Residents Keep the Lights Burning on East Harlem’s Holiday Tree;
Lighting Ceremony to be Held December 15th at 6:30 PM
at Northeast corner of East 106th Street and Third Avenue

East Harlem, New York—Four weeks ago, it seemed likely that Franklin Plaza, the site of the East Harlem Holiday Tree, would remain dark this year. The tree’s usual sponsor, the East Harlem Board of Tourism, was struggling to raise money in the face of a faltering economy and to find the staff resources to ensure that all the logistical issues were addressed.

But at the last minute community organizations and residents, led by Hope Community, a local non-profit housing group, stepped up to make donations and contribute their time to support the tree, which has become an East Harlem institution. Last week, event organizers announced that they had raised the $9,000 necessary to ensure that a tree lighting ceremony will taking place on December 15th at Franklin Plaza, on the corner of East 106th Street and Third Avenue.

“We’ve been lighting a tree at Franklin Plaza for the past four years,” said José Carrero of the East Harlem Board of Tourism and co-chair of the tree committee, who helped to found the tradition. “We didn’t want this year to be an exception.”

Local businesses, non-profit organizations and individuals reached into their pockets to make the tree possible. In addition to major sponsors like State Senator José M. Serrano, the Upper Manhattan Empowerment Zone, and Con Edison, groups like Manhattan Youth Baseball, Mount Sinai, Manhattan Community Board 11, El Barrio’s Operation Fightback, and the Lott Development Corporation contributed, and many local small businesses and residents made personal donations.

“The tree lighting is a tradition that’s should continue to flourish,” said Roger Cabán, chair of Hope Community’s board of directors and co-chair of the tree committee. “Hope is proud to have stepped up to the plate at a critical point to keep this tradition alive.” In addition to making a donation, Hope staff raised funds and carried out much of the logistical work required to make the tree lighting possible.

The tree has become a symbol of the neighborhood’s efforts to maintain its rich cultural heritage in the face of rapid change. East Harlem, like other northern Manhattan neighborhoods, is facing development pressures and rising rents. This year, residents are facing additional concerns about a rapidly deteriorating economy.

“The tree gives those of us who live and work in East Harlem a chance to join together and celebrate our community,” said Kathy Benson of the Museum of the City of New York, who volunteered hours of her time on the project. “This year, of all years, it’s important that we all stand together during the holiday season.”

From the Wall Street Journal

Setting the Record Straight about Ed Stone and Brad Cloepfil

By ADA LOUISE HUXTABLE

New York

It may seem low on anyone’s list of priorities at this moment of political change and economic crisis, but now that Ed Stone’s little seraglio has been converted into the new home of the Museum of Arts and Design and the reviews have set some kind of record for irresponsible over-the-top building-bashing, it is time to look at the facts and close the books on 2 Columbus Circle.

Hlne Binet

The bitter controversy over whether to save the building’s Scheherazade façade or accept the radical redesign needed to serve the new museum went beyond the local and parochial to a total breakdown of objective evaluation that silenced more responsible voices and threatened the hard-won credibility and authority of the preservation movement. Real issues were abandoned for the elevation of feeling over reason and a win-at-any-cost mentality. The invention of instant mythologies fed the studious evasion of unwelcome facts. It was an unworthy performance that did little credit to anyone who cares about preservation and can only serve as an object lesson of how not to go about it.

In such a poisoned atmosphere, it has been all but impossible to judge the successes or failures of the completed redesign. For many, the movie-set lushness of the not-to-be-taken-too-seriously galleries of modern art as defined and built by Huntington Hartford in 1964, consisting almost entirely of richly carpeted stairs topped by an irresistible Polynesian luau, stranded incongruously in the grimy traffic tangle of Columbus Circle, was an endearing aberration in a city where such things are all too rare. For the generation that had made the building a popular gathering place in the 1960s when they were newly arrived in New York and enchanted by its romance, the loss of this symbolic Shangri-La was too painful to contemplate. For others, the appeal was muted and the architecture second-rate. Some, like Philip Kennicott writing at a safe distance in the Washington Post, found it a hard building to love or hate. And so a mythology of its architectural significance had to be created for its defense, a well-promoted popular misconception that this observer, present then and now, would like to set straight.

While I respect the revisionist impulse, I simply do not buy the argument that this little building was a bellwether of the postmodern movement, or that its architect, Ed Stone, was a prophet who made the break with orthodox modernism, as its champions claim. That assertion is specious history. Stone’s charming potboiler has been falsely elevated by wishful hindsight. This was never an act of creative insurrection; it was accidental postmodernism, coinciding serendipitously with an awakening interest in more expressive referential and decorative enrichment. Two Columbus Circle was on the down curve of an architect who had done his best work in the 1930s; Stone’s stunning A. Conger Goodyear house, in Old Westbury, Long Island, and the first Museum of Modern Art, designed with Philip Goodwin, were radical structures that introduced modernism to this country.

His career was subsequently destroyed by alcoholism, and there was a long, fallow period until a new marriage returned him to sobriety and reinvented him as a new architect, Edward Durrell Stone. We who had known and admired him as Ed Stone were summarily informed by his wife and his publicists that he was to be called Edward Durrell Stone from then on.

As Edward Durrell Stone he designed a much admired American Embassy in New Delhi that featured decorative screens. Screens sold; they were instantly popular with clients, appearing on everything from universities to pharmaceutical plants, in work otherwise undistinguished in quality and uninspired in plan. The ultimate klunker was Washington’s Kennedy Center. Somewhere behind those screens, Ed Stone the architect was buried.

Hlne Binet

However, if faux history does not support a cause, neither does ignoring facts because they are obstacles to desires. The structural report on 2 Columbus Circle found the screen past reasonable preservation or repair. Granted that such reports should be looked at with a skeptical eye, but this one appears not to have been looked at by anyone at all. The fasteners holding the marble to the underlying frame were not all stainless steel; many had rusted and much of the marble had discolored and spalled. The façade would have had to be replaced at great expense, still with no idea of how the building could be saved.

And right here I part company with those who believe that copies and replicas are acceptable substitutes for the real thing. Once the original is gone or beyond salvation you are faking it; when it’s lost, let it go and move on. Blind sentiment and perverse tunnel vision kept the argument going.

Two Columbus Circle had been owned by the city but not occupied for some time; it was now in serious disrepair. The city decided to sell the building to a cultural institution that had been looking for a home, the American Craft Museum, later renamed the Museum of Arts and Design. But because this would mean extensive redesign with no guarantee that the screen would survive, the opposition cried chicanery and foul. The sale went through, and a rising American architect, Brad Cloepfil of Allied Works Architecture, was hired for the job.

The building’s distinctive shape and size has been kept, but the interior was gutted for more usable gallery space. The fairy-tale façade was stripped to allow the insertion of an updated vapor barrier required by the new museum and the replacement of outmoded systems between inner and outer walls. The most challenging problem was bringing light into the virtually windowless building. Because 2 Columbus Circle is a monolithic, poured-in-place concrete structure, the openings had to be limited and made in a manner that would not affect its structural integrity, a design and engineering feat few have bothered to notice.

Mr. Cloepfil’s unusual solution cuts narrow, ribbonlike strips in a tight geometric pattern across the building’s surface that continue three-dimensionally through the inside as light slots along ceilings and floors. Running along the tops of galleries and down the walls, the strips frame stunningly focused views of Columbus Circle, Central Park, and the surrounding city. But this three-dimensional concept is not easy to grasp, nor, seen just from the outside, does it seduce the eye. Mr. Cloepfil is a very cool, very restrained architect with a minimalist sensibility; his work is out of sync with a public increasingly desensitized by today’s can-you-top-this hypersensationalism and the expectation of in-your-face “icons.” From Arabian Nights romance to rigid geometry is a big leap. And something has gone noticeably wrong.

This is a precisely calibrated aesthetic that can be destroyed by one bad move, and that move has been the late insertion of a picture window on the restaurant floor. The client insisted and the architect resisted, and we will never know when and where the relationship fell apart — but at some point it obviously did, and so did the design. There were other sticking points, but this is the one that counts. The eternal banality of the picture window is forever with us, the lessons of the vignetted view never learned, even as we have developed techniques and materials that make such subtleties possible. We persist in the denial of a visual principle that artists have understood for centuries. Everyone has to sit smack up against the glass.

Even with the building’s flaws, however, criticism of the structure has been alarmingly out of proportion and flagrantly out of control. The unreasoning rejection of the solution carried over into a reluctance, or inability, to see anything good about the result. This is a thoughtful and skillful, if imperfect conversion, with the enormous added value of an inviting new cultural facility as part of the handsomely upgraded landscaping and glossily rebuilt commercial mix of a reborn Columbus Circle. The ghosts of Araby still linger in the lollipop structural supports of the ground floor, and the ’60s glitter alluringly in the perfectly restored auditorium. The custom-crafted iridescent white ceramic tiles of the façade change gently with the light. The building has presence, not prettiness; it has acquired form and focus. Mr. Cloepfil has turned camp into architecture.

And there is enchantment inside. As craft has been broadened and redefined by the museum, the exhibits explore a special place between the grim seriousness of high art and the frivolities of fashion. It is easy art, ranging from truly beautiful to borderline kitsch, devoted to the pure pleasure of the eye. Too bad the unforgiving opposition can’t enjoy it.

Ms. Huxtable is the Journal’s architecture critic. “On Architecture,” an anthology of columns from the 1960s to the present, has just been published by Walker & Co.

From the folks up at Marx Brothers Place:

—-

So that the NYC Board of Standards and Appeals can hear everybody’s strong objections to the proposal to top-off the Penthouse at 150E93 on historic Marx Brothers Place with yet another Penthouse, email messages can be sent, prior to the December 16, 2008 Public Hearing, to BSA Chair, Ms. Meenakshi Srinivasan, by simply clicking on this link and filling in the required fields.

Although our elected NYC officials allowed Community Board 8 Board Members (whom they appointed) to get away with ignoring the neighborhood’s concerns about the Penthouse Proposal in direct violation of NYC law and, in the process, also denied the opportunity for the objections of Marx Brothers fans and Historic Preservationists from all over NYC, and all around the world, the BSA Public Hearing on Tuesday, December 16 at 1:30pm in Hearing Room E, 6th Floor, NYC Board of Standards and Appeals, 40 Rector Street NYC, provides another chance for your voice to be heard !

But you don’t have to wait until December 16 to make your objections known, so please let BSA hear from you today !

As with all other forms of objection, EMAIL OBJECTIONS MUST INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION: BSA Calendar Number: 162-08-BZ; Property ID: 150 East 93rd Street; Block: 1521; Lot: 51; Borough: Manhattan.

All objections should be “land-use” related. So to save time, please feel free to cut & paste this sample objection:

I object to the proposal to construct a Penthouse atop the Penthouse at 150 East 93rd Street in Carnegie Hill NYC for the following reasons: the proposal threatens the historic character of this storied NYC neighborhood so rich in cultural and architectural history; the proposed addition literally faces the Carnegie Hill Historic District and thus threatens the historic integrity and property value of the CHHD; the proposal is completely out of scale & context with this historic block of 19th century houses which includes the beloved childhood home of the Marx Brothers; the proposed penthouse would completely overshadow the tiny four-story 1864 townhouses which 150E93 abuts and which are the indisputable Rosetta Stone to any credible development history of Carnegie Hill having been built prior to even the Lexington Avenue extension; and for those who live nearby the subject property, you might want to include: the proposal threatens the quite enjoyment of my property as it would interfere with my privacy, access to light, air and views, etc.

Respectfully submitted,

(Please add your name & address)

You can also send a hard copy OBJECTION FORM via regular mail by simply printing out this form, filling in a few sentences explaining your objection, having it notarized and sending it via regular mail to: BSA Chair, Meenakshi Srinivasan, NYC BSA, 40 Rector St, 9th Floor, NY, NY 10006-1705 prior to the December 16 Public Hearing. If you have any questions, you can call BSA at: 212.788.8500.

Please be sure to also send a copy of your Marx Brothers Place Penthouse Objections to: 93rd Street Beautification Association, 179 East 93rd Street NYC 10128 or via email here.

But don’t forget, just like all the other forms of objection, the hard copy OBJECTION FORM must also include the following information: BSA Calendar Number: 162-08-BZ; Property ID: 150 East 93rd Street; Block: 1521; Lot: 51; Borough: Manhattan.

Thanks for your continued support of historic Marx Brothers Place! And check here for a related blog post on the Clyde Fitch Report!

From Friends of the High Line:

High Line District Self-Guided Walking Tour Brochure and Podcast

The historic Westbeth Building, formerly Bell Telephone Laboratories, one of the ex-industrial buildings featured on the walking tour. Photo by Tom Starkweather.

Now available: a full-color brochure and podcast of our High Line District Walking Tour. Many of the former factories and warehouses, like the High Line itself, are examples of early twentieth-century architecture that have been repurposed. The tour passes through four specially designated historic districts: West Village Historic District, Gansevoort Market Historic District, Chelsea Historic District, and the newly designated West Chelsea Historic District.

Stops along the way include the Church of the Guardian Angel, London Terrace, the Starrett-Lehigh Building, and the Morgan Processing and Distribution Center, among others.

This program is made possible by the Trust for Architectural Easements.

Download the Tour Guide Brochure [PDF]

Download the Podcast [iTunes]

Listen to the Podcast [mp3]

From The New York Times

December 7, 2008 Living In | St. Albans, Queens

Bluesy Home Market With a Jazzy Past

By JOSEPH PLAMBECK

IT used to be easy for residents to rest on St. Albans’s laurels.

For several decades, starting in the 1940s, this serene neighborhood in southeastern Queens was a bastion for some of New York’s most famous African-Americans. Jazz greats like Count Basie and Ella Fitzgerald, as well as sports heroes like the Brooklyn Dodgers‘ Roy Campanella, called it home. By the 1970s, the area was solidly African-American and middle-class, and living there was a sign of success.

Visitors today don’t have to look far to see the neighborhood’s pride. Near the Long Island Rail Road station in St. Albans, a giant mural depicts some of the neighborhood’s famous residents.

But then came the 1980s, when, like much of the rest of the city, the neighborhood faced rising crime rates and drug use. And then, in the last 10 years, with real estate prices rising, investors and developers sought out one-family houses, the predominant housing stock, and converted them into two-family houses or built row houses where detached houses had once stood.

Greg Mays, a local community organizer, said: “Overdevelopment in southeast Queens was the biggest threat that we faced before the credit meltdown. The silver lining of the meltdown is that all of the development came to a roaring halt.”

Even before the downturn, though, community organizers had been fighting to preserve the area’s history and protect its suburban feel. Last fall, with the support of Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Mays, among others, the City Council rezoned much of the neighborhood to make it much more difficult to build multifamily homes or convert single-families.

It is the tranquil atmosphere that has lured many new residents, including Blanche Charles, a nursing assistant who lives with her two children in a three-bedroom home she bought last year. “It is a nice, quiet neighborhood,” she said, “and usually no one is on the streets at night.”

Those are just the attributes that need protecting, said Mr. Mays, the president of the Addisleigh Park Civic Organization, which is named after the 650-house enclave where many of the well-known African-Americans lived.

Last year, his group formed a partnership with the Historic Districts Council, a preservation research and advocacy group, to come up with a definitive history of the area and its architecture. That research has been sent to the state’s historic preservation office so that Addisleigh Park will be considered for the National Register of Historic Places. “It’s always nice to know that your neighborhood has a little magical significance,” Mr. Mays said.

For more info about Addisliegh Park, see http://www.hdc.org/addisleighpark.htm

Guide to New York City Landmarks Fourth Edition

This is the only official guide to the landmarks of New York City, filled with information compiled by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission’s architectural historians and research staff.

New York’s lifeblood is its landmarks-its historic neighborhoods, its incomparable buildings, its distinctive streets. This book will guide you through the extraordinary places that make New York New York.

Hoboken, NJ (PRWEB) December 8, 2008 — At a time of unprecedented building construction and development in New York City, it is important to take stock of the city’s many historic landmarks. In the five years since the third edition of GUIDE TO NEW YORK CITY LANDMARKS published, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission has added nearly 2,000 buildings to New York City’s outstanding collection of landmarks, either as buildings within new landmark districts or as singular landmark buildings. Those new landmarks are thoroughly described in the GUIDE TO NEW YORK CITY LANDMARKS, Fourth Edition (John Wiley & Sons; December 2008; $32.95) by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. New York City is truly a world capital, and the heart of the city’s infrastructure is its landmarks. From the Woolworth Building in lower Manhattan, to the Bronx Zoo, to the Unisphere in Queens, to Prospect Park in Brooklyn, to the Alice Austen House on Staten Island, the 24,000 properties with landmark status define the culture and character of this great metropolis. GUIDE TO NEW YORK CITY LANDMARKS helps readers, either residents of New York or visitors to the metropolis, find every designated landmark and historic district in all five boroughs. Covering approximately 1,200 landmarks, this book is the perfect companion for a walking tour of the city’s landmarks.

This is the only official guide to the landmarks of New York City, filled with information compiled by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission’s architectural historians and research staff. Completely updated with coverage of new landmarks, 80 two-color, easy-to-read maps, and more than 200 photographs, this new edition will make every visitor feel like a native, and turn every native into a wide-eyed tourist. This revised edition of the GUIDE TO NEW YORK CITY LANDMARKS features:

• Nearly 100 landmarks designated since the book’s previous edition
• Ten new historic districts
• A new focus on neighborhoods with local history
• Details explaining some of the more remarkable buildings in the districts
• A new Foreword by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg

Once perceived as an obstacle to progress, preservation is now understood to play an integral role in the City’s economy. New York City’s built environment is a stunning achievement, reflecting nearly four centuries of habitation and cooperation. Some, such as Grand Central Terminal and the Greenwich Village Historic District, are known and celebrated around the world. Others may surprise even the most knowledgeable New Yorker; the GUIDE TO NEW YORK CITY LANDMARKS, Fourth Edition is the best way to get acquainted with the rich architectural history and beauty of the world’s greatest city. New York City has so many things to offer and it’s never been more welcoming or more exciting.

“New York’s lifeblood is its landmarks-its historic neighborhoods, its incomparable buildings, its distinctive streets. This book will guide you through the extraordinary places that make New York New York.”
-Paul Goldberger, Architecture critic, The New Yorker

“This vital book will not only offer interesting information and insights on New York City’s 90 historic districts, 1,181 freestanding landmarks, 110 interior landmarks and 9 scenic landmarks, but it will also show you how to find them and now to make the most of your visits to them. It’s a neighborhood guidebook, a history book, and an art and architecture book rolled into one.
-From the Foreword by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
The New York Landmarks Preservation Commission is the public agency responsible for identifying and designating local landmarks and historic districts, as well as regulating changes to designated buildings. Established in 1965 in response to the demolition of the original Penn Station, the Commission is comprised of eleven members appointed by the mayor and supported by a professional staff.

GUIDE TO NEW YORK CITY LANDMARKS
Fourth Edition
Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Publication date: December 8, 2008
$32.95; Paperback; 464 pages; ISBN: 978-0-470-28963-1

From the Times Ledger

City eyes landmark for Schleicher’s Mansion

By Stephen Stirling
Friday, December 5, 2008 10:13 AM EST

City Councilman Tony Avella (D-Bayside) said the Landmarks Preservation Commission has agreed to bring College Point’s Schleicher’s Mansion up for a vote in the coming months, but the residents of the house still remain out in the cold.

Avella said the city agency’s decision to vote on whether or not to landmark the exterior of the building, built in 1851, is a victory for the community and the tenants since it precludes the house’s owner from demolishing the structure or selling it to a developer who would do the same.

The hulking Victorian exterior of Schleicher’s Mansion is intact, but the building has fallen into disrepair in recent years. An antiquated electrical wiring system coupled with 17 open city Department of Buildings and Environmental Control Board violations forced the city to issue a full-vacate order on the property in July, leaving about a dozen residents of the building without a home for nearly six months.

December 6, 2008 Editorial

Improving the Landmarks Process

Judge Marilyn Shafer of the New York State Supreme Court ruled last month that the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission habitually acted in a manner that was “arbitrary and capricious” and ordered the commission to conduct its business in a more timely manner. Her conclusions are welcome and frustratingly familiar to New Yorkers.

The city plans to appeal. Instead, it should reform the commission, which is all that stands between the enormous pressures for development in this city and its priceless architectural heritage.

In a recent series, The Times’s Robin Pogrebin detailed many of the commission’s dysfunctional ways, including inadequate record-keeping, protracted delays and a lack of transparency. The commission’s notable successes - creating historic districts and protecting significant buildings - have been diminished by its notable failures, including its decision to let 2 Columbus Circle be substantially rebuilt without a public hearing.

Part of the trouble is that the commission enjoys little political independence. The chairman serves at the mayor’s pleasure; the 11 unpaid commissioners see only the cases the chairman recommends. These are attributes that a pro-development mayor is not likely to want to change.

We urge Mayor Michael Bloomberg to give preservation more weight in city planning. The next landmarks chairman should come from preservation circles. The commissioners need more independence and authority. There needs to be better communication with the Buildings Department to prevent the confusion that has sometimes resulted in the destruction of a building slated for landmark consideration.

The most valuable change would be to address Judge Shafer’s concerns. Landmark decisions should be made expeditiously and transparently with a clear public record of the commission’s decision-making. The proper balance between healthy development and preservation cannot be found unless the commission plays a more vigorous and public role.

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

Presentation of the Louis Auchincloss Prize to Ada Louise Huxtable,

featuring remarks by Hilary Ballon

Wednesday, December 10, 6:30 PM

Museum of the City of New York

Ada Louise Huxtable, architecture critic and historian, embodies the spirit of the Louis Auchincloss Prize. As the first designated architecture critic of the New York Times, she changed the way New Yorkers understand the built environment. Her hard-driving articles and books have influenced and educated generations to see buildings as social and cultural forces in the life of the city. She was the first recipient of the Pulitzer Prize for criticism, was granted a MacArthur Foundation “genius” award, and is currently the architecture critic of the Wall Street Journal.

The LOUIS AUCHINCLOSS PRIZE is presented to writers and artists whose work is inspired by and enhances the five boroughs of New York City. Disciplines include literature, architecture, art, music, playwriting, and photography. The prize honors Louis Auchincloss for his many years of service to the Museum of the City of New York as well as for his literary contributions that established him as one of the leading American novelists of the 20th and 21st centuries.

Mr. Auchincloss will present the prize following remarks by

HILARY BALLON
Associate Vice Chancellor for New York University Abu Dhabi and
Trustee of the Museum of the City of New York

Reception to follow. Space is limited and reservations are required.
Tickets at $25 can be purchased online at www.mcny.org/public-programs/ or by phone at 917.492.3395

Chinatown-Little Italy district gets state boost

From the Downtown Express

Victor Papa is on a mission to save Chinatown and Little Italy.

Papa, president of the Two Bridges Neighborhood Council, wants to create the Chinatown and Little Italy Historic District as part of the State and National Register of Historic Places.

“We’re concerned development will wipe away the memory of all of this,” Papa said.

The State Historic Preservation Office gave Papa’s cause a lift several weeks ago by determining that the neighborhood is eligible to become a historic district. Both the tenement architecture and the area’s cultural and social history make the proposed district worth preserving, said Dan Keefe, spokesperson for SHiPO.

“We’re elated,” Papa said of the state’s preliminary support.

The proposed district is a narrow rectangle roughly bordered on the north by Houston St., on the west by Mulberry and Baxter Sts., on the south by Worth St. and on the east by Elizabeth St. and the Bowery.

Papa highlighted the coexistence of Chinese and Italian immigrants in the district as a key piece of the city’s history. Italian and Chinese immigrants began settling along Mott and Mulberry Sts. in the mid-1800s. Although the two cultures stayed separate, the early immigrants shopped in each other’s stores and sometimes worshipped in the same churches, according to historian Kerri Culhane-Black, who prepared the proposal for Two Bridges.

Simeon Bankoff, director of the Historic Districts Council, also supports the designation of the district.

“There are definitely very important cultural and architectural buildings down there,” he said. The district would include Columbus Park, the location of the historic Five Points neighborhood. The area is also home to many settlement houses and old social associations, Bankoff said.

Unlike the city’s landmark districts, the state’s designation would not put any burdens on landowners, as it does not prohibit the demolition of buildings. Instead, property owners are eligible for tax credits and matching funds to preserve their buildings.