Seven to Save 2002

Montauk Playhouse

Town of East Hampton, Suffolk County

The Montauk Playhouse (formerly known as the Montauk Tennis Auditorium) was built between 1928 and 1929 as part of developer Carl Fisher’s grand plan to establish Montauk as the premier resort community in the Northeast.  While Fisher’s plans came to an end with the stock market crash of 1929, the facility enjoyed a myriad of productive uses over the decades. By the 1970s though, the building was abandoned, and today, the Town of East Hampton ’s commitment to restore and reuse the building is under review as new questions regarding the building’s structural integrity have brought the project to a standstill.

Part of Carl Fisher’s public relations campaign for turning Montauk into a resort for the rich and famous, the same way he had already developed the marshlands of Miami, was his motto, “Miami in the winter, Montauk in the summer.” At the time of completion in 1929, the Tennis Auditorium was said to be the largest building of its kind in the world. The facility was to be used primarily for tennis tournaments, boxing exhibitions and conferences. Its two regulation-sized courts were glass enclosed and surrounded by gallery seating. The building could seat up to 6,000 for conferences and had ample locker rooms and lounge facilities to handle spectators.

After 1932, when Fisher’s development corporation went bankrupt, the Tennis Auditorium continued to be used, but it never fulfilled its planned use. Over the decades it went from indoor tennis courts for resort guests, to assembly hall and theater for World War II troops, to indoor training of quarter horses for show competitions, to a summer stock theater (when the name was changed to Montauk Playhouse) to, finally, a summer movie theater. The building was abandoned in the 1970s, and in 1988 was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In 1999, the building and the surrounding property were donated to the Town of East Hampton.

The building is designed in the Tudor Revival style, as is much of Carl Fisher’s Montauk architecture. The Playhouse is large – its three and a half stories cover a footprint of approximately 24,000 square feet. Its central location, size and varied history offer a unique opportunity to fulfill many of the community’s cultural, social, and recreational needs in one location.

In the fall of 2001, an Advisory Committee established and appointed by the Town Board, made a final recommendation to the Board that the Playhouse be restored and adapted for use as a community center. An architectural firm hired by the Town developed a plan for completely preserving the front façade and steel superstructure of the building to accommodate a 48,000 square foot community center. A structural survey by the same firm found the steel superstructure, foundation and exterior walls to be sound. In addition this firm found that reconstruction would cost about $3 million less than demolishing and building new construction.

Important first steps have been taken by the Town toward eliminating the threat of losing the structure, including applying for state funding and allocating $1.5 million in its capital budget to assist in the first stage rehabilitation. However, work has yet to start, and the Town Board is currently evaluating other options, including full or partial demolition. In the meanwhile, with no funds in hand, and conflicting opinions on the suitability of the building for new uses, it continues to deteriorate.

Carl Fisher built this structure as a monument to sport and to the resort mentality. Many from the Montauk community want to see Carl Fisher’s legacy live on through the building’s rebirth as a multi-generational community center accessible to both residents and visitors alike. Support, both within and outside of the Montauk community, is needed to ensure that the Town leaders understand the value and benefits of saving historic properties such as the Playhouse. The Playhouse, which is part of Montauk’s rich history, its identity and landscape, must be saved as a whole for future generations.

For more information:  Maureen Rutkowski, Project Director, Montauk Playhouse Community Center Foundation, 631.668.1540.

back to top

Gansevoort Market

New York City, New York

It is rare indeed to capture a living glimpse of New York City’s maritime, industrial and market past. While the post-industrial service economy has transformed most of Manhattan, an approximately 20-block area in the northwest corner of Greenwich Village, the Gansevoort Market, remains a noisy and gritty mixed-use, mercantile district. One of New York City’s last remaining market neighborhoods, the area is today threatened by growing development pressure to tear down, replace or inappropriately alter its historic buildings, which would destroy the character of the district.

For over 150 years, this area has served as a market to New York; first a farmers’ market, then produce, and now a meat market. The area first grew around the active piers and ferry lines which serviced it on the Hudson River waterfront. A transportation network of several rail and streetcar lines, including a unique overhead freight rail system, today known as the High Line, allowed this shipping and market neighborhood to be transformed into a multi-layered hub of food production, storage, sale, and movement.

The district became home to the headquarters of nationally known corporations such as Nabisco, Colliers, and Herring Safe and Lock. In addition, the Manhattan Refrigerating Company’s Underground Brine Cooling system helped to shape the neighborhood with a technological innovation which helped to preserve and store the meat which traveled through the area.

The buildings themselves have been adapted over time to the changing but always inter-related uses of the area. The area’s low-rise character is a reflection of purpose-built structures, old-law tenements and other structures shortened by the removal of upper stories to adapt to market needs and use. While many of the market buildings themselves are utilitarian or vernacular in design, others in the district are clearly showpieces, designed by Ralph Walker, James McComb, Trowbridge & Livingston, and Boring & Tilton and other notable architects. Taken as a whole, the approximately 130 buildings that define Gansevoort Market maintain a remarkable sense of place embodying the spirit of Manhattan’s commercial past.

Today, new uses, including restaurants, bars, clubs, caterers, photography studios and art galleries have been drawn in increasing numbers to the area. Many of these have proven to be compatible with the area’s existing character, continuing Gansevoort Market’s history of evolution and adaptive reuse. The Chelsea Market, a new wholesale and retail market, has been successfully established in the old Nabisco complex at the district’s north end.

Because of its location between the Greenwich Village Historic District and the developing Hudson River Park, Gansevoort faces mounting development pressure which is a threat to its character. An application is currently pending before the New York City Board of Standards and Appeals for permission to tear down an existing market building for the construction of a 400-foot tall luxury residential high-rise. Another high-rise hotel is planned for a vacant lot in the district. If these projects proceed as planned, such buildings will not only compromise the integrity of this historic neighborhood, but will create a ripple effect, pushing out the existing commercial uses. Other threats include the recent death of a major property owner and the uncertain fate of his estate, and the potential demolition of the High Line, which was placed on the Preservation League’s 2001 Seven to Save list. Current discussions for the redevelopment of Manhattan’s Far West Side, including nearby plans for the 2012 Olympics and for the World Trade Center site, could also lead to dramatic change in the area’s role, function and character in the near future.

To protect this area, New York City historic district designation is needed to regulate and control alterations, demolitions and new construction. State and National Register listing can also add another tool to encourage appropriate development. In addition, variances need to be denied by the NYC Board of Standards and Appeals for projects that would significantly alter the physical fabric of the area or introduce incompatible uses. Innovative zoning tools to encourage the retention of existing and compatible uses in Gansevoort, and to limit development to appropriately configured, scaled and designed buildings, would also help.

Gansevoort Market reflects an important piece of New York City’s history and urban development; its preservation should not be overlooked because of the district’s mixed or commercial use, gritty characteristics, or because of alterations over time.

Pond Eddy Bridge

Pond Eddy, Sullivan County

The Upper Delaware River basin, which forms the wild and scenic demarcation of the southeastern portion of New York State’s border with Pennsylvania, also encompasses a rich array of historic engineering resources that represent elements of the early economic history of the region. More recent engineering achievements survive intact and in use, including the Pond Eddy Bridge in southern Sullivan County. This National Register-listed historic bridge is threatened with demolition and replacement, placing the scenic and cultural resources of Pond Eddy, New York, at risk from the potential construction of an unnecessary and extremely costly modern bridge.

The Pond Eddy Bridge is one of two surviving pin-connected Petit truss bridges remaining on the Upper Delaware River, built by the Oswego Bridge Company in 1904. It was built to replace an earlier (circa 1871) suspension bridge that washed away in “The Great Pumpkin Flood” of 1903 and which served to transport bluestone from quarries in Pennsylvania to the Delaware & Hudson Canal on the New York riverbank. Later, Delaware & Hudson constructed a railroad on the Pennsylvania side, in competition with their own canal. Evidence of this entire transportation system remains evident in the immediate proximity of the existing bridge, representing a cultural resource site with incredible potential for public appreciation.

The bridge was nominated by Pennsylvania to the National Register of Historic Places in 1988, in recognition of its engineering significance, and is also listed on the New York State Register of Historic Places. On the New York side, remnants of the Delaware & Hudson Canal, a National Historic Landmark, stand close to the bridge abutments; on the Pennsylvania side, the cable stays of the previously existing suspension bridge are evident. Situated on a stretch of the Delaware River that has received national “Wild and Scenic River” status, the bridge is also located on the recently-designated “Upper Delaware Route 97 NYS Scenic Byway.” 

These historic and scenic qualities are threatened by the proposed demolition and replacement of the Pond Eddy Bridge with a three-span, concrete structure, a project estimated to cost in excess of $13 million dollars. This project will also include major reconstruction of the bridge approaches which will result in drastic impacts to the cultural resources on both sides of the bridge. Load and weight restrictions are cited as the chief deficiency of the bridge. 

Bridge service remains necessary to serve a small number of landlocked houses on the Pennsylvania side of the Delaware River, a grouping of approximately 22 homes and seasonal hunting cabins which generates approximately 80 vehicle-trips per day. While their address may read “Pond Eddy, PA,” the day-to-day needs and more importantly, emergency services, for these homes are received from the New York side of the bridge. It has been suggested, however, that these needs can be adequately met through rehabilitation of the existing historic bridge to full load requirements, along with creative and less expensive solutions, to emergency service needs. 

Complicating clear decision-making on this project is the administrative agreement between New York and Pennsylvania that oversees the interstate bridges on the Upper Delaware River Basin. Revised in 1988, the Joint Interstate Bridge Commission agreement gave administrative control of the lower five bridges to Pennsylvania, including the Pond Eddy span. As a result, Pennsylvania’s Department of Transportation (PennDOT) has taken the lead on assessing the need to replace the bridge.

Under federal and state historic preservation law, an exploration of alternatives to demolition is required during this process. Formal recommendations from PennDOT as to a preferred course of action are expected shortly, but when planning for the site began in 1999, PennDOT appeared to prefer replacement rather than rehabilitation of this stately structure.

Support for saving the historic Pond Eddy Bridge has come from a local grassroots organization, Friends of Pond Eddy Bridge, and members of the New York State Legislature. In addition, officials at the New York State Department of Transportation and State Historic Preservation Office have advocated strongly with Pennsylvania officials for the retention and rehabilitation of the bridge. The Bridge is also listed on Preservation Pennsylvania’s 2002 “Pennsylvania At Risk” list of threatened historic resources.

The controversial contemplation to replace the Pond Eddy Bridge comes at a time when New York State has just completed a multi-year, statewide project to document National Register-eligible bridges and assure that historic bridges, such as the previously-listed Pond Eddy span, receive special consideration and protection in state and local transportation planning efforts. 

For more information:  

back to top

St. Joseph's Roman Catholic Church & Ten Broeck Triangle Historic District

City of Albany

St. Joseph’s Roman Catholic Church is one of Albany’s great landmarks, defining the neighborhood in which it stands. It is the most prominent element in Albany’s northern skyline, visible from almost any point in the city. The extraordinary Gothic style building is situated near the eighteenth-century Ten Broeck Mansion, and is the jewel in the crown of the Ten Broeck Historic District in Arbor Hill. St. Joseph’s Church, and the entire surrounding historic district is at a crossroads. Emergency repairs and court injunctions have helped to keep the district largely intact, but a long-term solution is needed to restore the vitality of this community. 

The church itself was built between 1856 and 1860 to the design of renowned architect Patrick Keeley. Keeley, one of the most prolific church architects in American history, always considered Saint Joseph’s to be his masterpiece. 

The finest materials were used in its construction, from the Crone Elbow bluestone that makes up the exterior, to the marble floors from Vermont and Italy. The chapel floors are graced with Minton encaustic mosaic tile imported from London. The slate roof is ridged with iron cresting, and is supported with columns of monolithic marble. The hammerbeam ceiling is finished with 31 carved wood cherubim, and a peal of Meneeley bells is installed in the main tower. Though the building’s architectural merits are not in question, St. Joseph’s future is uncertain.

St. Joseph’s is not a stand-alone building, but is intrinsically tied to its surrounding neighborhood, known as the Ten Broeck Triangle Historic District. The district was developed primarily between the mid 1840s and the early 1900s with outstanding examples of townhouse architecture of numerous styles. But by the second half of the twentieth century, the wealthiest families had moved out and magnificent townhouses were converted to small apartment buildings or simply neglected and left to be ravaged by time and the elements. 

Decades of urban disinvestment have temporarily taken their toll on the buildings in this National Register historic district, but Ten Broeck Triangle remains remarkably intact with a unified frontage of townhouses facing St. Joseph’s, one of the finest Gothic churches in the state.

Unfortunately, the security of both the historic district and the church has been undermined in recent years. The long-term deterioration of St. Joseph’s culminated in the winter of 2001 with the city’s seizure of the building in order to perform emergency stabilization to forestall structural failure. Albany Mayor Gerald D. Jennings is to be commended for committing increasingly scarce financial resources to the preservation of this building, but continued work is needed to maintain its structural stability. 

Municipal investment in the Ten Broeck Triangle was also enhanced when a settlement was reached between Historic Albany Foundation, the City of Albany and the County of Albany, resulting in a $150,000 county grant to stabilize the façade of the Greek Revival home at 41 Broeck Street, keeping the magnificent fabric of the Triangle intact. The 150 year old building had fallen into such disrepair that the owner, Albany County, illegally attempted to demolish it, citing public health and safety concerns. However, this summer, Albany Counted granted Historic Albany Foundation title to the building along with a grant to stabilize the façade. The site clearance and stabilization is now complete, and the Foundation hopes to sell the building to a developer who will rebuild behind the historic façade.

In addition to strong support from the City of Albany for St. Joseph’s and its surrounding neighborhood, the Historic Foundation of Albany and Ten Broeck Triangle Preservation League have collectively worked together to make this a priority issue. Both St. Joseph’s and 41 Ten Broeck Street need owners capable of restoring and maintaining the buildings for new productive use. As well, the neighborhood could greatly benefit from tools such as the Neighborhood Reinvestment Act, which is the top priority for the Preservation League in the 2003 Legislative session. Passage of the Neighborhood Reinvestment Act would create a state tax credit for owners of historic homes, to encourage reinvestment from within existing neighborhoods, while also attracting new owners.

For more information:  Elizabeth Griffin, Executive Director, Historic Albany Foundation, 518.465.0876.

back to top

Albion Business District

Albion, Orlean County

For over a century, the Erie Canal was considered the “Main Street” of upstate New York, and its presence led to the construction of densely packed commercial cores in communities all along the canal. The Village of Albion has one such core, which still contains an almost completely intact collection of 19th century buildings. As in most of the villages along the Erie Canal today, however, the economic viability of Albion’s historic downtown is threatened by underutilization and new commercial development in the region, which is creeping toward the community’s fringes. 

Albion’s commercial core retains all the physical characteristics of an important destination: imposing buildings enclosing broad streets with wide sidewalks, welcoming storefronts with tall windows and ornate doorways, and the best materials and the best design. It is at the physical center of a compact community that measures roughly eight square blocks and, despite being sparsely occupied, is still considered the center of village life.

One block south of the commercial district is the equally imposing civic and religious core – the National Register listed Courthouse Square District. The square is encircled by five of the most attractive, well-maintained churches in the entire region and key civic buildings. At the center of the square is the Orlean County courthouse and offices.

Albion’s residential neighborhoods lay snug to downtown, and showcase the range of 19th century styles, from early Greek Revival to Victorian. Many homes that date from the early 1840s are remarkably intact and beautifully maintained. Overall, this is one of the most lovely and complete communities in western New York.

Albion is typical today of many canal villages, where new development happens along a highway running parallel to the canal, a mile or so away. In Albion’s case, the highway is New York State Route 31. Civic life has been drawn away from the core, and fragmented along the highway. Commercial activity in downtown has declined to where it is grossly incapable of supporting the infrastructure. Many first floor spaces are minimally occupied and, of those that are, most are occupied by office functions. The upper stories are nearly all vacant, and have been for at least three decades. The longer these properties remain underutilized, the greater the risk of their deterioration and, ultimately, loss.

However, because Albion’s downtown retains its architectural integrity and has not yet been decimated by the commercial sprawl occurring in neighboring communities, it has great potential for rejuvenation. In addition, the downtown has strong support from many in the community, including the mayor and village board, members of the new landmark commission, local historians, church leaders and commercial property owners, who are intent on improving the village.

Albion awaits change, but the assistance that it and every other canal community desperately requires is not available. There is a strong need for a sustained “Main Street Revitalization Program” for canal communities, which has to come from state government. With the new State and National heritage corridor designations for the canal, there are new opportunities to focus attention on these villages. For most of the canal communities, including Albion, it is clear that any increase in tourism will depend largely on the improvement of village centers. The tourists will come only if and when the residents are satisfied with their community, and the mechanism to do so is through a Main Street program.

In addition, many of these villages need better tools from the state to eliminate some of the barriers to investment on their Main Streets. The former New York State Building code, now under revision, has been an impediment to developing the full economic potential of Main Street buildings, in particular, the use of upper floors. Progress is being made to assure that the new building code addresses the delicate balance between work that must be done to meet the property and life safety standards, while maintaining the economic viability of the project and the historic integrity of the building.

Promoting a return to Main Street and using preservation as the means to economic development is the key to revitalizing the entire canal corridor. With the right tools, creative incentives and the elimination of existing barriers to downtown reinvestment, Albion can be a model, not only for western New York, but for the state as a whole. 

For more information:  Peter Siegrist, Director of Preservation Services, Landmark Society of Western New York, 716.546.7029 x 29.

back to top

Downtown Randolph

Randolph, Cattaraugus County

The Village of Randolph, East Randolph and the Town of Randolph in rural Cattaraugus County, are currently exploring the opportunity to upgrade their combined administrative facilities in a new location. Unfortunately, in what is an all too common decision by local governments today, the municipalities are proposing to build a new complex outside of the existing commercial center. If this were to happen, it would truly be a missed opportunity for the people of Randolph to see the best, and perhaps only, chance for substantial investment in the future of their downtown and in the historic fabric that defines the unique character of their community.

The Village of Randolph is distinguished by mature trees and stately 19th century residences, with an especially strong collection of early Greek Revival homes, reflecting early prosperity. These historic neighborhoods are still served by Randolph’s downtown, which, in addition to municipal offices, contains two local banks, a drugstore, senior center, library and other small businesses.

Cattauraugus County hired consultants to conduct a study of the Randolph area and to make recommendations for its future. One of their key conclusions is that the municipalities should not abandon downtown Randolph. While the municipalities’ decision to share the associated costs of new office space is a praiseworthy example of inter-municipal cooperation, the consultants determined that the decision to relocate outside of the downtown area would not be in the best long-term interest of the historic central business district.

The heart of Randolph has a small triangular block, where a significant group of downtown buildings stand and are dominated by one of the village’s key structures, the McNallie Building. Despite years of neglect, this three-story brick building, formerly a hardware store, is structurally sound and amazingly intact. Years of insufficient maintenance have allowed many of the original historic features such as the exterior cast-iron columns and the interior wooden floors, tin ceilings, and beautiful shelves and cabinetry to survive. While it is in great need of rehabilitation, the building is one example of underutilized space in downtown that has the potential to accommodate the municipal office needs.

In addition to the investment in the revitalization of the historic downtown, the reuse of an existing downtown building could also provide substantial savings to the municipalities. The consultants’ reports found that the costs for refurbishing the historic McNallie Building are approximately half of what it would cost to build new.

A decision by the local municipalities to re-use one, or potentially two, of the underutilized buildings along Main Street would set a positive example for communities across New York State with similar opportunities. Too often, municipal office facilities are located today in new, single-story structures surrounded by parking. These non-descript buildings do not adequately inspire a sense of pride in or contribute to a community’s vitality or unique sense of place. In addition, the common location of these new facilities outside of downtowns further contributes to the deterioration of older central business districts.

While the long neglected buildings in Randolph’s downtown may have understandably not initially brought images of civic pride to mind, it is clear that refurbished, they can substantially contribute to a positive image for residents and visitors alike. Allowing the village’s landmark buildings to further deteriorate and face “demolition by neglect” would negate any sense of achievement provided by a new office building. As well, a vision of a vital village center with a dynamic economy that serves the community and encourages tourism, will be extremely difficult to achieve without government funding.

The consultants’ report concludes, “It is no exaggeration to say the downtown’s future hinges on the village’s decision whether to invest in its historic fabric, or to decline this watershed opportunity. No other decision of any village board during the last or next 50 years is likely to be so critically important. The ‘Heart of Randolph’ needs open-heart surgery, and the municipalities are the only players with the funding to perform that operation.”

For more information:  Lee Harkness, The Development Corporation, 716.287.3279 .

back to top

Erie Lackawanna Railroad Passenger Station

City of Jamestown

The passenger station of the Erie Railroad, built in 1931, was central to Jamestown’s bustling daily life and served as the gateway to the city, and to the outside world. Both historically and architecturally significant, the station stands as a reminder of the cultural and economic impact of the railroad on the development of Jamestown. Currently vacant, the station suffers from general neglect and, given its condition and location, if it continues to deteriorate, it is in danger of being demolished. 

Jamestown was a growing and thriving community in the heyday of the railroad. The arrival of the Erie Railroad in 1860 was the catalyst for development in terms of both tourism and industry. The area’s agricultural products and manufactured goods flowed along this economic lifeline and travelers enjoyed years of reliable passenger service.

Throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, rail passenger facilities in Jamestown saw a steady improvement. In 1865 the first railroad station was erected, followed in 1897 by a larger, more impressive brick station. Finally, in 1931, the last and grandest station to be erected was opened on West Second Street at the foot of Lafayette Street.

The architect for the station was Erie Railroad architect Graham King. The design shares characteristics displayed by more monumental contemporary Art Deco buildings in Western New York as Feldheimer and Wagner’s New York Central Terminal (1929) in Buffalo and John Wade’s Buffalo City Hall (1929). The station is a fine local example of the Art Deco, a style of architecture that was popular nationwide in the 1920s and 1930s, especially for commercial and institutional buildings. It brought to Jamestown an element of modernity and elegance that was suggestive of the progressive values of the bustling city, the hopes of the Erie Railroad for a bright future, and the glamour of travel that awaited passengers upon such celebrated trains as the Erie Limited.

In 1962 the Erie merged with the Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad to create the Erie-Lackawanna Railroad. The railroad eventually succumbed to competition from auto, bus, truck and airplane traffic and in 1970, it suspended passenger service to Jamestown.

The building suffers from water infiltration, vandalism and general neglect of both its interior and exterior. The train station is situated directly across the street from a new, privately funded $21 million dual pad ice arena complex, which had its grand opening ceremonies in October 2002. In addition, there is a $3 million hotel complex underway in the same area. Due to the train station’s condition and proximity to this new development, there have been serious discussions of the station’s future. One idea put forward is its demolition for a parking lot.

The Downtown Jamestown Development Corporation, Fenton History Center, City of Jamestown, Chautauqua County and Chautauqua County Visitors Bureau have all come together to try to save and restore the Station. The threat of demolition can be eliminated if funding can be secured to, at a minimum, land bank the building for future development. This would protect the building from further deterioration while the local community explores options for additional funding to redevelop the station. 

The station is ideally suited to serve as a welcome center for Jamestown and offers the potential for many related uses. The Fenton History Center has expressed interest in operating a small retail shop in the entry area and housing exhibits in the passenger terminal. A seasonal farmer’s market could operate from the loading dock area and the Western New York Railway Historical Society has proposed development of tourist excursions along existing rail lines. And, the station could become a bus transfer point for the Chautauqua Area Regional Transit System (CARTS), which currently lacks an indoor hub.

When the station cornerstone was laid on November 16, 1931, the building was described as “having been designed to express the mutual confidence of the Erie Railroad and the City of Jamestown for the future of both.” History has an opportunity to repeat itself as a new generation of Jamestown leaders express their vision for the community’s future. With proper planning and adequate funding, the Erie-Lackawanna Railroad Passenger Station can become an anchor facility and public asset, complementing the exciting redevelopment underway in downtown Jamestown.

For more information:  Jennifer Harkness, Executive Director, Downtown Jamestown Development Corporation, 716.287.3279.

back to top