« July 2004 | Main | September 2004 »
August 30, 2004
It makes you blue. The surfeit of closings and restrictions for the convention this week have produced a predictable and deserved outcry from the usual quarters. But unless you are listening closely for those voices, you will find little sympathy for those critical of the massive, albeit relatively brief, disruption of civic life by an event that purports to celebrate democracy. Well, such is the spin media provide without much thought, when in fact the political convention is a dastardly process with much more in common with dictatorships than anything else, as either party would prefer that this moment be the coronation, rather than prelude to the discomfort and expense of an election. It’s unfortunate that we can’t put a permanent physical face to them in the same way one could to Tammany Hall, or 110 Livingston Street.
No, what we can learn this week is how the gradual erosion of public space (which, to be fair, doesn’t have much of strong precedent in most parts of this country) continues with little resistance on the part of the those who encounter it daily, or next to no comment from those ostensibly charged with providing an objective voice on these issues. When the largest media conglomerate throws the opening party in its mall, a vigorously guarded private space, one shouldn’t expect a great deal of criticism when the thousands of people who diligently (and in many cases, without alternatives) support public transit are told to 'avoid' their only terminal.But it’s a point that is worth keeping at the forefront, because the incursions are constant, incremental, and systemic. The vibrancy of any city, and particularly this one, depends upon the autonomous existence of its citizens. But if this is too socialist, think then about what drives revenue and consequently what is an equitable distribution of right. Streets can be owned, rented and closed with little warning, with the full compliance by the city, at times for little or no fee, provided a 'business interest' is served. With a tax burden that is falling steadily towards the wide bottom (federal income and capital gains tax, which hit the top end most dramatically, are a net outflow for the city), the continued obeisance of the city ranges from regrettable to appalling. Tax abatements are issued against corporation tax, not payroll tax. More and more of our city services are funded by sales and various proto-VAT taxes (look closely at your phone bill), but we are expected to demurely defer to the various land grabs: sidewalk cafes, movie shoots, events that close large areas (Disney in the Sheep Meadow, for instance), so that when we are allowed unfettered access, it is then promoted as surplus, as an heretofore unrealized benefit.The other agent that is an integral role in the preservation of public space is the tourist. The significance of revenue cannot be understated, and there is also a measurable value of cultures intermingling, even if only for a short time. Tourism is one of those sea change events that deserve the same critical eye, since some of the forces (or their proxies, quasi public business associations that field their own security forces) driving the privatization of space are those profiting most handsomely from tourism. But tourism requires people. Every attempt will be made to render environments simple. It is not a grand cabal, simply the deadening required for the efficient transaction of capital. Nodes are celebrated only if the can be serviced in an orderly way. Otherwise, we see the logical reaction of rendering previously unique locations as similar by the presence of repetitive stores and restaurants. Can’t make it to Toys-R-Us in Times Square? Go to Union Square! They got one too! But if culture is work, then maybe we should surrender the battle. It’s supposed to be fun, right? Not here, where if you can make it, then anywhere. That implies a certain amount of grit and determination is required to simply earn your chance to plant a stake in the ground. Except they keep trying to cordon off where and when you can. Another tedious scrum we have to wade through. Show your colors this week. Throwing bottles is for excitable college students. Being as difficult as you damn well please to get your way, and not budging an inch is the way we do things are around here. Wear it with pride.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 26, 2004
We'll be back after this short interruption. A recent trip West provided a chance to get back to reading actual books, and enforced a interruption from the routine of this site. The distinct difference of consuming more considered writing, and the relative ease of not getting up and scouring local publications for noteworthy items, were striking. Even as new forms of writing and publishing have presented opportunities that were heretofore restricted to academic publishing or dilettantes, their pervasiveness may not be a good thing -- the reading in question was Neal Leach's The Anaesthetics of Architecture, and sitting and thinking about a glut of information erasing meaning led to some introspection about what is going on around here, one result of which will be a hiatus of sorts for the next 4-6 weeks (meaning this site will not be entirely bereft of posting, but the infrequency would be best served by an RSS reader).
Being fussy about design means a high level of introspection is expected. The next few weeks will also include a redesign: a major software update is pending, and the desk is currently littered with various popular how-to's that cover the proper way to execute CSS and build a more standards-compliant friendly site. Whereas some aspects of this design work, there are several glaring failures. Much of the improvements will be under the hood, but should result in greater reader control, for both off- and on-line reading. Though the current state is reasonably tidy and effective, the visual result is not dissimilar to, say, an Urban Outfitters: some hipster gloss without a firm conceptual base. Normally, this sort of geek-tech talk is considered unnecessary, but given the editorial tone here, a short acknowledgement of the structural (code-wise) failures of this site was desired.This revamp also extends to content. One of the goals in starting this project was to produce well-considered, tight, and entertaining prose about the city and the structures that are its defining elements. Though the latter is clearly in evidence, the former is less so. One clear reason is that you can't plan for interesting or exceptional events to occur daily. And spending a good chunk of it writing means that there is even less opportunity to discover. The ill-defined editorial goal was to hew some middle ground between the best of architectural criticism (Michael Sorkin, and Stuart Klawans are two personal inspirations; though the latter is not architecture, that speaks to the dearth of good, popular architectural critics) and essayists who wrote more generally about the city (William Whyte), to define a synthesis of experience of the narrative of experience and the environment in which is unfolds. A little high-minded, sure, but if its works, it shouldn't read as such.Instead, what happened too much was regurgitating items found elsewhere online. The standard was that some commentary had to be added that was lacking in the source material. Given the arid conditions of architectural and urban criticism in local publications, this wasn't hard to do, and is still an essential need, but chasing after the Times will always be only that. Lacking a staff of reporters, finding one's own news means walking the streets more.The most immediate and obvious change will be a reduction in the frequency of publishing. The new target will be Monday morning publication, with more abbreviated comments when the more egregious examples of journalism turn up. Items will likely be longer, and if this goes as planned, be better written (unlike, say, this very sentence). Some other bells and whistles may turn up (photos, for instance). If you've like what you have seen so far, please keep coming back. What's to come will should be a refinement and perhaps even an expansion.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 17, 2004
Bridge over ugly waters. We've been hestitating to comment on the temporary bridge under construction at Madison Square Garden for the upcoming convention. Costing something like a million bucks, we're still not clear what exactly it is for. Something about security, ease of access (even though the police will likely shut down 8th Avenue for the duration of all sessions), journalists or something, we've been waiting for the day it looked most 'done.' We had some high hopes, what with the union banners that were plastered all over it during the assembly. Then came a tepid blue nylon wrapper and banner so innocuous we forget what it says, even though we passed by about an hour ago. Thinking that no one would let such a highly visible structure be presented in such a pedestrian fashion, or pass on the opportunity to plaster some symbolic hokum on the side, we have reached our limit of patience. It is done, it is ugly, and if you believe some, it might even fall down.
So we had resigned ourselves to this blight on the Farley Post Office for another two weeks, when we discovered this morning that the crafty RNC had a strategy all along: they have begun to line 8th Avenue and 32nd Street with acres of industrial modular space -- also know as construction sheds, or temporary classrooms, or just plain ugly trailers. We were amazed had how colorful and attractive the bridge seemed all of a sudden. Touche, Karl Rove. The only other thing we could possibly find to say about all this is: when, and how, did Kohler get into the rental power business?
Found always via this Permanent Link.
What's next, the Prada Chastity Belt? Security chic is all the rage these days. Of course, where the Wall Street Journal does the staid and reasoned take, leave it to New York to make it all sexy. Or what they think passes for sexy. They asked several designers for their designs for security barriers, which yielded a bonus Big Brother incident, when one of Winka Dubbeldam's (who will continue to get good press, as she has the best name in architecture -- take that Zaha!) interns got promptly detained for trying to snap a photo of a post office.
Her solution is a pretty standard gooey CAD-enabled pod that, whoo, lights up at night. If they really were photographing the post office SoHo, then this is bad idea contextually, since it would crowd the already narrow sidewalks. And, really, protecting the SoHo post office? You can't even find it. What you would really be protecting is the Apple Store, which, given its role in outfitting legions of faux different iDrones, perhaps really is a mission-critical mandate.There is also some inspired thinking, particularly from Daniel Kaplan of Fox & Folwe, who evinces what truly elegant design is about, pointing out that creating hollow sidewalks (strong enough to support pedestrians, but weak enough to collaspe under the load of a truck) would serve the exact same benefit as instrusive bollards. Michael van Valkenburgh takes a similar tack recommending trees. His use of Lincoln Center as a sample shows that it's a 'not for everywhere' solution (given that most of the plaza is elevated, that is one of the few places where bollards wouldn't detract).Hopefully this is indicative of a continuing dialog to address this problem, as there is an immediate need for creative thinking, as the deployment of new designs continues apace.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 16, 2004
Follow the money. The pie keeps getting a little smaller. Since the block grant money was given to be spent, there's no point to griping its being used, though some have taken issue with how fairly -- or not -- it has been distributed. The only way to find out how, or to protest, is to review the latest Partial Action Plan (PAP) (No. 8), which is still in the public review and comments period (closes September 8 -- this is your only chance to comment; there are no public meetings or hearings for this process). This PAP is the first major allocation for the planning (for the cultural facilities) and the pre-engineering and continued design development (for the Memorial and Memorial Center) of the non-commercial portions of the site.
The document provides limited insight into how the development and long-term manangement of the site will proceed. A new 501(c)(3) organization is being formed, the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation, Inc., to be the fund-raising and coordinating entity for the Memorial, Memorial Center, and the Cultural facilities. But it appears that the LMDC is still the overseer, and, presumably, the PANYNJ is still the landowner. Fundraising for memorials is a pretty straightforward affair, but asking for donations under the rubric of 9/11 memory that will fund arts groups may rankle some. Likely, fundraising will be directed, meaning donors can allocate their donations as they like, but since no formal, public plans have been issued regarding the collective administration of the facilities, some awkward conflicts may occur.
The largest portion of fundraising is needed for the Memorial and Memoiral Center. Since they are intergrated into the site, there is a certain amount of 'must do' for this portion to enable the overall redevelopment to proceed. With a price tag in the $350 million range, this is not an inconsiderable sum to raise. The World War II memorial raised $195 million, and that took 11 years, and substantial donations from the state and federal governments. Additionally, the routine upkeep of the site, which will likely have costs that are much steeper than most memorials (due to security, and its tight integration into a transit and commercial hub), is not budgeted anywhere, and will require routine funding (being self-supporting through tee-shirts and coffee mugs is a rather noxious inevtiability).
What contingencies are in place for funding and progress? The LMDC still has enough money in block grants (the air link money is all coming from Liberty Bonds, a seperate pool) to fund the all this construction, but are they going to hold reserve funds to cover the all the various structures in the event that fundraising falters, which means not disbursing up to half of its balance over the next 3-5 years?
And what of the four cultural groups? Will they have fundraising targets they must meet to initiate construction? What contingencies are established should they fail? One, the 'Freedom Center', can't be said to truly exist yet, which potentially puts the Drawing Center (its stablemate) at a disadvantage. Since there is much political will for the the Freedom Center (which may change over the next two -- presidential and state -- election cycles), it seems the most certain, but its nebulous mission is going to wreak havoc in schematic planning (what kind of space will they need, how much, etc.). And who goes upstairs in each building? Will they flip a coin? Have a fundraising race? Who will be funding the fundraising? This is not a flip as it sounds. Asking arts groups to raise $200 million (not a stated figure, only a speculation of what the facilities may cost) to build buildings they won't own is a little cheeky (of course, there is also talk about the space being rent free), as well as pricey. If the Drawing Center really thought they could raise $50 million on their own, wouldn't they have tried already?
LMDC chair John Whitehead has already admitted they don't have as much money as they need for everything they want to accomplish. While his comment may have been only symbolic or an attempt to placate the dissenters, it may very well be a statement of potentially dire consequence. Given that one of the main goals of the rebuilding process is to remove the blight of a hole in the ground -- though there are still many who would debate the wisdom of this point, or its subsequent planning -- it doesn't seem that the mechanisms or plans have been put into place to realize even this limited goal.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 13, 2004
Mike, you might be right, but that doesn't mean anyone likes your plan. Community opposition, yadda yadda, government handout, blah blah, traffic, overcrowding, lack of support from the MTA, etc. The glimmer of hope here is that last point, because even though this entire fiasco can end run around local opposition, if the MTA doesn't sell its land, or support the 7 line extension, the stadium is pretty much a non-starter. Likely, they are only playing some hardball, since the state has been slowly starving them for the past 20 years, and this is the best chance to apply some pressure to increase their funding. Al Hirschfield, who realized late that the best way to rehabilitate a felony conviction is by loudly owning a sports entity in the city, decided to add some levity to the proceedings by claiming he can develop it all by his lonesome, and, more importantly, with his own money, which is more than all the rich guys currently involved are willing to do.
Meanwhile, Bloomberg calls Cablevision 'a disgrace', which isn't news to anyone, for their new ad campaign which basically shows that the new stadium proposal is full of shit. Which it is, but Cablevision decided to fudge the numbers on the environmental impact statement, projecting that -- and you can't have a local dustup with the exploitation of minorities -- Harlem would be overwhelmed with sewage, since the primary treatment plant for Manhattan is located at the west end of 125th street (the pro stadium side is up in the Bronx wooing the Latino community with, um, promises of janitorial positions or something). If the West Side is fully developed, this is a fairly true statement (and one that no one is talking about), but this fine distinction is lost on the Dolans, who also didn't think about the fact that as long as the sewage goes where white people ain't, then an excess isn't really going to keep anyone up at night. But this is their version of outreach, hoping they can get local Harlem leaders to make enough noise to stop the stadium while they get the city to toss those same tax-funded bucks at the MSG, and fade quietly in to the night when their predictions come true.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
And she didn't trot out some rape analogy. Damn. Kate Millet, who has empowered legions of affluent white girls that bothered to attend good schools finds herself victim of yet another social order dominated by men. In this instance, rampant development (which, hey, we happen to hate too) has forced her to make do with only 1700 square feet of city apartment. That's right. Millet, who for several years has fought the redevelopment of her city digs from the farm she has upstate, finally fell victim to the virus that is Avalon Bay development. As compsenation, she suffers the indignity of having to scale down to a smaller aparment, which is only three or four times larger than most two bedrooms in her neighborhood. I don't know about you, but I'll miss Millet. I remember her selflessly working the flophouses, handing out sandwiches and free copies of Sexual Politics to winos and bums. Once you destroy the fabric of downtown like that, what can replace it? Million dollar lofts developed by sculptors who made their name attacking corporate profiteering? Maybe, but it won't be the same.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 12, 2004
Hey, hey, most of the gang's here. David Dunlap tries to work some scandal chic into what was by any measure an innocuous event, yesterday's RFP conference for the two cultural sites at the WTC site. It's a sloppy mess, presuming the casual reader will know the proposed location of the musuem site, which will also hold the Drawing Center (never mentioned) and that there is a whole other site for the performing groups. His big flourish is a senseless speculation on what might happen if the selected firm decides to 'move' the site, his precedent for this inane point being the 'bending' of the rules by prior competition entrants. Except this isn't a competition, it's an RFP, and the selected firm will be expected to perform professionally under contract, which is to say, design for the program as it's delivered.
His trenchant thesis is that the corner location is significant in part because of the potential for sight lines between the Winter Garden (!) and the proposed PATH station, and thus a potentially 15-story museum might obscure some views. It's interesting how people continue to talk about the site without noting that it will be filled with office towers (eventually). There were no sight lines at the old WTC. There were two, large, repetitive figures that blocked light, and dominated the skyline. The future may not be very much different (especially if Kevin Rampe gets his way). Exactly how is a 15-story museum going to be intrusive when there is a 100-story tower behind it (with a handful of even more bland infill sprouting up another block back)? If anything, the reverse is more important: some of the (potentially) most interesting design work downtown will be dwarfed by the entirely unexceptional first 40-stories of the Freedom Tower.
Beyond that, the most useful part of the column is the partial list of attendees, which included "Arquitectonica, Santiago Calatrava, Diller & Scofidio, Nicholas Grimshaw, Zaha Hadid, Rem Koolhaas, Enrique Norten, Bernard Tschumi and Rafael Viñoly". All in all, not a bad list, if you trim the front end a bit. Were you to have a sky blue shapeless blazer from Chess King packed away in a closet, you probably remember Arquitectonica best as the firm that made all those wacky apartment towers in the opening credits to Miami Vice. If you have been paying more attention recently, you know they are also responsible for the worst hotel ever constructed in Manhattan (the Westin Times Square, on 8th Avenue and 43rd Street) and the suburban behemoth in the East Village, Avalon Chrystie Place.
Though his list is not presented as exhaustive, we would hope firms such as Steven Holl, MVRDV, Smith-Miller Hawkinson (responsible for underappreciated Pier 11), Herzog & de Meuron, and Richard Gluckman (he might be a little short on total dollars completed, but has a great musuem and gallery portfolio) submit. Stepping down in scale just a tad would allow an even more interesting list with the likes of Office d'A and Mack Scogin/Merrill Elam, and locals such as ARO and Lewis Tsurumaki Lewis.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
You won't have old Herbert to kick around anymore. The Times introduces Nicolai Ouroussoff today, and he introduces the winners of the High Line competition: Field Operations + Diller, Scofidio and Renfro. As a piece of writing, it's not the strongest move out of the gate, but he does show legs in the backstretch and finishes strong.
Opening with some general comments about the competition, he seems to impute an opinion that only the winners earned the distinction of "startlingly original results". But this kind of bland obsevation could be equally applied to any of the projects. He doesn't offer any insight of his own regarding the losers, which would have made for more intersting criticism. Overall, it might even be hard to say what it is he is praising, beyond the slivers of concrete that turn up in all the renderings. He rightly pans the terminus as bordering on a "high-end mall for downtown sophisticates". The rest of the elements he mentions are qualified as 'sketches,' and this is certainly true, as nothing beyond the plants and aforementioned concrete pieces have enough detail to indicate how they might even be built, which doesn't leave all that much to discuss or evaluate. It's certainly not his fault that one read of the project is that is consists primarily of pavers and a schematic planting diagram, but perhaps he could have considered this in his write up.
It's not all bad. He manages a rather direct jab at the end, noting that the High Line development is emblematic of the best way to do adaptive reuse, as compared to "flawed, often cynical planning efforts that have marked development at ground zero" which is a degree of unvarnished commentary that is most welcome.
As a decision, well, a hearty 'boo-hiss' from these parts. If pressed, we would have voted for the winners as the 'if it isn't going to be Holl' candidate (even without reviewing submissions), but unfortunately, the drop-off is rather steep in our estimation. Diller + Scofidio have realized a small number of impressive and complex projects, but they simply don't have the grace of handling materials and light that Holl does. Or, at least, they haven't had a chance to show it yet. Given his history with the site, the elegant and pragmatic solution he submitted, his role as an ardent voice for innovative urban interventions, and his clear distinction as being the best architect in town, being passed over is a most disappointing decision, one that the new kid would have been wise to acknowlege.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
It's Wednesday; time for some public interest group to oppose the West Side stadium. What? It's Thursday? Oh, well, then it must be time for... as my father would say, same shit, different day. Actually, we're just late in reporting: it was Wednesday, and it was the Citizens Union this time, the "city's oldest good-government organization" as the Times puts it. They offer a succinct position paper that addresses the major points of the opposition: that the plan should undergo a binding ULURP (right now, the stadium can proceed without city input), that the development authority be better scrutinized, that the BPC revenue not be diverted, and that we shouldn't be racing ahead thinking we'll get the Olympics. In other words, Dan Doctoroff's Olympic fetish shouldn't be driving the development bus. Given their roots opposing Tammany Hall, they are a little more lively and strident than the RPA, who we imagine are taking the tactical route (also known as the cop from the 1970's advice vis-a-vis rape: if you know it's going happen, you should relax and enjoy it) but end up coming off as too obsequious -- even though their numbers are at best inconclusive about the need for 30 million square feet of office space over the next 30 years and the residential real estate market is at an all time high, they fall all over themselves repeating that the West Side development can't be driven by residential development, even though that would be by far the most visionary solution. Given the limited amount of authority the city has, it's questionable that focusing on the overall development scheme -- which the city does control -- would have any impact on the stadium. If you think there would be a hestitation to plunk down a new stadium on the West Side with no additional development, we recommend you pay a visit to where the Jets play currently before pondering that question any further.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 11, 2004
130 Liberty Street: cleaner than you think. We hope. A little more news is leaking out regarding the planned deconstruction of 130 Liberty Street. After reiterating that you can't trust an investment bank when it comes to analysis, the LMDC spent some time glad-handing at a CB1 meetings, and reported that they will be commissioning their own study of site before proceeding. Given that the LMDC site optimistically projects the commencement of the tear down to begin this fall, one might be inclined to think it may get the short shrift, since they haven't even started the testing yet. But that hasn't stopped the contractor from detailing exactly how the job in going to be done so don't go thinking that this 'testing' is just 'public relations.' Just in case, if you live downtown, perhaps you should hustle over to the WTC Registry, which is still short of its hoped for enrollment.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
Times Arts editors: left hand, meet right hand. The new concrete: sure is pretty, if you can find someone who can make it.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 9, 2004
Naked Cowboy releases study showing Jets stadium poor investment. So we're being a little facetious, but only because we're interested in what sort of twisted Google strings will lead folks here. However, it really does seem that if everyone in town has pretty solid analysis (there's a bunch more out there, but why bother linking? There will be a new one tomorrow for Dan Doctoroff to ignore, including one from City Comptroller-cum- mayoral candidate William Thompson, due any day now) to support the patently obvious: namely, that tax dollars shouldn't guarantee nor subsidize sports stadia. It's a little lost in the muddle of $4 million dollars worth of advertising (which pitches the Dolans versus the Johnsons; just who is Goliath in this one?), but pretty much 100% of the cost of the proposed Jets stadium is dependent upon John Q. Public (the Jets will finance using bonds guaranteed by the city so they get a sweet rate).
Given that the combined net worth of the RWJ IV, Bloomberg and the Dolans would cover the cost of a mixed unit development that would pander to everyone's particular franchise needs, why don't they do it all street, and you know, buy the land and pay for it themselves? Up next: my mother issues a position paper on the absurdity and patent racism of claiming that the stadium will be good for the Latino community cause there will be all those peanut vending opportunities.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
The Spy List. Delivery Trucks. Bicycle messengers. Food delivery guys. 'Homeless' people. Transvestite Prostitutes. Eurotrash tourists. Improv teams. Out-of-town 'firefighters' coming to town to commune with the spirit of their fallen brothers. Parking attendants. Drunk girls trying to vicarioulsy recreate their favorite scenes from SATC. Univision news crews. Yuppies pushing Maclaren stollers without any kids in sight. Republicans. Skate punks. Flyer guys. Greenpeace volunteers. PA's from Law and Order. Jamaicans selling fake watches. Anyone on Canal Street. Postal workers. Dog walkers. Dogs. You. Me.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 6, 2004
It's days like these I don't miss 254/255 forms. The LMDC has released the RFP for the Cultural Buildings at the WTC Site. RFP Conference is next week, and submissions due at the end of the month. No scoring criteria are outlined, so it's hard for anyone to self-select (beyond the very obvious requirement of having successfully completed a project with a construction budget over $50 million). The only other thing that might constrict the field would be the potentially daunting submission requirements, which will favor firms that have weighty RFP's on file. Very little useful information about the development is given, except that the LMDC is taking a clear ownership role of the development of the Memorial Center building, but is vague regarding the theater (to the point where they seem to infer that the Joyce and Signature may be forced to do their own fundraising). And they confirm what a nightmare the latter will be from a schematic standpoint: a 40,000 sq ft footprint that will have to house four theaters, ranging from 99-1000 seats, plus vertical circulation for two distinct facilities. The total is 300,000 sq of program space, a big chunk of which will need 3-4 times average floor height, making a tall, slender and awkward envelope. The idea of a black box theater on the 20th floor is interesting, but only if there is money in place to make it so.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
And just when you thought real estate agents weren't vampires. There's a nominal amount of activity going on at 6 Hubert Street, formerly the site of Vinyl/Arc. The building seems to have changed hands (or at least plans) in May, which necessitated the closing of the club. Sinvin was listing the property (at $18 or $26 million, I can't remember, and their listing is gone). It was being marketed as a potential residential conversion. The property information looks like hieroglyphs to us (there are others way better at interpreting them), but from what we can discern, it is an exercise in tax obfuscation without peer (anyone who runs an entity under the name 'Last Gasp Realty' can't be taken real seriously). This is confirmed by the building register on the Hudson Street (157) entrance, which lists about 15 tenants for a building that looks by and large abandoned.
It all seems a little shady because of the current activity. The doors on Hubert and Collister have been graced with a new coat of black paint (erasing the simple graphic that denoted the entrance to Arc), and the basement, previously filled with construction debris, is fairly clean, with a very interesting exception: a very precise hole is being dug just under the Hubert Street entrance. With the excavated dirt lining the hole, and its dimensions, it pretty much looks like a grave site. Now, there's plenty of reasons for such a project, though we can't name any really good ones right now (tip on Jimmy Hoffa?), but given the air of decrepitude of the building, and the hazy ownership record, the bare bulb throwing a garish light on the crispy hewn orifice some three feet by eight, in a basement no less, makes it just a little creepy.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 5, 2004
How long can you tread water? We all know just how cutthroat New York Real Estate is, but in case you were looking for some hard numbers, the Times serves them up cold: if it comes down to your life or rentable square feet, well, don't ask a question you don't want to know the answer to. Commercial property owners, which successfully lobbied in 1968 -- a good 57 years after the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire -- to effectively halve the number of required exits for tall buildings, are fighting any revisions to codes that might expand their responsibilities.
The Times peice is some pretty muddly analysis, noting that '5 of 6' firestairs in the WTC were unusable during the 9/11 attacks, but that number refers to the strike zones and above (which the Times fails to note). The 9/11 commission concluded that almost 99% of those located below the strike zones were successfully evacuated (though it should be noted that this was due to more sophisticated command and control systems put in place by major tenants after the 1993 bombing, and the active insurrection of most workers who ignored fire command instructions to stay put). Allowing that the stairs would be evenly dispersed, doubling the number of exits would have only added one functional staircase. But unlike the standard canard of real estate, location isn't everything here. If the stairs that were in place were more fire resitant -- one recommendation is for a 4-inch concrete liner that may have been adequate to withstand even the 2,000 degree fire at the WTC for a short while, provided the entries were airlocked -- this may have made a difference without taking away as many precious square feet. But even this is too much for the landlords.
But the line should be drawn somewhere, and this is a key point since the escape statistic noted above presents the ugly logic for future potential terrorists to try and strike the lowest possible floor (tactically the easiest option as well). So quality of escape route is as crucial as the number, but unfortunately no one is seeing the light on this point either. But don't worry, your boss really is worried about you. Quoth the Times:
One major financial company, while building a new headquarters, used a computer model to study how many of its employees would able to evacuate if three bombs were exploded inside 20 minutes on different floors, according to Ms. Lancaster. The plans showed that many employees would still be able to escape.Many. Not most, but many. That makes you feel all warm inside doesn't it? Oh, wait, that's probably the fire nipping at your nose.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 4, 2004
How do you spell failure? B.P.C. There's a term used in selling investment products that comes up when it is necessary to explicate the gap between the rosy projections of any piece of sales literature (that mythical 7-11% return that climbs steadily northward) and what may have actually happened: it's called hindsight bias -- one of the few terms that makes sense independent of financial services jargon. It's the point where you explain to someone that should you look back and find the absolutely two best points to buy and sell a stock, it cannot be a rational basis for acting now, since it is impossible (sort of like the Heisenberg Principle) to determine if one of those two points is approaching.
It applies to just about any retrospective analysis in life. Real estate and development is another. If you had only moved to X back in Y, you'd be rich, etc. So it takes a certain amount of rigor to analyze an event without coloring conclusions with extraneous information. The folks at the Downtown Express -- not the most nonpartisan folks, but they do manage occassional burst of incisive journalism -- therefore cannot be entirely blamed for the whitewash they give to Battery Park City, presented on the eve of the final betrayal of public interest, which slips by with they jaded resignation of the sellout. But becoming inured to the corruption with which real estate development happens is not something we should allow journalists.
And so here we have what is trotted out as the signal accomplishment of Manhattan development, an anitdote to Robert Moses, a livable, park-like environment. But we'll skip right over that residents love it because it's so unlike Manhattan, and that it was mostly luck and the determined effort of one designer that saved the project from a forest of skyways a la Minneapolis. The bridges connecting the WFC buildings look like an aberration now, but that was the intended goal for the entire project, so that precious ground level space could be freed up for, yep, you guessed it, cars and trucks.
So it's mostly banal, it never attracted new downtown businesses, and it's another example of a quasi-private entity that consumes public resources at disproportionate levels (they get to unilaterally make budget decision and simply net expenditures againsts their yearly PILOT numbers), that's not a failure on the order we come to expect, in a city where things are done big or they aren't done at all.
Well, we have that too, in monumental quality. Over the 35-year history of the development, the primary goal of Batter Park City was to provide public housing. A number that ranged from 6,000 (including middle-income units) in 1969, to 14,000 in the 80's to 24,000 in the 90's (when it was tacitly agreed that building them on-site was not going to jibe with all the flocking rich white folks). Total number constructed? Less, than 2,000 (see the gory details here). It's crucial to talk about this, not just because it's another example of how ruthlessly class warfare is perptuated on the lower echelons of our city, but because we are at another critical nexus of planning and investment. To whit, the city has announced another sweeping public housing initiative, coupled with the defunding of big chunks of the homeless shelter program, and they are looking to hand out positively gargantuan sums to sports teams. It was agreed more than once that surplus revenues from the BPC would fund affordable housing. Now it is openly being recommended that the initial funding for Hudson Yard be the surplus funds. That's right: $600 million for public housing for 22 people, and they don't even get to sleep there at night.
So let't not get all misty eyed about how great Battery Park is. When it was being planned there was one restaurant in TriBeCa, places like Independence Plaza were lonely encampments, and the city was looking to hide its low income residents on a perch at the end of Manhattan. But the minute it became clear that it wasn't going to be a prison, the promise of low income housing was shunted aside. The information is there, but everytime a reporter is dispatched to present fact, turns out their boss has a cozy relationship with a developer (the Times), or is one (the Daily News). And so everyone rolls over and ignores the fact that the wealthy invented class warfare, and the ability of the downtrodden to resist grows weaker each year. You would think that at the very least, the rich would understand without the poor, there would be no mechanism for edifying their egos.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 3, 2004
At least we can look up her skirt. More we-are-winning-the-battle kind of news today: the Statue of Liberty is 'open' again, in the same kind of way that 'anyone' can be President or get reservations at Nobu. The Statue is now 'run' by one of those 'private-public' organizations, like the Central Park Conservancy, and it turns out they are just as paternal and high-handed. Thus, in a fit of symbolism that anyone who isn't a white guy will appreciate, visiting the Liberty Island (which I assume still requires removing your belt to get through security), affords the opportunity to look up the innards of the Statue through a glass-ceiling. And, like CP, let's all pretend to be surprised when it turns out that this vigiliant concern about security is shit-canned the second Disney wants to shoot a television show or someone wants to hold a fundraiser there.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
We have a winner! The votes are in! After an a day of confusion about exactly where we should be expending our precious heightened awareness of impending terrorist attack, it turns out that the selfless workers at the Citicorp Tower (we'll be all retro here, since they don't even own it anymore) on Lex and 53rd (officially 153 East 53rd) -- you know, the ski slope building -- are those under imminent threat. This courtesy the Times, which is partly to blame, since they ran a photo of 399 Park Avenue, which is the corporate HQ.
This isn't the first time the Citicorp building was in dire straits. Due to an unauthorized construction modification (bolting structural joints instead of welding), the building was potenially vunerable to toppling over in a strong wind (if you've spent much time downtown in the colder months, you know that 70mph actually isn't that beyond the pale).
More fun facts about your neighborhood symbol of Dread Westernism: architect Hugh Stubbins initially proposed that solar cells be mounted on the slope, in hopes of offsetting the energy consumption of a 59-story tower. This is what is known as a symbolic gesture. That went by the wayside quickly, though they didn't square up the roof, which subsequently became a maintenance hazard (all that snow and ice running down a 45-degree slope? Problematic).
But we should all just chill. Just as the possibility of it collapsing was hidden from the public for decades, it turns out the terrorist threat has been around for some time as well. Hey, it's not like their slogan is 'Live Safely'.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
August 2, 2004
Deaniac. Dean Bowman should be the most important American singer alive. Cleary, I already think he is. And 'important' being a slight distinction from 'best' (not that I would be averse to promoting this as well). I'm sure that this isn't the first time someone has listened to a performer and thought, 'if everyone just listened to this, people could, would change.' To say nothing of the powerful orators that we have cast aside, if not outright destroyed. But resilience of spirit should be celebrated and inspire action.
Dean just moved, but is coming back for a week of shows. Go see him. If he doesn't fill you with joy and make you want to cry at the same time, then your soul must be a sad place. The Thursday shows are the most recommended.
Dean Bowman sings Black Spirituals
Thursday, August 5th, 9pm and 10:30pm, $12
Jazz Gallery, 290 Hudson Street
With D.D. Jackson (piano, organ), Jerome Harris (bass, guitar), and Michael
Wimberly (drums, djembe).
"SONGS IN THE KEY OF LIFE"
Saturday, August 7, 3PM (free)
Central Park Summerstage
Featuring: Caron Wheeler, Vernon Reid, Corey Glover, Imani Uzuri, Gordon Chambers, Dean Bowman, Tamar-Kali, Kelli Sae and many, many others!
Caron Wheeler and The Screaming
Headless Torsos
Thursday, August 12, 2004, 9PM (Doors, 7PM), $15
S.O.B.'S, 204 Varick Street
"THE NOT-SO-GREAT AMERICAN SONGBOOK"
(aka Bad Reagan Era Music)
Saturday, August 14, 3PM (free)
Central Park Summerstage
Featuring: Marshall Crenshaw, Kiki & Herb, Moby, Judith Owen, Elizabeth Ziff, Dean Bowman, Everett Bradley, Gordon Chambers, Maggie Moore’s Chanteuse Club, and many more special guests -- curated by Richard Barone.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
But they might buy the naming rights to the Gowanus -- Stillenkarre, perhaps? IKEA is going to need a lot of free tee shirts to combat the wave of bad press they might be facing, if today's item in the Daily News is any indication of what the next month will be like. A new study (which follows one completed by 'Gridlock Sam' Schwartz that put the potential impact at 14,000 cars daily) predicts upward of 20,000 cars daily, considerably more that IKEA projects. Schwartz was dismissive about the methodlogy, but even at his lower number (still ten times the number of parking spaces in the current plan) concludes that the project is ill-advised. We are a little skeptical too, since much of this traffic will be on weekends, and we happen to know that such a number is impossible, if only because every vehicle on the eastern seaboard is otherwise occupied right in front of our apartment, trying to get at the Holland Tunnel.
Given the recent Yankees expansion proposal, the fiasco that is the Jets Stadium (ooh, the 'Multi Modal Convention and Entertainment Center, or whatever the hell they are calling it), it would seem that we doomed to repeat the errors of planning large for large's sake, as documented yesterday in the Times.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
A proper civics lesson. Last week, the Van Alen institute announced the finalists for their Civic Exchange competition, which is developing a prototype for information distribution in lower Manhattan, that, in their words, will:
Underscor[e] the critical role of innovative design thinking in the regeneration of downtown, [calling] for designs that will 1) provide information and generate interaction; 2) stimulate place-based education; and 3) enhance the appearance, perception, and experience of public space.It's not clear if the winner will be constructed, or what steps would be required to make this possible, which is crucial to raising the bar for discussing publicly funded design. When Atlanta hosted the Olympics, there was a very high profile competition with no mandate for construction. Granted it was more critique than competition (the sites were four particularly difficult intersections that were emblematic of how freeways undermine urban areas and a parking lot), but when you draw the interest and effort (which, considering the size of the stipend for this program, still requires a good deal of unfunded labor) of the best designers working but don't provide a path to realization, you train people to believe accomplishment is a series of powerful gallery shows and a monograph or two. That isn't public work, that is the successful distraction of those who might make the most difference.
The people who made the short list are an impressive collection of thinkers, and actual doers. Given the multi-disciplinary nature of competitions these days, it's a lot of names (see the PDF for the full list), including Antenna (designers of the new MetroCard terminals and the interiors of the new subway cars), Thomas Leeser (best known, for, well, the Gold Bar, though he was just awards an addition to the American Museum of the Moving Image), Mesh and David Reinfurt (who collaborated on the Story Corps kiosk in Grand Central Terminal) and a whole bunch of folks, led by an organization called Local Projects. Among them, there are more than a few good ideas and some acutal opportunities for execution. If this program gets off the boards, it might be the first time since something physical has risen from to the level (and perhaps beyond) the supposedly high-minded rhertoric that has erected itself downtown.
Found always via this Permanent Link.
We don't need no stinking murals. Though Curbed smartly noted last week that the mural at 6th Street and the Bowery is in danger, should the lot be sold, it turns out that the wrecking ball may loom even larger, in the form of that bastion of architectural rigor, the Cooper Union. Turns out space the mural occupies might be worth upwards of ten large a month, should some buyer be found. And if one turns up, it's curtains for the mural, reports the Times. Cooper Union is apparently sticking to their end of the agreement, which was to not touch it for a year, which is well past. But ask most anyone in the neighborhood, I would hazard they would be aghast that what looked like a memorial is actually considered a placeholder by its owner.