In the News: One Tribeca Building Got Through the Landmarks Logjam

143 Chambers and 315 Broadway2••• 315 Broadway (above right) and 33-43 Gold made it through the Landmarks Preservation Commission’s review of its backlog; now they continue through the rest of the landmarking process (or not). From the LPC: “[The LPC] also voted to remove five sites from the calendar based on their lack of merit, and to remove a further 43 sites from the calendar due to site-specific issues by issuing No Action Letters, which will allow them to be placed back on the calendar at a future date, should new information or historical interest in them arise.” (According to DNAinfo, 143 Chambers, above left, was among those removed from the calendar.) “The Commission noted several reasons for removing properties from the calendar by issuing No Action Letters, including questions regarding their relative significance, alterations that have reduced sites’ historical features, and the presence of other regulatory controls that serve to protect the structures from future alteration or demolition.”

••• The Port Authority decided against an opening party for the World Trade Center Transportation Hub, likely because it’s only semi-opening next week. The New York Times explains what to expect: “At first, only the west half of the Oculus, and a concourse running to 4 World Trade Center, will be accessible to the public, an authority spokesman said. Several weeks later, the east half of the Oculus will open, offering a connection to Fulton Center. Not long after that, a concourse running to the site of the future 2 World Trade Center will open. Stores in the hub will not open until August.”

••• A typically over-the-top New York Post editorial calls the hub “the world’s most obscenely overpriced commuter-rail station—and possibly its ugliest”; “a monstrosity offensive both inside and out”; a “white elephant”; a “horror”; a “giant gray-white space insect [that] has gone to ground in the middle of the Financial District”; and “a vast mausoleum.” (Can someone explain the lede: “Coming soon to a vomitorium near you”?) Anyway, I bet within 12 months the paper will refer to the building as a new landmark, once public sentiment rallies around it.

••• “A 70-year-old woman had her hearing aid batteries, along with $600 and 250 Euros taken from her bag while she waited in line at Starbucks last week.” It was the one on Park Row. —DNAinfo

••• There’s a map of which TV shows shot where from November 2011 to July 2015. An awful lot of the various maps is at the maximum end of the range, but since it’s “12+” or “19+” or whatever, we can’t know whether the number in question is 12, 25, or 99. —WNYC



  1. vom·i·to·ri·um
    noun: vomitorium; plural noun: vomitoria
    each of a series of entrance or exit passages in an ancient Roman amphitheater or theater.
    a place in which, according to popular misconception, the ancient Romans are supposed to have vomited during feasts to make room for more food.

    • Yes, that’s what the word means, but the lede still doesn’t make any sense. They just wanted to jam in the word somewhere.

      • The transportation hub *technically* is related to a series of entrance and exit passages, just not from a theater. And the Post gets to print the word “vomit”

        Barnum’s Museum, once located nearby at Broadway and Ann, took advantage of a similar misconception to keep customers moving through and not loitering in the museum. He posted a sign saying “This Way to the Egress.” Customers who unknowingly followed the sign out the exit had to pay another admission to re-enter.

  2. The Oculus is a stunning work of Art and will be an instant landmark; a true Grand Central Station for the 21st Century. The public will indeed decide and not the New York Post. Having been a volunteer at the 9/11 Memorial for over two years, I heard what many visitors said. Almost 100% said they thought it was amazing and they couldn’t wait to come back to see the finished product. It will become one of the city’s top attractions and rightly so.

  3. The New York Times just printed a rave review of the Oculus! This is what the majority opinion will be.

    • While the article is positive, it’s by the paper’s city columnist, David W. Dunlap, not the architecture critic, Michael Kimmelman (so technically it’s not the review).

      • Fair point, but the editorial page of the Post isn’t an architect either. The Oculus is a beautiful piece of work that the vast majority of people will love, but like most great art, not everyone is going to agree. :-)

  4. Frankly, I believe we all need to hear the opinion of A.

    (I almost wrote that with a straight face).