Conference Bike, "the world's first circular bicycle -- a tricycle built for seven people sitting in a circle by artist/designer/inventor Eric Staller." Eric Staller is best known for the Lightmobile, a VW Beetle covered in lights. The bike is intended to promote peace, though the promotional image on his site just makes me want to hate people I don't know. Even more.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 6, 2004

I Light NY. NY1 reports that Milton Glaser, oft cited as the creator of the I 'Heart' NY logo, is promoting a 'non-confrontational' protest to the Republican National Convention: he is asking everyone to point a flashlight or similar light source at the sky the opening night, from dusk til dawn (start exercising now). The symbolism is that we protest the darkness in the hearts of all Republicans, and Light Up the Sky. As protests go, it's okay -- not the same as 500,000 people in Central Park (and, as an aside, I wonder why Times Square is not being pushed as an alternative. The AIDS rally at the '92 Dem convention was a powerful event, even allowing for the officious pens from the NYPD), but certainly a welcome addition.

We'll be doing our protesting the old fashioned way: yelling at barricades, making tee shirts (look for link in the coming weeks) and giving out false directions to anyone who looks like a conventioneer. Remember, Republicans don't hate just blacks and gays; they hate immigrants, poor people and independent filmmakers as well. Grand Central or Grand Concourse? The New Yorker Hotel or New Lots? It's up to you. But be original. There's almost nowhere in the city where the biggest Dick won't feel welcome.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 2, 2004

Turns out they didn't think we could steal the ABMA from the Marriott Sawgrass. The Independent Budget Association released its analysis of the proposed Jets stadium yesterday, and it turns out they don't think the city can find 35 new mid-sized conventions to fill the space after eight Jets games and Ozzfest. The Times reports the Jets responsed with the charge that the IBO was both "pessimitic and inexpert". And, for once, you know, I might be inclined to agree with them. I don't think the city really has tried hard enough to determine if they really could do better than 20 (the IBO number) new events a year. If we call go out and find just one potential convention group, I think we could have at least six or seven by the end of the day. Look, I'll start: out in Aurora, Illinois, there is the American Brush Manufacturers Association, who just had their convention in Ponte Verde, Florida, at the Marriott Sawgrass. And if you mistype their URL, you get the American Mold Builders Association, who have two yearly events, in Cleveland and Key West, in the coming year. I'll bet the IBO didn't even consider the AMBA and ABMA. It's the kind of small minded thinking that will talk yourself out spending $600 million on a stadium. I, for one, am embarrased for my city today.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

July 1, 2004

Lend me some sugar, I will be your neighbor. Brooklyn development blah blah, gentrification drives out all the artists blah blah, what's next a Starbucks? Blah blah. I clearly have nothing to add; I really just wanted an excuse to write that headline. Props to Curbed for two, two relevant cultural references in one hed. We just enjoy being juvenile once in a while.

Found always via this Permanent Link.

The hardest working man in the memorial business. New Jersey has announced the winner of a memorial dedicated to residents who died in the WTC attacks, one Frederic Schwartz. If this is a familiar name, it's because he was recently announced as the designer of a memorial in Westchester County (titled, 'The Rising' perhaps to appeal to the New Jersey jury?). And he was a member of the THINK design team that most everyone believed would 'win' the site concept competition (because one of the three designs they submitted received a plurality of the public voting).

The Times provides the details, and some insight into just how rudderless their criticism is sans Muschamp. Clearly respecting the clout of the Families of September 11 they take pains to quote a representative who declares the salient differences between the New Jersey and New York approaches quite concisely: "it will be above ground and the families of the victims chose the design." Well, I guess we can tell what the FO911 thinks of Mr. Arad. And they reproduce a submission brief comment that the type used for the unavoidable wall of names is Times New Roman "a familiar and easy-to-read typeface." Particularly to users of Microsoft worldwide.

Schwartz had previously displayed a design concept on his site for Hoboken (or so my memory dictates) that would be a glass wall with a ramp that rose from side to side, the wall parallel to the river, so you would see the empty (for now) site through the wall, and could progress up the ramp, reading, presumably, the 700 names. If was a far more elegant solution. The selected idea is two parallel stainless steel walls that run along an visual axis that terminates at the WTC site, the effect being that when you approach it along the viewing axis, the image of the Twin Towers will be recreated. The concept may be laudable, but viewed from any other angle, the effect is somewhat fearsome and oppresive. And the remainder of the site seems rather slapdash. I'm trying to avoid seeming callous or crass here, but as the number of satellite memorials continue to be announced, some in view of the proposed site memorial, do we go down the road of making each location-specific site the only place a name is displayed? Using the logic of this memorial suggests we should we develop a Manhattan-specific site as well. Isn't this Balkanization (particularly as it encroaches visually on the site itself) counter to what supposedly seperates us from them, that so many disparate peoples collected and worked together each day in relative harmony?

Found always via this Permanent Link.

People of New York, we humbly present -- GowCa. Places everyone! We've gone over this a number of times, so let's try and do this with a minimum of error. Opening date has been announced, and it's a good ways off (mid-2007), so there is still plenty of room for new cast members. If you move now, you can still qualify as a curmudgeonly local who wearily decries the hordes of Brown graduates and 'East Williamsburg' refugees who are ruining your secret thing. Bonus points if you start a faux revolutionary group that threatens to sabotage the new filtration system, hoping the resulting smell with drive out the johnny-come-latelies. Call yourself the Smith Street Reclamation Society and open a coffee shop/free store. Make a logo with the face of Che and the name 'Gary' under it. Now, get to work people! Productions like this don't happen on their own!

Found always via this Permanent Link.

Archives

October 2008
September 2008
July 2008
June 2008
January 2008
November 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004

Tick Tick Tick

Entry
Merch

Links

Local
Streetsblog
Curbed
Lebbeus Woods
Personism
John Massengale
Greg Allen
John Lumea
Bird to the North
Polis
NY Songlines
Kevin Lippert (back at last!)
Forgotten-NY
Progressive Reactionary
Daily Dose

Americas
Transfer
City Comforts
Exquisite Struggle
Space and Culture
Spacing Wire
My Urban Vista
BLDG

Abroad
Super Colossal
Things
City of Sound

Institutional
Archinect
The Architectural League
Death by Architecture
The Real Estate
The Architect's Newspaper
ArchNewsNow
Architecture for Humanity
Storefront
Regional Plan Association
Architectural Record
CCA
Planetizen
Van Alen Institute
PPS Blog

Syndicate this site (XML)

Some rights reserved. For details, please review our Creative Commons License.

Powered by
Movable Type 4.0

Comments? Suggestions?