"The Phoenix" Rises On Bloomfield

What an ugly building. I wish architects would grow balls again. Are the parking spaces on the roof?

Personally, I'd like to see gargoyles.

Valet parking offered by gargoyles! Think of the tourist trade....

Ugly Building? Have you seen what's there now? That is currently the ugliest building on Bloomfield Avenue. There's a big parking lot behind it, and underground parking in the building...i think working with what they have, this is a beautiful building.

Ugly Building? Have you seen what's there now? That is currently the ugliest building on Bloomfield Avenue. There's a big parking lot behind it, and underground parking in the building...i think working with what they have, this is a beautiful building.

Architect "grow balls"..is this a condemnation of non-masculine architects???

Seems like a pretty good makeover for that particular building.

Horrible! It's awful. Hasn't somebody told Montclair developers that postmodernism is a joke?

These so-called architects should take a walk around Riverside Drive in NYC and the surrounding area to see what REAL architecture looks like.

do you mean this?

http://www.nyc-architecture.com/HAR/HAR008.htm

That looks so much better than the current building.

It is nice to see that stretch of Bloomfield Avenue (as well as Glenridge Ave and N. Willow) getting some updating.

I don't find these appropriate either

http://www.nyc-architecture.com/UWS/UWS.htm

I don't mean like Grant's Tomb but I do like some of the details you find in the architecture along parts of Riverside Drive, in the 70s. I could spend all day there taking photos.

Of course, some of Montclair's older structures are exquisite, as are those in parts of Newark, East Orange, South Orange. But I am afraid they aren't long for this world.

I find this to be much more appropriate for downtown Montclair

http://www.nyc-architecture.com/STYLES/STY-Romanesque.htm

or maybe even this

http://www.nyc-architecture.com/STYLES/STY-Federal.htm

Yes! Especially the first link. Anything but just a square boxy structure.

I love the pre war buildings of the Upper West Side and learned of their maintenance reality while working for a NYC restoration firm. Before these became expensive co ops, they were neglected buildings in great disrepair. Now they represent some of the most expensive real estate in the world.

The pre war building technology of steel frame and three wythe interlocking brick masonry didn't pass the test of time and its high costs to build and to maintain. Their facades are generally decorated with elaborate faux stone terra cotta architectural ornaments that are cemented in and pinned to the steel framework. These terra cotta ornamental units are hollow in order to work better against gravity. What happens is that water infiltration causes the underlying steel structure to rust and corrode, the rusting causes the material to expand and this creates cracks in the masonry. The masonry cracks expand as the steel rusts causing more water to infiltrate and eventually these facades fall apart creating public safety issues. Once you understand this reality, you then realize why buildings like these are not built anymore.

For the most part, these buildings were single owner operated. With the event of rent control, landlords could scarcely afford to maintain these buildings and their mechanical systems in sound operation. Prevailing unsafe conditions and fatalities lead to the institution of the NY Local Law 10 of 1980 and now known as Local Law 11 of 1998. This law enforces the inspection and maintenance of these buildings, every six years. A structural conditions report must be filed with the NYC Building Department disclosing all of the unsafe conditions and the building owner has one year to repair the deterioration in order not to loose the Certificate of Occupancy. This procedure is extremely costly but constant maintenance and repairs of these buildings have caused a notable increase in real estate values.

Specifically trained Architects and Engineers are specialized in the repairs of these buildings. Specialized Industries have been developed for waterproofing and restoration. The buildings are beautiful but the work is not glamorous. Its all about brick and terra cotta replacement, re pointing, steel replacement and waterproofing.

Because of all of these maintenance issues, regulations and costs, todays building technology has shifted to those twisting glass spikes that we see going up all over Manhattan. The glass skin will require practically no maintenance or expensive repairs.

The building in this article is a suburban cousin of this easer technology. Its glass skin fa硤e and exposed steel window lintels will require very little maintenance. Our beautiful buildings like the Hinck Building, our train stations, the Wedgewood Cafeteria Building, the Arcade Building in Glen Ridge and many buildings in Baristaville's historic center - Bloomfield, could never be built today in our current technology. They are valuable real estate that are certainly worth maintaining because they make all of our real estate more valuable.
(by the way, efforts to restore Grants Tomb are mainly thanks to the efforts to one of the President's descendants, Ullysses Deitz, Curator at the Newark Museum and also expert on our local domestic architecture)

Frank: Much thanks for that informative explanation. You really know your stuff!

I like it. It matches store fronts like Urban outfitters.Sienna has NYSC. The homes are for old, but the downtown is for the young

Thank you for your kind words Miss Martta. I LOVE these exquisite old buildings but working on them and keeping them up to code really makes you wake up and smell the coffee. (Especially when you see the repair costs!) I'm also convinced that preserving them is worth it for maintaining strong real estate values and more so for their beauty and their atmosphere in our environment.

"I'm also convinced that preserving them is worth it for maintaining strong real estate values and more so for their beauty and their atmosphere in our environment."

Amen. And that coffee you're smelling? That would be Starbucks...the 3rd one designated for Montclair. {{{{Do we REALLY need 3 Starbucks?}}}}

We won't have 3 starbucks Miss Marta, only 2, the Starbucks that's currently in the Whole Foods has not renewed their lease.

I am pleased to see architects submitting PhotoShop renderings rather than "painterly" (and for that matter, practically misleading)renderings. They allow us to understand the proposed projects in a more "for real" setting and see how they relate scale wise to the neighboring buildings.

The de la Hoya photos are hysterical but I think that they are just copying the Diego Maradona scandal photos from Naples in the early 90's.

I love most the coffee that I make at home in my old machinetta. Buonissimo!

Frankgg is always a repository for valuable info. But it is worthwhile to know that glass buildings are not as maintenance free as one would think. The Lever House curtain wall had to be completely rebuilt recently, due to it's initial construction era occurring prior to full understanding of the necessity of curtain walls to flex and weep. The same can be said for Louis Kahn's glass and steel sheathed gallery at Yale, also recently rebuilt.

Masonry technology is always advancing as well, with a key focus being the desire to keep the dew point of the air as it passes through the wall as close to the exterior as possible, and to allow for water evacuation if trapped within the wall, and to allow for expansion and contraction during the freeze thaw cycle.

Then again, FLW's Fallingwater needed a complete structural overhaul recently, it's cantilevers now stiffened with post tensioned cables within the slab, a technology not readily available in the 1930's. Otherwise, it would have merely collapsed.

The simple matter is that
some people really like glass (like those paying megabux to live in a Richard Meier project) and other people really like cedar or masonry (like Miss Martta).

Its remarkable how ungracefully the modern buildings age. Old vintage architecture seems just to fade into gentlemanly shabbiness but the deteriorated concrete and sagging cantilevers of modern buildings just look squalid and monstrous. I'm not so sure how these new brick panel curtain walls are going to look in fifteen years when they start to deteriorate.

Frankgg, I am definitely trusting that your personal view of "deteriorated concrete" and "sagging cantilevers" being "squalid and monstrous" shouldn't be misconstrued as a swipe at the (until very recently) deteriorated concrete and sagging cantilevers at the aforementioned Fallingwater!

And, older concrete can look pretty good.Kahn's Salk Institute in La Jolla or his Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth come to mind.

The dangers of over-generalization can be risky, I am sure you would agree.

Fallingwater is a breathtakingly beautiful masterpiece. When we visited as a Cooper Union class trip in the late seventies, we were pretty scared to see the concrete in disorder. It makes you realize that architecture can seem divine but concrete is man made, a human invention.

For squalid and monstrous, I was thinking more of examples like those post war cavity wall buildings in NYC that have sagging cantilevered balconies. That looks terrible and unfortunately, there are a lot of those.

I love old concrete when it has a human touch, like Le Corbusier's rough wood formed concrete, or Thomas Edison's neoclassical concrete architecture prototypes (on N. Fullerton, Valley Road & Llewellyn PK) or Fonthill, the treasure encrusted cement "sand castle" and the cement "gothic cathedral like" Mercer Museum both in Doylestown, PA.

....sorry, its on N. Mountain, not N. Fullerton.

"I love old concrete when it has a human touch..."

Agreed. It can work if doen properly. Certain materials (concrete is one of them, stucco is another) DO "show the dirt" more than others. I guess that is where shiny surfaces and real brick have concrete beat. To me tehre's nothing more depressing, archietcurally speaking, than to see streaks of detritus running down the sides of buildings.

Then again, FLW's Fallingwater needed a complete structural overhaul recently, it's cantilevers now stiffened with post tensioned cables within the slab, a technology not readily available in the 1930's. Otherwise, it would have merely collapsed.

Posted by J Perlstein | October 22, 2007 6:57 PM

It's my understanding that it was not the concrete at falling water that was the problem but either FLW's use of undersize steel or the steel itself:

When Frank Lloyd Wright designed Fallingwater, he must not have specified a steel grade or condition that varied from common production available. Yet, it is notable that the Bessemer steel reinforcing bar had not deteriorated during service in the concrete terrace. Also, the open-hearth hatch steel performed well, as severe corrosion occurred only at the concrete-bar interface while the remainder of the flat bar, also exposed above the Bear Run stream for 68 years, showed only pitting corrosion. Fallingwater has timeless interest as an architectural achievement, and some of the steel used to produce this landmark was made using techniques whose time has passed.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0303/Dean-0303.html

this one is worth reading:
http://www.structural.net/News/Media_coverage/media_fallingwater_toh.html

We have many beautiful stucco homes locally with a warm and artistic atmosphere.

The work of Dudley Van Antwerp very very important and not known enough in the academic architectural world. My idea about Van Antwerp's original style isn't because of architectural fashion of the early 1900's but more of a response to an ideological rift that existed locally between the original Dutch community and the community members of English origin. Beautiful English Tudor mansions were going up everywhere and the 1910 Nolan plan for Montclair suggested that the new township architecture had to resemble a quaint English hamlet. The Dutch Colonial house probably didn't seem glamorous enough when compared to the Tudor mansions, so Van Antwerp invented a more "baronial" looking Dutch stucco architecture to satisfy the demand of clients who didn't want the English style or Mediterranean. The old Montclair Academy main building was a great example of his talent. We have several of his fine houses still around with magnificent interior spaces, great details and fine leaded glass windows.

Too bad those that are living there will have to evacuate the building with 30 days notice in order to do rennovations. Hope the building is successful!

Too bad those that are living there will have to evacuate the building with 30 days notice in order to do rennovations. Hope the building is successful!

Too bad those that are living there will have to evacuate the building with 30 days notice in order to do rennovations. Hope the building is successful!