Serious Discussion-Stress and Psych Disorders- Page 11

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 9:18am

More importantly than landmark businesses, I think, is the amazing disregard for actual landmark buildings. Of course, we all know the famous photo which led Sondheim to conceive of Follies...look at a recent one: The Henry Miller Theatre is now going to exist only as the facade in a new multi-purpose building.
Say what you want, but at least Disney went to great lengths to preserve the decrepit New Amsterdam and restore it to its original splendor. I think, in this case, they both honored the past and created something profitable for themselves.

[iflitifloat]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 9:26am

Philosophically, I understand what you are saying, DG, but it's a difficult philosophy to subscribe to when establishments that contribute to the history and personality of neiborhood are disappearing and being replaced by yet another big, impersonal hotel. Yes, another hotel may be good for the tourist business, but once all those people get here, there's less and less left of the little things that have been part of a Broadway experience, beside the actual shows, of course. It's not a stretch to envision an area populated by only chain restaurants or those truly upscale establishments that most of us can't afford.

[beacon1]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 9:33am

What a neat topic.

It is so sad to see landmark structures disappear. They give such flavor to a locality and remind us of history. They bear record of the talent, creativity and fortitude of those who have gone before us.

In the town next to where I grew up is a beautiful Victorian mansion that is painted a unique shade of pink. I believe it's a trademarked shade. It's actually called the Pink House. It is such a wonderful bit of local history (with requisite ghost story included) and would be a real loss if it were leveled by developers.

However, I can see the responsiblity to meet growing needs of the modern world. Sometimes it's actually possible to physically relocate a small structure.
In other cases,all that can be preserved are photographic records and blueprints or site plans.

Updated On: 1/25/06 at 09:33 AM

[DG]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 9:39am

". . . an area populated by only chain restaurants or those truly upscale establishments that most of us can't afford."

Iflit - that sounds eerily like where I live!

Something I've seen done - and like a LOT - is using the existing structure as part of the foundation for the new building. I don't know exactly how Barrymore's sits exactly (as an example) but it would be wonderful if they could have incorporated that into the new building and gotten the best of both worlds. history as it plays a part in our expanding needs, wants and desires. I know it isn't always possible, but some amazing things can be done these days architecturally.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 9:55am

Japan is an interesting country to discuss in regards to this.
A country filled with history and, specifically, historic locations of great age. However, Tokyo has almost no regard for history. Granted, it was leveled in WWII but they see nothing in the leveling of a building there to create a new one. However, I would imagine the case is different in some of their other major cities (like Kyoto, the original capitol).

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 10:22am

"Something I've seen done - and like a LOT - is using the existing structure as part of the foundation for the new building."

Which is what many developers are trying to do now, with new zoning regulations in NYC regarding "air rights" in transferring the maximum allowable heights from one lot to another to increase the height the new building can reach. The new developments over the Biltmore Theatre are a reflection of that, with the looming high rise next to it. But given this is in Times Square, such a building does not appear out of place. And the Biltmore was restored as a result.

Theatre for a New City down in the East Village, however offers a greater disparity. In return for selling its air rights, the high rise luxury condos that were built are completely out of character with the lower lying buildings. The East Village is not really a high rise zone...

[DG]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:23am

Unfortunately, I can't stay and discuss today, as responsibilities beckon (well, they're actually screaming at the top of their lungs, but that's a seperate discussion!) I did want to throw this out there, though, as just a different dimension to the topic.

We've been dealing with the recent decision to demolish the Ambassador Hotel, after many years of fighting and wrangling by a whole slew of groups and individuals. It's been sad watching this historic landmark disappearing piece by piece (The Coconut Grove!), but something occurs to me every time I go by. Despite whatever else it might have been, when the name is mentioned, the thing most associated with it is Bobby Kennedy's assassination. And I can't help but think that by tearing it down, we say (even subconsciously) that we don't need to hold onto that horror, but rather move on and know that the memory will never go away.

Just a thought. I remember going to Ford's Theatre in DC, and despite the fabulousness of experiencing theatre in that beautifully preserved space, I couldn't help but feel a little wierded out looking up at that box with the draped bunting and thinking, "Maybe it would be best not to dwell on that aspect."

Anyway, keep the discussion lively, and I hope to read other thoughts at some point when I can lift my head above the water!

[Elphaba]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:27am

and DG, LAUSD needs the land for a school....and somehow I would think Robert Kennedy would be ok with that.

[DG]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:31am

Absolutely, Elph. I know they tried to investigate converting the existing structure for that purpose, but as is often the case, it simply is more cost effective to start from scratch.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:37am

E - in response to a post of yours the other day, we have the gorgeous Uptown Theatre in Chicago which sits in decay. The problem is that it is in a neighborhood where it is easier to get herion than a Starbucks.

I watched the destruction of the Granada Theater on North Sheridan. At one point of the demolition the back wall of the stage was gone and you could see into the theatre looking up the audience - a haunting view.

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:40am

of course, I want to posit the question as to whether or not naes should be "landmarked" too, particularly with our friend from Chicago here...

Should Marshall Fields' name have been switched over to Macys?

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:46am

DG: "Something I've seen done - and like a LOT - is using the existing structure as part of the foundation for the new building."

What you are describing, DG, is the architectural practice called "adaptive reuse," in which old buildings are re-developed for new uses while retaining their historic features.

It's a very excititng alternative to tearing down buildings that give a neighborhood or a city it character--or even just for making an exciting public space out of an unlikely older structure, the way the Tait Modern in London was created out of an old power station.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:47am

Mayor Daley did not object to the name change of the business. The city could have designated the building as a landmark (which it might be), but its value as a business and tax is great. Even if the name of the building stays as "Marshall Field's" the business conducted will be that of Macy's.

The structure itself (as I gaze upon it) will not change. And, what an incredible building!

I have a feeling that Macy's made a promise to Daley to bring back to Chicago the production of Frango Mints. That loss was a greater impact economically than the Macy's change.

Hopefully, the name change will help the MF not on State Street and that are struggling.

Oh, I will soon completely lose my view of Fields due to construction of a new building. *cries* I lost one of my two lake views about two years ago.


Updated On: 1/25/06 at 11:47 AM

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:51am

NY has been able to keep the old Bowery Savings Bank building intact, now as the Capitale Grille (though I dunno if the restaurant still exists anymore). The ceiling of the BSB is amazing.

[SonofMammaMiaSam]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:52am

It was announced this weekend that the Philadelphia Strawbridge and Clothier name will also be changed to Macy's. Our Wanamaker Department Store became a Lord and Taylor a few years ago. The building is still known as the Wanamaker Building. Both of those stores were 100 year old Philadelphia institutions.

[Jane2]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:52am

Kiss my cookie raised a good point. The gorgeous old structures no longer look "in place" with the more modern look of a neighborhood. So I'm conflicted in this issue. Well, after giving it some thought (one second's worth) I decided so what if they don't look in place. We have that mix of architectural styles all over Manhattan and I think it's part of its charm.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:57am

Why is it that Americans are so quick to tear down their heritage. Historic old theatres, homes, and train stations are routinely demolished to make way for new , modern office buildings for the good of the community. While Europeans treasure their past we seem to relish in tearing it down.
In New York City alone so much is gone - almost all of the old movie palaces (Radio City Music Hall was spared at the last moment), Beautiful theatres including the old Metropolitan Opera House among others, The old Penn Station ... the list is endless.

Just the building of the monstrous Marquis Hotel in Time Square in 1981 lost us several gorgeous theatres - including the Old Helen Hayes Theatre.

Shame on Us!


Updated On: 1/25/06 at 11:57 AM

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 11:57am

To some degree, though, Jane2.

It's one thing to have the a mishmash of styles, as that does contribute to a more interesting mix of architecture. Being able to juxtapose the neo-Gothic aspects of the Woolworth Building in the financial district goes well with something more modern, like the World Financial Center. But seeing a high rise apartment complex dwarf brownstones in Park Slope is both jarring and completely out of context.

I think the Trump Tower over near the UN looks atrociously out of sync with Tudor City and the UN Building itself in that area.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 12:02pm

Marc, the issue is money and utility. As I mentioned, the Uptown is a huge theater in Chicago in a neighborhood that could not support a 2000 seat house.

On the other hand, we have recently renovated the Palace and the Oriental Theaters as well as the Schubert which will be called the LaSalle Bank Theater. I do not object to that name because it is one of the only original Chicago banks. Fu** NYC and your "Chase" name. (just kidding)

[Jane2]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 12:06pm

Yes, Cookie, but are those instances you just cited cases of the preservation of very old landmark buildings, or are they cases of disregard on the part of the newer developers?

[Jane2]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 12:13pm

I just realized my post may not have conveyed what I'm actually thinking. I'll get back to it later, as my computer is not working right and I have to leave for work.

[DayDreamer]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 12:21pm

Wow... this has been my rant for the past few months. Not only the demolition of landmarks and older buildings that add character to a city, but the disappearance of local establishments with their own flavor in favor of homogenized national chains.

Beautiful old apartment buildings all over Seattle are being torn down to make way for the HUGE and modern mega-block condos. (the whole disappearance of apts. and proliferation of super-expensive condos is another topic I could go off on.) Apartments with hardwood floors, living spaces one can actually live in, details in the mouldings, facades that are more than a flat wall. Gone. In their place you get these air-tight, sterile looking condos, with rooms you can barely fit a queen size bed in.

And the disappearance of local stores and shops, landmarks on their own, is even sadder. And I'm not even talking about malls, but main streets. Shopping in downtown Seattle is not that different than shopping in some areas of Manhattan or LA. Same stores. Same restaurants. Some of the appeal of going to different citites for the shopping is gone. Go to NY for Macy's? Why... we have it in town. Go to Seattle for Nordstrom? No longer something special.

Even small, boutique stores. My trips to Vancouver were always something special. It always meant we got to go to 'Lush.' Pick bath bombs, scrubs, etc. We so looked forward to walking down Robson, smelling the aromas as we approached. Guess what? There's now a 'Lush' in the mall down the street. And the appeal of it has gone WAY done.

If you read all this, you get a chocolate martini on me.

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 12:29pm

I'd have to disagree with the Europeans treasuring all of their "culture." Currently, there is a debate in Berlin at the replacement of the old East Berlin Parliament building, because many see it as a vestige of Communist rule (and delipidation). Though I'm no fan of Stalinist architecture, there is a lot of history within that edifice. And in recent years, has been used as a cultural center.

Jane2: I was citing how new zoning laws are used variably to help preserve certain landmarks well, but that even those examples have mixed results.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 12:37pm

It is so important to have zoning commissions that are free of corruption to save historic buildings. DD - we still have many great neighborhoods with nice buildings. I can think of a Blockbuster on Irving Park that did an excellent job of keeping the facade and upper floors of an old bank.

C - I saw a story on that building. I agree with you - keep it as a part of history.

[kissmycookie]

Posted: 1/25/06 at 12:40pm

The bizarre thing is that they want to rebuild the palace that was there before that was torn down to build the Parliament building.