Washington, DC—Ahead of the 100th Anniversary of World War I next year, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02) today introduced bipartisan legislation to rehabilitate World War I memorials in Hawai'i and across the country. H.R. 4328, the Honoring World War I Memorial Act of 2017 would authorize $50 million awarded through VA grants to eligible entities for the rehabilitation of World War I memorials throughout the United States. Eligible entities include non-profit organizations or state or local governments with direct jurisdiction over the rehabilitation of a World War I memorial. Hawai'i is home to one eligible World War I memorial at Waikiki Natatorium, along with 47 other states.
In recognition of Veterans Day, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard will deliver the keynote address during the Veterans' Day Ceremony in commemoration of the 99th Anniversary of the end of World War I at the Waikiki Natatorium this Saturday, November 11.
For more information on Rep. Tulsi Gabbard's work for our military veterans and servicemembers, click here.


text:
The Wedding Agreement
by Elizabeth Hayley
Elizabeth Hayley
Epub (Kobo), Epub (Adobe) Publication Date: 03/05/2016
The author of Just Say Yes is back with another sweet and sultry Strictly Business novel about working hard and falling harder into an unexpected romance...
Love doesn't always follow the same schedule...
Alex Walker doesn't need a woman in his life. In fact, he doesn't have time for one. Between his career in the FBI and the demands of being good father, romance is an unwanted distraction.
Likewise, Cassidy Mullen is fine on her own. The independent career woman has never had a husband in her plans—forget about kids. But when her friend Alex gets into a bind with his ex over their daughter, Cass finds herself suddenly playing the part of Alex's stable, child-loving fiancée—and liking it a lot more than she'd care to admit.
Soon Alex and Cass can't deny the real passion growing between them. But as fake affection turns into real love, Cass and Alex will have to make a choice: say "I Do" to their feelings or give up on happily-ever-after for good...
Be the first to review The Wedding Agreement.
Adult & contemporary romance Romance

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


ClearView Innovations manufacturers custom Vanishing TV Mirrors, Lighted Mirrors, and Waterproof TVs. Offices in Chicago and Hong Kong, ClearView serves customers in Hospitality, Residential and Commercial markets around the world. TV mirrors can be modified for any specific design from 7 inches to 80 inches with a variety of sizes and shapes, including edge options such as framed, sandblasted, flat, rounded and beveled.
Electronic options such as lighting, wall control, motion sensor, multi-screen and clocks.


People have become fascinated by microbes in recent decades. Historically, microbes have been mis-characterized as the bad guys, and unfortunately associated with infections and diseases. However, more recently, microbiologists have discovered and understood the importance and benefits of microbes for life on Earth. For example, microbes in our bodies, particularly in our guts, have been shown to be incredibly important to the health of our bodies. Similarly, microbes in our soils are known to be crucial to the health of our gardens and plants. Our understanding and appreciation of microbes is continuously growing.
So, what is a microbe? A microbe (or micro-organism) is typically defined as an organism that is microscopic; those that are too small to be seen by the naked human eye. More specifically, microbes fall into two classifications: prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Prokaryotes are almost all single celled organisms and lack cell nuclei. Prokaryotes are sub-divided into two further groups: bacteria and archaea. Eukaryotes are organisms with organelle, such as nuclei. Not all eukaryotes are micro-organisms, although many are. Eukaryotes microbes are further classified into protists, fungi and algae.
Microbes live pretty much everywhere on Earth. Wherever there is liquid water; inside rocks in the Earth's crust, on the ocean floor, and in our garden soils. Up to 10 billion microbes can be found in each gram of soil around plant roots (1). Microbial life in healthy soils includes huge numbers of bacterial and fungal species plus smaller numbers of algae, other protists, and archaea.
Farmers and gardeners have known for a long time that soil microbes are important for plant health and productivity. However, the mechanisms of how and why soil microbes are important were less well understood. Current research is revealing the details of why soil microbes are beneficial in our gardens. With new research it is becoming clear that without a healthy, thriving microbial community, nutrients are not recycled, pests are more likely to take over and gardeners are more likely to rely on chemicals to replace the natural functions of the soil microbes.
Microbes are essential for releasing nutrients into your garden soil where your plants need them. Microbes form a critical part of nutrient recycling in all ecosystems. Probably the two best known processes are those in the carbon and the nitrogen cycles.
Soil microbes are vital for the break down (or decomposition) of organic matter from dead plants and animals, forming a critical step within the recycling of carbon in our ecosystems. Fungi start the process by breaking down larger pieces of organic material. Other microbes then consume the organic material and incorporate it into the soil. Globally, soils contain more carbon than the atmosphere and plants combined. By regenerating our soils we have the opportunity to sequester more carbon underground and reduce the rate of climate change.
Nitrogen fixing microbes are found in the soil and some plant roots, such as peas, beans and other legumes. These microbes transform atmospheric nitrogen into fixed nitrogen. More than 90% of all nitrogen fixation is due to these microbes making them a critical part of the nitrogen cycle. Nitrogen is an essential nutrient for plant growth, however, it is also the most commonly limiting nutrient in plants. Without these nitrogen-fixing microbes it would be impossible for plants to get the nitrogen they need to grow. Within a plant, nitrogen becomes part of amino acids and then into proteins. Globally, plant proteins form a major source of proteins consumed by humans and other animals.
Without microbes, it's obvious that the carbon and nitrogen cycles would not exist as we know them. But did you know that many more natural cycles are also dependent on microbes? The illustration below gives some insight into the wide importance of microbes in the oxygen cycle, water cycle, as well as phosphate, potassium, iron and calcium conversions. Quite clearly, microbes are essential for releasing nutrients and elements into our soils where our plants and gardens need them.
As shown above, microbes are critical for releasing nutrients into the soil, but did you know that microbes are also essential to help plants uptake these nutrients? Most plants rely on mycorrhizal relationships to obtain nutrients from the soil. Mycorrhizae are symbiotic partnerships between plant roots and certain soil fungi. The fungi grow in fine hairs, finer than the smallest root hair, and act as crucial pathways transporting nutrients, moisture and carbohydrates through the soil to plant roots. Why do the microbes do all this work for the plants? In exchange for a treat! A plant's roots give off substances that the microbes can use such as sugars and amino acids; a crucial (arguably the most crucial) symbiotic relationship in nature.
Without soil microbes, plants would not be able to get all the nutrients and water that they need to thrive.
Healthy soil is rich in organic matter. This organic matter is critical to help the soil retain moisture and nutrients and to feed the essential soil microbes. When soils are lacking in organic matter many gardeners and farmers become reliant on fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides.
Until recently it was thought that dead plants and animals were the main source of organic matter in the soil. However, recent advances in understanding of soil formation suggests that the most persistent forms of soil carbon are primarily from dead microbial bodies, rather than from dead plant parts. While plant matter forms the original source of carbon in our soils, it is bodies of microbes that ate the plant matter that ensure at least some of the carbon is retained in the soil. It is actually microbes that form the basis of a healthy soil structure, rich in organic matter.
Mycorrhizae, which are essential for plants in the uptake of nutrients, are also critical to help plants defend themselves against disease. Farmers and gardeners have long known that certain soils provide protection to plants from specific soil-borne diseases. Such soils are often called disease-suppressive soils. It is believed that beneficial microbes within the soil create inhibitory effects against particular disease-causing pathogens. These beneficial soil microbes help suppress diseases. In addition, the healthy microbial activity will create healthier, more productive soils which, in turn, will allow plants to grow stronger and healthier and be more resistant to pests and diseases.
You will by now realize how important it is for your soil to have a thriving microbial population. But how do ensure that there are billions of beneficial microbes in your garden? Here are our top 3 tips for increasing the number of microbes in your soil.
Like any living thing, microbes need a source of food. Compost provides food for your microbes. Not all organic matter is created equally. When it comes to feeding microbes, food waste is their preferred food. Good quality, homemade compost is already teeming with microbes. So, by adding compost to your soil you are adding billions of beneficial microbes and a large source of food. Note that many store-bought, bagged composts are sterilized prior to bagging. This sterilization process kills off many (if not all) of the beneficial microbes. Good quality homemade compost is the best for your garden. Bokashi compost is richer in effective microorganisms than any other form of compost.
In addition, you can also add microbes directly to your soil. Bokashi bran and EM are both available from our online store. Add these directly to your soil to give a boost of beneficial garden microbes.
Mycorrhizal is also available in powdered form from numerous online sources. Again, sprinkle directly on your soil when adding new plants or seeds.
Bokashi tea and other compost teas are also teeming with beneficial microbes. Adding these to your garden is another simple, yet effective, way of boosting the microbe population.
No-dig (or no-till) gardening is exactly as the name suggests; gardening without digging the soil. No-dig gardening supports the microbes in your soil. It mimics the natural processes under which soil is formed. Digging and tilling soil damages the fine mycorrhizal fungi and other microbial life in the soil. Leaving soils undisturbed allows the microbial life (and other soil organisms) to thrive. Learn how and why no-dig can help your garden (read more).


TheBlueGuerilla: Springthorpe Hits Back at 'Shoddy' Website.
LUKE SPRINGTHORPE has launched a blistering attack on breaking poll results, slamming the websites polling and writing as "Shoddy", TBG can sensationally reveal.
London Conservaive Future Chairman exclusively told TBG - "Not surprisingly, RightofCentre and its editor's integrity in polling is about as shoddy as its writing capabilities. Given that the poll allows multiple votes to be cast by the same person, I think I'll take the results with a pinch of salt and continue to crack on with the job in London."
It's unknown if Luke Springthorpe will restand for the London CF Chairmanship in probable upcoming National Elections in August.
Luke did a pretty good job in London during the campaign, came to help out non-target seats when they needed the help. Good guy.


Altaaqa Global, a global temporary power and energy solution specialist, recently won 'Power Project of the Year' for its Yemen power project and was highly commended for its role in innovation.
Dubai, UAE: Altaaqa Global CAT Rental Power has recently received the award for 'Power Project of the Year' for its power plant project in Aden, Yemen. Altaaqa Global was highly commended for its contribution to product innovation, social responsibility and impressive delivery during the Middle East Electricity Awards 2014, held at the Dubai International Convention Centre in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
The 54 MW temporary power plant was built in just 23 days from signing the contract and has the capacity to supply up to 150,000 homes with electricity, benefitting more than half a million people in the city of Aden.
The Middle East Electricity Awards recognise the outstanding achievements of individuals, departments, teams or an organisation that have contributed to the growth and development of the energy industry with a focus on the power, lighting, new & renewable, nuclear and water sectors.


text:
Cavendish hopes to stay upright in return at Yorkshire
The 32-year-old will return to racing next month after three crashes earlier this season put him on the shelf.
Mark Cavendish will return to racing action in early May. Photo: ©Tim De Waele | Getty Images
Mark Cavendish is hoping bad things come in threes and that the worst is behind him as the sprinter plots a comeback sooner than expected.
The 32-year-old Cavendish, who's been bedeviled by a trio of crashes this spring, will race the Tour de Yorkshire from May 3-6. That's earlier than what was expected to be his return at the Amgen Tour of California for what will be his seventh start in the U.S. race. That will be followed by a likely start at the Tour of Slovenia and a return to the Tour de France in July.
"Results-wise, I'm not sure where my form will be actually only having had a couple of weeks back on the bike," Cavendish said. "I'm delighted to have recovered sufficiently from my injuries at Milano-Sanremo to be back racing sooner than I initially thought."
Cavendish last raced at Milano-Sanremo following a string of bad-luck crashes that left his spring campaign in tatters. At the Abu Dhabi Tour in February, Cavendish was knocked to the ground in the neutral start zone when an official's car unexpectedly slowed down right in front of him. Even worse was a crash at Tirreno-Adriatico, when he fell heavily after striking a pothole in the team time trial stage. He finished with his jersey bloodied and torn, but was ruled "out of time" by the race jury.
Despite injuries, he started Sanremo only to suffer a harrowing impact with a traffic bollard. Cavendish was lucky to have not suffered worse injuries than a broken rib and injured ankle.
So far in 2018, Cavendish has won once — stage 3 at the Dubai Tour in February — and he will be keen to put some race miles into his legs before July. A string of setbacks have hampered Cavendish's return to winning form ever since the controversial crash with Peter Sagan in last year's Tour de France.
The Yorkshire tour will be Cavendish's first time racing in the hometown region of his mother since the 2014 Tour de France. In that race, he crashed out with a dislocated shoulder in the opening stage into Harrogate.
"My mother's from Harrogate and obviously the last time I raced things didn't go that great [for me] in the 2014 Tour de France," Cavendish said. "One thing I do remember is the incredible crowds and I know that the Tour de Yorkshire always provides."
Cavendish's teammate Serge Pauwels also confirmed he will return to defend his title in the Yorkshire race.
The Yorkshire tour was launched on the heels of the successful 2014 "grand depart" of that year's Tour de France. The women's race was awarded 1.2 status in 2016.
Zdenek Stybar turns page with move to Jayco-AlUla
Alexey Lutsenko wants to be Asia's first elite men's world champion
Sadhbh O'Shea
Human Powered Health inspired by Intermarché-Circus-Wanty as it seeks WorldTour survival
EF Education-EasyPost vows to chase wins not points: 'We're not going to play that game'
Jim Cotton
Mark Cavendish


text:
William Tummel (March 5, 1892 – November 16, 1977) was an American assistant director. He worked on 59 films between 1925 and 1947. He won an Academy Award in 1933 for Best Assistant Director. He was born in Kansas City, Missouri and died in Los Angeles, California.

Selected filmography
Siberia (1926)

References

External links

1892 births
1977 deaths
American film directors
Best Assistant Director Academy Award winners

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
the "red gold"
This ancient and precious spice from Asia Minor arrived in Europe from Spain one thousand of years ago, and now has also settled in Valle d'Aosta.
The first evidence dates back to 1600 where a document indicates the presence of a plot of land dedicated to saffron farming in Saint Pierre village. The last data that attests saffron farming's presence in our region is in 1800.
After a gap of almost 200 years, the cultivation resumes in 2013 thanks to a group of farmers from Valle d'Aosta. The Rosset Terroir Farm starts its production in 2014 and uses this "red gold" as an ingredient of the Ebo Lebo gran riserva of the brand "OTTOZ ALPINE LIQUEUR".
Crocus sativus L.
SURFACE 500 m
HARVEST Manual, from October to November
DRYING PROCESS Using a dryer machine, immediately after the harvest


Vancouver, December 19, 2006 - BC Advantage Funds (VCC) Ltd. ("Advantage") announced today that it is experiencing strong demand for its venture fund shares in advance of the upcoming tax selling season. Advantage has now sold over $5 million of its $10 million 2006 tax credit allocation and expects sales to continue to accelerate in late December and January. These tax credits provide Advantage investors with a 30% refundable tax credit for the 2006 taxation year (maximum $200,000 investment and $60,000 annual tax credit).
"With sales exceeding $500,000 last week alone, we are very pleased with the demand we are seeing for our fund's shares," said Frank Holler, CEO of BC Advantage Funds. "Particularly gratifying is that this demand is coming from all across British Columbia, reflecting our commitment to offer everyone in the Province the opportunity to invest in our fund."
Holler further noted that Advantage's 2006 tax credit allocation is limited to $10 million and recommended that investment advisors and their clients interested in acquiring shares of BC Advantage Funds move quickly to secure their 2006 tax credits.


text:
← Swedish Streets
Everywhere In Manhattan I've Ever Lived →
Honestly, isn't this building giving New Yorkers the finger?
by John Massengale Posted on May 11, 2015
UPDATE: When I first published this quick post in September 2014, for some reason it attracted comments from young architects who not only wanted to defend the building, but who saw my comments as ridiculous. In retrospect, it's obvious that most New Yorkers, many non New Yorkers, and many architects agreed with me. Some support for that is listed at the end of the post. This month's Architectural Record on Architecture & Money: The New Gilded Age produces more agreement, particularly in Michael Sorkin's Too Rich, Too Skinny.
THIS IS Robber Baron 2014 Style: Conspicuous Consumption literally taken to unprecedented heights. You can see it many miles away in Queens, the Bronx, and even Brooklyn, which means millions of New Yorkers have to look at it's graceless form every day. You get some idea of the problem here (and to a lesser degree here).
And for what? One-hundred and twenty-five apartments on 89 floors (a number that will probably go down as Russian billionaires buy multiple units to combine into large pied-a-terres on the highest floors). Most of the occupants won't live in the building (What New Yorker would want to live completely surrounded by undistinguished midtown office towers?) and they won't pay much in the way of local taxes, but their empty nests (called "bullion pots in the sky" in London) will forever disfigure the skyline and steal sunlight as far away as Central Park.
In New York's first Gilded Age, the Robber Barons built towers and civic landmarks that graced the skyline and made better streets. Most of the tall buildings were corporate office towers, like the Woolworth and the Chrysler buildings, and there were a few like the wonderful New York Municipal Building by McKim, Mead & White. The Woolworth, Chrysler, and Municipal buildings contributed to one of the great skylines of the world and at the same time made streets they stood on better. Most of the towers, institutional buildings, streets, and neighborhoods that give New York its physical character come from that time.
Today's plutocrats are the modern-day Rockefellers, Fricks, and Morgans. But unlike those men, who both took from the city and gave to it, the international 1% parking their money here today take far more than they give. They're also helping to chase the middle class out of the city.
Last but not least, this building—the tallest building in New York*—is somehow "as of right." Before the Bloomberg Administration waved its magic wand over air rights, the building would have been illegal. And in more reasonable times, when developers built much lower "sliver buildings," the Giuliani administration made those illegal. We understand that Mayor de Blasio doesn't want to offend the controllers of the largest SuperPAC in New York (the Real Estate Board of New York), but this is a part of the Tale of Two Cities that led so many of us to vote for de Blasio.
* The antenna at the Freedom Tower makes it "taller" than 432 Park Avenue, but the top floor at the Freedom Tower is lower than the highest floor at 432 Park Avenue. As far as I know, this is the first time in the 390-year history of New York that our tallest building has been residential.
PS: Here is the building that was torn down for 432 Park. As an urban building, a building that contributes to the street and the "space between the buildings" where public life takes place, it is infinitely superior. Big development, just like Big Finance, Big Pharma, and Big Agriculture, is diminishing our future for the short term gain of the richest of the rich.
PPS: In The Happy City, Charles Montgomery shows that the people who live very far from the ground are less happy than those in the lower floors of the same buildings, where they are more in touch with their fellow human beings. We are social beings. We might want to visit the clouds now and then, but many of us are not happy living there.
PPPS: Duo Dickinson agrees (succinctly): http://savedbydesign.wordpress.com/2014/11/03/irony/
PPPPS: "Gotham's fickle finger of real estate wealth signaling the next Gilded Age? A giant upraised baton cuing us all to a symphony of conspicuous consumption…?" Francis X. Clines. The New York Times, Jan. 1, 2015
PPPPPS: "Stream of Foreign Wealth Flows to Elite New York Real Estate," Louise Story and Stephanie Saul, The New York Times, February 7, 2015. Investigative reporting of the type that only a great paper can do.
This entry was posted in Architecture, Classical, Culture, Current, Egotecture, Global, New York, Street Design, The Other Kind, Urbanism. Bookmark the permalink.
33 Responses to Honestly, isn't this building giving New Yorkers the finger?
joe dee says:
Please run for Mayor!!!
I hate to be "that guy," but... says:
No it is not. The WTC, both old and new, are architectural travesties and this is an aesthetically far superior "tallest" for this great city. Didn't know this was a leftist blog too until I read the part about the Drake. I dare you to go live in a "humanist" city like, oh, say, Pyongyang, North Korea, and then report back on whether you still prefer that environment to New York's.
John Massengale says:
joeylesbo116 —
I'm not comparing the design of the WTC to the design of 432 Park. But what part of the design of 432 Park do you consider good? It is simultaneously overwhelming and monotonous on the street, the top has no visual interest, and neither does the silhouette or the boring repetition of the shaft.
I don't use the word "humanist" in the post, so I'm not sure why you apply it here. Florence is usually the prime example of a humanist city. I have no idea what Pyongyang looks like or when it was built, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't have much to do with the old Drake. Today, of course, Pyongyang is Communist, which is anti-humanist.
Joey Lesbo says:
joey116@hotmail.com, aka joeylesbo116@hotmail.com, says, "you can't 'cyberbully' someone who doesn't exist"
DanDan says:
Pretty much everything in this article is wrong. Just 100% incorrect "facts", and silly ranting from an anti-development NIMBY.
DanDan —
Could you give a few specifics about what facts are wrong?
Everything. Your claim that today's plutocrats are "takers", and somehow different from yesterday's plutocrats (as if the towers from the past were built out of goodwill rather than greed), your claim that this building will not contribute to streetlife (it actually has more retail space than the predecessor building), your claim that the zoning is Bloomberg's fault (there was no zoning change at all in Midtown East since the 1980's, and this building is as-of-right).
Basically this entire essay is the architectural equivalent of an old man complaining about everything new and how the "good old days", when buildings were supposedly built for reasons other than profit, were so much better.
And, not that it particularly matters, but I'm a GSD grad, work in urban planning, and very much like this building.
I don't think the problem is "plutocrats." The specific problem I'm raising in this very short post is the buildings we are building for the global 1% to park money in New York. They deface the city, they overly privilege the rich, and they contribute to making New York "a luxury product" you have to pay for, as Mayor Bloomberg said. "Bullion pots in the sky," as London's Mayor calls them, they play a role in the fact that the other 90%, and even the rest of the 10%, have a harder and harder time living here. Cities need diversity, and cities need to be a place that support the making of art, not just its consumption.
This is hardly a controversial opinion. Here are some variations:
The Shard has slashed the face of London for ever
Simon Jenkins
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/03/shard-slashed-the-face-of-london
The Shard is the perfect metaphor for modern London
Aditya Chakrabortty
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jun/25/shard-metaphor-for-modern-london
London's Housing Boom
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/28/opinion/londons-housing-boom.html
A $90 Million Condo Flip Shows What's Wrong With Financial Capitalism
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/28/upshot/a-90-million-condo-flip-shows-whats-wrong-with-financial-capitalism.html
What I admit to not understanding is why so many architects who think of themselves as progressive support this.
Today we have the world's 1% focusing on "World Cities." One hundred years ago, the nation's rich flocked to New York. But that was a much smaller group, and the city also supported a large middle class, as well as the Bohemian capital of America, Greenwich Village. Of course there were many problems, including the plight of the poor. But a time that had many parallels to today also spawned the Progressive Era, and led to the first income tax. To be clear, one hundred years ago was not better. We need our own reforms, including campaign finance reform, tax reform, and more attention to climate change. Many believe that if we get the first—finance reform—the other two will follow.
Here's another link, to a program by Bill Moyers called "The Long, Dark Shadows of Plutocracy"— http://video.pbs.org/video/2365376893/
Youse guys are nuts.
Do you know where the city generates most of its revenue? Property Taxes. Everyone who buys property in NYC will pay property taxes, so I don't get what the big gripe with this building is. If anything, paying property taxes, yet not using any of the city services or infrastructure would be plus to the city. The problem with ghost buildings only occurs when you have too many of them, and we are nowhere near that point.
I didn't describe tax revenue as the main problem. However,
In 2013, New York City had $43.8 billion in tax revenue: 58% of that did NOT come from property taxes. In previous years it has been lower.
Non-residents pay no income tax or business tax and contribute less to sales tax than full-time residents.
New York City needs more tax revenues. A billion here, a billion there…
In other words, the problem is more complex than "they pay property tax." This is precisely why Mayor de Blasio is reportedly considering a graduated property tax for apartments over $5 million that are not primary residences.
There are lots of other problems, too. For example, billionaire non-residents contribute almost nothing to the cultural life of the city, but they make real estate unaffordable for many artists, painters, musicians, writers, actors, and others who have contributed so much to the history of the city. On 57th Street, they even led to the destruction of a great bookstore and the century-old Steinway piano store that worked with the artists at Carnegie Hall.
Nor are they like the immigrants in Queens and the Bronx, who contribute so much to the workforce in the city.
As your statistics point out, 42% of city revenue comes from property taxes. By far, the largest source of income for the city. In other words, property taxes generate almost half of all city revenue ALONE. These luxury condos will eventually contribute more tax revenue for the city then any missed sales tax, income tax, or what not from not having a few more permanent residents in Manhattan. Because thats exactly what Manhattan needs, more residents to jam already overcrowded streets and subways. Billionaires are not my favorite people, but they contribute a lot to the city coffers simply by owning property. Artists, painters, musicians, etc, are all nice and all but they are not the ones paying to keep this city running. The building are a result of the high real estate market, not the cause. Ten years ago, it would not have been feasible to build this tower, or the towers like it that will soon go up. There are bunch of factors contributing to the exploding real estate market, this building isn't one of them. Don't misjudge effect for cause.
grogofmagrog says:
…and by inserting one or two "affordable units", the majority of these new super lux buildings for billionaires have 20-30 year tax abatements.
General Scarr says:
No, not New Yorkers…this building is giving YOU the finger my friend.
Well, this blog is nothing more than whining about nothing. I know this seems crazy, but it's New York. It's a mecca for skyscrapers and tall buildings. I suggest you move to Tuscon so that you don't have to worry about shadows and other scary things in a city with over 100 buildings that are at least 600ft tall…..
V.O. says:
John, your key arguments hinge around this tower's aesthetics, as well as its impact on the city. Speaking of former, beauty is a matter of personal taste.
– No, it isn't. The same can be said about any prominent structure that breaks the line of the horizon and does not appeal to your tastes, whether it's the Empire State Building or your neighbor's chimney. "It's tall. It's pointy. I think it's ugly. It's a middle finger to everyone, right guys?"
You may call it "boring repetition of the shaft" while I would describe it asa "refined minimalist tower with unrestrained verticality and dignified sophistication without the clutter". Neither of us would be objectively right. At the end of the day, some people like the aesthetics of an object, and others don't. Both of us can attack or defend its looks based on historical references and comparative stylistic analysis, but it won't change the fact that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Your post becomes more problematic and misguided when you make sweeping generalizations about the tower's effect on the city as a whole, without backing up any of your claims.
"THIS IS Robber Baron 2014 Style: Conspicuous Consumption literally taken to unprecedented heights. You can see it many miles away in Queens, the Bronx, and even Brooklyn, which means millions of New Yorkers have to look at it's graceless form every day."
– Why would you imagine that "millions of New Yorkers" consider it "graceless" rather than "graceful"? Not everyone agrees with your opinion, nor does everyone agree with mine. I would never have the audacity to claim millions of supporters in my hometown if my only "evidence" is a collection of disparaging forum posts. You may be right, you may be wrong, but face it – you do not know whether the majority of the city likes the building or not. It's fine if you don't like this building, but do not speak for the whole city if you cannot back up your words.
"And for what? One-hundred and twenty-five apartments on 89 floors (a number that will probably go down as Russian billionaires buy multiple units to combine into large pied-a-terres on the highest floors)."
– New York is a global city with a great number of high-profile persons with global influence. The taxes paid by wealthy foreigners and non-New Yorker Americans helps provide for the services used by New Yorkers every day. Since Peter Minuit bought Manhattan from Indians, New York was born, raised and nurtured via global commerce and transplants (I'm pretty sure Dutch traders and English colonizers are not Native Americans). Complaints about foreign investors in a city built in large part by the idea of foreign investment seem short-sighted at best. But then again, "John Massengale" sounds like a typical Lenape Indian name, so I would assume that your ancestors have lived in Manhattan for thousands of years, and thus you have a great claim for complaining about transplants and foreigners changing the island.
"Most of the occupants won't live in the building"
– yep, this is probably true. But, so what? It stands in an area with a very high daytime population density, and it won't make or break Midtown, the world's largest office district that shares space with thousands of existing residences, if 89 extra apartments are all full or all empty at any given moment.
"(What New Yorker would want to live completely surrounded by undistinguished midtown office towers?)"
– Again, absolutely unfounded personal opinion. Of course, to many of us, Midtown might not be a preferable neighborhood, but you speak about this as if you've conducted a survey or something. Personally, I'd find that neighborhood too hectic for my preferences, but who cares about what I personally like when it comes to gauging historic trends and public opinion? Let's look at more reliable figures. New Yorkers have lived in high-rise towers in Midtown side by side with office towers for almost a hundred years, since Ritz Tower (http://www.theritztower.com/) opened its doors in 1925. Times changed, so did architectural styles, but this tradition remained. Instead of opulent spires, modernist slabs like the Olympic Tower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Tower) shared space with modernist office towers nearby. This is 2014. A new decade, an evolving skyline, same principle of multi-use highrise districts. If you so desire, I would provide an exhaustive list of residential towers in Midtown Manhattan. You can even give me the street coordinates for what you constitute Midtown, and I would oblige. Now, can you provide any evidence as to why New Yorkers "don't want to live completely surrounded by undistinguished midtown office towers"?
"won't pay much in the way of local taxes"
– says who? These ultra-luxury buildings provide local job creation on a short-term basis for construction workers that are hired to build the towers and long-term basis as well for the staff that is hired to service these wealthy people. The construction of this building cost about $1.2 billion, with hundreds of millions of dollars in payments to local steelworkers, concrete crews, electricians, plumbers, local architects, accountants, lawyers, engineering consultants, etc. And all of that income is taxed as well. Besides, the building 's combined unit cost comes up to almost $3 billion (http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2013/05/20/floorplans_revealed_for_superscraper_432_park_avenue.php). Think of property taxes alone that will go into New York's budget thanks to that. Given these facts, please explain how all this translates into "not paying much in the way of local taxes". Perhaps you have figures or analysis that would convince me.
"steal sunlight as far away as Central Park."
– You would have much better luck making this claim about other proposed skyscrapers in the vicinity, but 432 Park Avenue's impact would not be as prominent. Consider the following shadow studies. 432 Park is the rectangle all the way to the right. Note how in the winter (http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/52bda7f36da811b040ce32f9-800-579/screen%20shot%202013-12-27%20at%2011.05.28%20am.png), its shadow will be minimal and will leave the park before noon. In the summer (http://static1.businessinsider.com/image/52bda7b76da8111d42ce32fc-800-577/screen%20shot%202013-12-27%20at%2011.05.13%20am.png), the building will cast no shadow over the park *at all* during most days. In either case, it's evident that the bulk of current shadows is cast by buildings that have already existed for many years. Do they really make Central Park into an inhospitable dark abyss? I agree that it is best to avoid blocking large amounts of sunlight to parks if possible. However, you've picked the wrong building to lodge that complaint against.
Gosh, that's just my response to your first couple of paragraphs. The rest of your post is equally misguided, no offense. If you desire, I would continue my breakdown of your errors and misunderstandings at a later time. You have the strongest point in regards to Drake Hotel's destruction. I agree, it was an amazing building that should have been landmarked and preserved. If you made a post strictly complaining about its destruction, I would be behind you 100%. However, your post opposes the new construction that went up in its place. It is a fair argument if you are saying that 432 Park is an unworthy replacement, but it comes off as if you think that the new building is ugly because the old building was pretty. What happened to judging buildings on their own merits rather than by comparison?
I'm sorry if some of my arguments came off combative. I hope you take no offense.
Interesting how much hostility this is provoking. It would be interesting to know too how many of the people who are upset did not go to architecture school (my guess is one or none).
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" has been the mantra of architecture schools since World War II. But many recent studies show it's not true. Walk a group of people around a city with maps in hand, ask them to chart which blocks they like and which they don't, and you will find a public consensus. Of course there are individual preferences, but those also fall into patterns: to give one example, some like more formal, some like more picturesque. And then there's the fact that most of us can acknowledge quality of different types. SOM's Lever House and McKim, Mead & White's Municipal Building are great designs, even if our own designs or personal favorites are not like either.
VO, of course I don't say, "It's tall. It's pointy. I think it's ugly. It's a middle finger to everyone, right guys?" There are many beautiful tall towers in Manhattan, and many of them are in fact more pointy than 432 Park: the pointy tops are part of what makes the Chrysler and Empire State Buildings more visually interesting than 432 Park. Minimalism and unvarying, mechanical repetition are boring when the building is 1,300 feet tall. We have enough information (like surveys taken for the East Midtown plan) to know that the overwhelming majority of New Yorkers agree.
The issue is not Classical or traditional versus Modern. There are many beautiful Modern buildings in New York. But the very wide, very tall, monochrome glass boxes that look like they were wrapped in graph paper and then covered in shrink-wrap plastic are boring. As they get larger, the boring boxes get oppressive.
Google things like "billionaire row" and "57th Street" and you will find articles and posts from all sorts of sources that also object to the economic side and what it is doing to a great city. Three-quarters of the city agrees with Occupy Wall Street and wishes Mayor de Blasio would do more about the Tale of Two Cities that was at the heart of his election. Take a look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu1suQP1vC4 or this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eohHwsplvY. These are not by architects and they have nothing to do with anti-Modernism.
This is an architecture school disease. Universities with on-campus housing survey their students every year to see where they want to live, and we know that the buildings the architecture schools love and promote are almost always the least popular. Architecture students should ask themselves why their taste is not just dramatically different from their friends and fellow students but actually in opposition to them. The average person is neither anti-Classical or anti-Modern. What they crave are places that make them feel good. See Charles Montgomery's The Happy City.
BTW, SHoP takes similar forms over in Brooklyn and makes them interesting.
John, thank you for your reply. Before I begin, let me say that I strongly disagree with many (not all) of your points, and that's one of the reasons why I'm enjoying this discussion. Disagreeable viewpoints get me fired up and force me to do some serious critical thinking as well as deeper research on my subjects of interest. The world would be a boring place if we all just agree with one another, and shying away from polarizing opinions results in mental inbreeding with no new ideas coming in. Besides, sometimes I change my view about a thing or two in the process. I'm sorry if you feel personally insulted at any point. This is not my intention. I have looked through your website and admire many of your projects and ideas. I am a strong believer in human scaled design myself, am a [partial] admirer of New Urbanism, and your links to additional stuff (e.g. http://streets-book.com/home)… I'd actually be willing to do some promotion for that. It's right up my alley. You come off as someone I'd enjoy having a drink with while getting into a heated discussion.
Having said that…
"Interesting how much hostility this is provoking."
– You posted a controversial and polarizing opinion piece. Voice an opinion – get ready for flak.
"It would be interesting to know too how many of the people who are upset did not go to architecture school (my guess is one or none)."
– What does this have to do with the subject at hand? Is architectural critique reserved only for enlightened elites, and mere mortals without this level of education must bow their heads in respect and keep silent? I'm sure that it's not what you meant, but that's what it sounds like to me. I'm sure that I'm mistaken and that you know better than saying something like that. If that is indeed what you meant, then it is downright offensive. Whether someone never went to school at all or is a professor emeritus that outranks everyone in the AIA, please judge their words on their own merit rather than on the speaker's background.
" 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder' has been the mantra of architecture schools since World War II."
– Right. In the past, architecture styles were much more regimented and linear in their development because the instructors taught their students about what is good and what is bad, same as the rest of society functioned: women were forced to conform to gender roles, minorities were told to sit at the back of the bus, some art was classified as "proper" while other was "improper", etc. Mandatory conformity ruled the day. Thankfully, our postmodern world is defined by a plurality of ideas, accepting that different viewpoints, lifestyles and movements have their own merits, while the top-down structure where the elite tells everyone what to think, how to behave, and what to like is being increasingly discredited. Architecture also accepted this pluralist concept, recognizing that a variety of movements and approaches have their own merits rather than forcing their ideas of "good" and "bad" upon everyone whether they agree or not. I'm really not sure what you were driving at with that statement. What were you getting at? Again, how is architecture school relevant here?
"But many recent studies show it's not true."
"We have enough information (like surveys taken for the East Midtown plan) to know that the overwhelming majority of New Yorkers agree."
"Google things like "billionaire row" and "57th Street" and you will find articles and posts from all sorts of sources that also object to the economic side and what it is doing to a great city. Three-quarters of the city agrees with Occupy Wall Street"
– Fact: apples are clearly better than oranges. Many recent studies show it's true. We have enough information to know that the overwhelming majority of people agree. Google things like "apples" and "oranges" and you will find articles and posts from all sorts of sources that support my viewpoint, because I don't feel like doing the legwork to support my own claims. Three-quarters of the world agrees with me.
…see how misinformed and condescending you sound when you make a controversial claim and then not only refuse to support it, but also ask the other person to do all the busy work for you? Whenever you make a claim, the burden of proof is always on you. As of individual points (like the East Midtown Rezoning Plan and googling Billionaire's Row), I'll address them later. It's your approach that I have an issue with. Note how in my previous wall of text, I have not asked you even a single time to look up anything I claimed to be a fact. It's bad form, plain and simple. Either be ready to back your words up, or leave it ambiguous (allowing us to read it as opinion), or say nothing at all. Never say "These are facts and you should do the research to prove me right." Saying "studies show" without showing actual studies is an insult to any reader's intelligence.
"Walk a group of people around a city with maps in hand, ask them to chart which blocks they like and which they don't, and you will find a public consensus. Of course there are individual preferences, but those also fall into patterns: to give one example, some like more formal, some like more picturesque. And then there's the fact that most of us can acknowledge quality of different types. SOM's Lever House and McKim, Mead & White's Municipal Building are great designs, even if are own designs or personal favorites are not like either."
– That is true to a limited extent. Like I said before, beauty is subjective, but I guess we both agree that there are things that the majority considers ugly, and things they consider good-looking. Most people would agree that this (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c8/Taj_Mahal_in_March_2004.jpg) is a better looking building than this (http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/9760360.jpg), but even the latter might have fans: a large portion of urban enthusiasts admires urban grit, calling pristine surfaces "soulless" and "sterile", while mass-produced slab housing of the type pictured above, known in urban enthusiast communities as "Commieblocks", has its own fan clubs. Here's one example (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=477). In summary, while there is some consensus on aesthetics and neighborhood appeal, beauty is still subjective to personal, social and cultural standards. Protected historic districts and uniformly designed neighborhoods have their place in most cities, for all the right reasons, but on a greater scale, forcing one "elite" group's standards of beauty upon everyone is not only unnatural, but also tends to backfire. When the Nazi Party declared which design styles are "good" and which are "bad", they held an exhibit of "proper art" juxtaposed against a sideshow of "Degenerate Art" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_Art_Exhibition), where the Nazis placed any design work that, in their view, "insult German feeling, or destroy or confuse natural form or simply reveal an absence of adequate manual and artistic skill" (Spotts, Frederic (2002). Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics. The Overlook Press. p. 151). As over a million people showed up to see the exhibit in six weeks, it became clear that the "taste-makers" are often so caught up in their delusions of self-importance that they lose touch with what the public actually wants. You seem to refer to this trend as the "architecture school disease", where you say that "studies show"… without actually showing any studies… well, you already know how I feel about weasel words like that. This whole "some argue" approach to supposed facts is so trite that it's become a common butt of jokes (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Some%20Argue). An example from the link I provided: "Wikipedia entry: 'Some argue that President Barack Obama was involved in the mass murder of over 12,000 kittens in February of 2004.' Sensible person: 'Care to list a source for me, buddy? Other than yourself, I mean.' "
As of the comparison to the ESB and Chrysler, I agree that 432 Park's flat "chimney stack" top pales in comparison with the whimsical, brick/stone/steel pinnacles of the Art Deco giants. However, just because those two have better looking crowns, it does not make 432 Park ugly in its own right, even if it's an overall worse building in many people's eyes.
"Minimalism and unvarying, mechanical repetition are boring when the building is 1,300 feet tall."
– More opinion-based postulates. I don't think we need to re-hash everyone's favorite debate of Mies van der Rohe's "Less is More" versus Robert Venturi's "Less is a Bore". At least here we are in agreement, since you say "The issue is not Classical or traditional versus Modern. There are many beautiful Modern buildings in New York." There are both great and ugly examples of rectilinear Modernist facades, which you aptly described as "look like they were wrapped in graph paper and then covered in shrink-wrap plastic". Let's look no further than your Seagram Building example: while the tower is a timeless masterpiece, a number of stylistic imitators that were built nearby come off exactly as dull and atrocious as you described, usually failing because of cheap materials, bungled details, no respect for proportions, etc. Large size of many of these buildings can often be a problematic factor, as you described: oppressive, monotonous, and frequently deadening on the street level. Still, I'm at a loss as to why you listed it to support your critique of 432 Park. This structure is the very opposite of a squat and wide structure, isn't it? This is a fact. Now the following is an opinion – my opinion: stretched to this fantastical combination of height and slenderness, an otherwise dull facade becomes just the right skin needed for this type of building: an elegant, clean, clutter-free pattern stretched towards the sky; at only 6 windows in width, it is too narrow to be dull to the point of slab-like oppression, no matter the height. I know that your opinion differs. I'm willing to agree to disagree, but you will not convince me that you are objectively right on this one. At least put more effort into your argument than "studies show".
You attempt to do the latter here:
Your attempt failed.
Allow me to explain. I have been following the East Midtown rezoning saga since its inception, and I remember various arguments for and against its different elements. Since you kindly refused to provide any of the information that you mentioned (which should be plentiful and easy to find, right? You did say we have "enough" of it), I do not know whether you are referring to some wide-reaching survey where the majority has stated that "minimalism and unvarying, mechanical repetition are boring when the building is very tall", as you claim. The studies that I am aware of state none of that. Even a basic Google search of "east midtown rezoning survey" does not show predominantly negative responses. However, let's cherry-pick one example that gets at least close to supporting your opinion which you present as fact:
http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20131017/midtown/majority-of-e-midtown-residents-businesses-oppose-rezoning-poll-says
"MIDTOWN — An informal online poll sent to East Midtown residents and businesses this summer revealed that a majority of respondents opposed the Bloomberg Administration's plan to rezone 73 blocks around Grand Central Terminal. The poll showed that of the 108 residents and businesses who responded, 63 percent said they opposed the proposal, with just 28 percent supporting it. The poll, conducted in August by the East Midtown Partnership, asked, "What do you think of the city's proposal to 'upzone' a large section of East Midtown (including parts of this district), allowing for some more modern, larger commercial buildings but also adding more people to the area and potentially straining mass transit and public spaces?" Of those in favor of the rezoning plan, only 7.4 percent said they strongly supported it."
Now, let's see: does the study make it clear that the participants in the survey do not line the plan because of "large and modern" buildings, or because of "straining mass transit and public spaces" by adding more people, or because of other, unspecified reasons (e.g. generic Not-In-My-Backyard anti-development reaction, opposition to new local competitors, historic preservation, or just because it's a half-baked masterplan with a number of problems)? No, it does not. And it definitely does not say that "the majority of respondents said that they do not want large buildings with Modernist facades". You made a huge logical leap by filling in the gaps with baseless assumptions only to support your claim. If I was asked to take part in the survey at the time, I would have voted against it because it does not provide enough protection to existing pre-war structures on site. I have no issue with increased permissible size, given unparalleled mass transit capacity in the immediate vicinity. However, someone like you would hijack my "no" vote by saying "see? he voted against it, which means that he dislikes large and monotonous buildings". Your argument where "East Midtown Rezoning surveys prove me right" falls absolutely flat, at least in the way you approached it.
And *even if* the poll said exactly what you claimed it would, even its supporters agree that it is not some be-all, end-all fact:
" 'Clearly, the survey shows a level of discontent or, if nothing else, skepticism,' East Midtown Partnership president Rob Byrnes said. 'The city needs to take it seriously.' He emphasized that the East Midtown Partnership has not taken a position on the rezoning plan, and that the partnership's poll, distributed via the organization's website and newsletter, 'was not scientific.' "
"Google things like "billionaire row" and "57th Street" and you will find articles and posts from all sorts of sources that also object to the economic side and what it is doing to a great city."
– Incidentally, if you Google either of those, you would come upon some of my own work on documenting this trend, which I began before 432 Park Avenue even broke ground. Thus, the only factually correct part of your statement is that "you will find articles and posts from all sorts of sources". Heck, you are talking to one of those sources right now. As for the other half – "sources that also object to the economic side and what it is doing to a great city" – well, yeah, some sources support this trend, some object against it (for a great variety of reasons), some have taken middle ground. I explained in my previous posts the economic benefits to the common New Yorker that these ultra-luxury towers provide. The least you could do is return the courtesy by outlining its supposed economic disadvantages, rather than saying "you google it for me". Perhaps you are complaining about general economic inequality in the city? The growing gap between the rich and the poor? It appears as if you are saying that "rich people buying apartments in tall towers is bad for the city's economy, and most sources agree with me". Care to elaborate, or at least explain that I'm misreading your claim? You gave me nothing to work with.
"Take a look at this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nu1suQP1vC4"
Thank you for the memories. I actually remember seeing the flyer for that NIMBY-fest, the one that introduces the video. I would not normally use such disparaging language for a community meeting of concerned citizens, but since those fellows refuse to take the subject seriously, I refuse to take them seriously as well. When I clicked on the link, I was hoping for an actual authority figure, but all I got is a is a comedy routine by a Jane Jacobs wannabe, with all of the fiery passion and love for New York, and none of the grace, manners, nor insight. Busting on the rich and making fun of overheard college kid conversations may get a laugh out of a like-minded crowd, but it does not make her an authority nor a factual source on urban design. One57 looks like a washing machine! Ha-ha-ha! Bloomberg is tall and Jewish, so he cannot be President! Ha-ha-ha! I would be offended by her claim that college campuses cannot possibly work in urban environments, but I do not get offended by those that I cannot take seriously. I understand the jokes, and thanks for providing an alternate viewpoint, but how does it support your view that tall towers for rich people are ruining the city? As I've said in my previous post, skyline-busting towers built for the 1% have been popping up across the city for almost a century, like the example I referred to. Ritz Tower was built for the ultra-rich and stood twice as tall as any other apartment tower on Earth, and it has stood on the same 57th Street and Park Ave intersection that 432 Park sits by since 1925, and it did not destroy New York as we know it, even though critics were describing it in similar terms to how they describe 432 Park today. In her book, "New York, New York," [1993, Henry Holt and Company], Elizabeth Hawes wrote: "At forty-one stories, it was the first residential skyscraper in the city and the tallest such structure in the world. It looked like sheer verticality as it narrowed, like a telescope, up through its setbacks, to a tower in the clouds. It was a 'sky-puncture,' 'a flare,' the critics said, quite overcome, noting that 'even the 'professional' New Yorker, who has ceased to [be] awed by the wonders of the present age, stops to view and contemplate the actual arrival of the home five hundred feet high.' " Of course, the "setback" bit does not apply to 432 Park, but at this point we are discussing public and critic attitudes towards super-tall residentials on 57th and across the city, rather than stylistic differences.
"Universities with on-campus housing survey their students every year to see where they want to live, and we know that the buildings the architecture schools love and promote are almost always the least popular."
As I said before… let's see some studies if you're going to refer to them. I've lived in one of such universities that you've described, and I don't remember any such attitudes or surveys with such results, but even if I did, my anecdotal experience does not count as some sort of "evidence" of a general trend.
"The average person is neither anti-Classical or anti-Modern. What they crave are places that make them feel good. See Charles Montgomery's The Happy City."
– I do not need a book to tell me that human beings would rather live in places that feel good rather than places that feel bad. The problem is that it's debatable what's objectively good and objectively bad, no matter how many urban prophets profess that they found the One Right Path while everyone else is a heretic. Still, thanks for the recommendation. I always look forward to expand my horizons on approaches to urban design and creating the best living spaces that we can. Of course, an open an honest debate between disagreeing parties (like the one you and I are involved in at the moment) is a step in the right direction.
V.O. — Are you saying you are not an architecture student or a recent graduate of an architecture school?
I am not confirming nor denying either of those things because I do not see how my personal education level pertains to whether 432 Park Ave is "giving New Yorkers the finger." Of all the points I have presented for discussion, you chose to address educational background?
Would your objective response to my remarks change whether I told you that I hold a Masters of Architecture degree from Carnegie Mellon, or if I am a high school dropout that has never been employed in my life?
I would appreciate if you spent a moment addressing the contents of my message rather than dissecting my background.
Your educational level is not the point, which is that as a group, architecture students and recent architectural school graduates have distinctly different ideas towards architecture than most people.
You seem to suggest at one point that I was judging architects to have more educated and worthwhile opinions. I was suggesting just the opposite—it's an occupational hazard. Or more accurately, an educational hazard, because many architects become less ideological as they get further away from school. And as I've already said, this is not about age. As a group, architecture students have distinctly different ideas about architecture than their peers and friends. That is not praising their learning, but lamenting it. Architecture is a public art, but the academy makes in increasingly esoteric.
My obviously subjective opinion, based on talking to a number of New Yorkers, is that perhaps as many as three-quarters of New Yorker feel that 432 Park is giving the city the finger. My small but diverse sample was actually unanimous in agreeing. And look at what uncontroversial Wall Street Journal columnist Ralph Gardner, Jr. wrote: "Here's how out-sized 432 Park is: It makes One57, which previously appeared as if it was giving Central Park the finger, appear modest, even demure, by comparison." ("When Size Really Matters," http://www.ralphgardner.com/articles/column/) It's mainly certain architectural types that don't see the these invading towers as most of the world does.
John Massengale AIA
I agree with you John – that building is very very average and no where near the quality of the one it replaced. Just looks very typical of the anonymous 'anywhere' high rise that are regrettably eroding city character and identity across the globe.
Lynn Ellsworth says:
Well done, well said, and I agree. The comments are fascinating. However, I am not surprised at the irrational and ranting hostility that your post has generated from the likes of the person posting as "V.O.". There are a lot of vested interests in building these kind of over scaled towers. Those interests will push back hard at anyone who disagrees with their project of running amok in New York for their own selfish gains.
However, I am glad people are discussing the issue of property taxes. If it is true that the city gets 42% of its revenue as property taxes (and we should also ask, what percentage of expenditures are on public sector wages and pension obligations?), we are facing a huge problem as a democratic society. City government in such a revenue situation cannot represent the interests of citizens, in any normal sense. Instead, it must feed its own hunger for revenue, a self-interest that superficially allies city government with that of "Big Real Estate" rather than "ordinary" residents. However, that alliance represents a sick cycle that is not sustainable. For example, if we keep building these towers, we will without question destroy what makes New York unique (which is not skyscrapers as the Ideologues of Big Real Estate would have it) and we will see a retreat from the city, and an eventual erosion of those tax revenues as the city becomes more and more unliveable. The solution is a more diversified tax base, a re-industrialization policy, and a larger project that would require reform of our corporate tax structure and the reining in very powerful interests. Take the case of Google. Are they paying their fair share of taxes? I think not. We can see that through the lens of the financing problem of a public good like Hudson River Park. Big Real Estate (like Durst) would like to create a special tax zone from Chambers to 59th street three blocks in (but exempting Google headquarters in Chelsea). All the residents in that "three blocks from the river" zone have been asked to pay a special tax to maintain that very expensive and overbuilt park, one that is by law a statewide public good. It was a project to treat the local residents as tax serfs, one that would have allowed Big Real Estate to overbuild all along the Hudson. The proposal was beaten back, (for the time being). But why was Google exempted from the proposed tax zone? Google has been famous (in the New York Times) for using the Double Dutch/Irish tax evasion scheme to prevent billions of dollars in profit from being repatriated to the United States – where it would be subject to government taxation. A tiny bit of taxes on those profits would easily finance Hudson River Park's $250 million deficit. But those profits are not even part of the public discussion. Hence the City is forced to retreat to the nastier game of raising property taxes one way or another.
More on New York towers: http://blog.massengale.com/2014/10/29/shanghaied/
Pingback: The Good Kind, and the Other Kind » There are two types of architecture—good architecture, and the other kind
Pingback: The middle finger | Ben Bansal
Wow! What a harsh bunch commenting here.You are entitled to your opinion which I for one share. I'm not an architect or urban planner – just a regular person who appreciates historic and/or more traditional architecture and would much prefer coming to NYC to see the building that was torn down. That tower looks like something my son made in Minecraft.
I have admired many buildings from around the world. I am not an architect but 432 Park Avenue is a mistake on the NYC skyline with its uninteresting and bland exterior through to the missing windows on floors to deal with the wind on a building that is not designed to deal with its height and surrounding environment. Perhaps any architecture that provokes a reaction is still a good thing but this building saddens me.
Honestly…I'm not an architect, but I know many, most of which should be called "architects" (just because you are one doesnt mean you are the best or can convince people to accept you new age concepts..), anyway I find it pretty evident that this is arguably the ugliest skyscraper ever built…
Ignatz says:
I think this article is great. I have no idea how anyone with an ounce of taste can consider this anything but an eyesore. It looks like shit. 20 years from now, it will look like shit gone to seed.
Its terrible look aside, I'd hate to be inside during a strong wind storm. This is one of those rare but true cases where I'd actually have to be paid – a lot – to live in that building.


Education within language technology/computational linguistics is divided into undergraduate studies and graduate studies. Undergraduate studies at Swedish universities are based on a system of credit points, where one credit point corresponds to one week of full time study, i.e. 40 hours a week. 20 credit points are equivalent to one semester. The academic year consists of two semesters of 20 weeks each: the autumn semester, which runs from the end of August to mid-January, and the spring semester, which runs from mid-January to the beginning of June.
The nominal time for a doctoral degree in Sweden is four years (160 credit points) and for a licentiate degree two years (80 credit points). Since many graduate students spend 20 per cent of their time on teaching, it normally takes about two and a half years for a licentiate degree and about five years for a doctoral degree.


Are you a recent design graduate looking to join a firm with a solid project history that incorporates cutting edge design with innovation and sustainability?
With an emphasis on high-performance design, RB+B Architects designs spaces that are vibrant, sustainable, and comfortable for those who inhabit them. Our collaborative design process engages each client personally, centers on the discovery of creative solutions, and results in Design Confidence®: which is the assurance our clients have that the design process is inclusive and their building will be a reflection of what makes them unique. Our projects range from craft breweries to K-12 schools and have received recognition at the local, state and national levels for their creativity and positive impact on communities.
RB+B's staff has remained around 20 in size for a decade, which is large enough to take on complex, high profile projects yet small enough that each member of the design team works closely with one another. Our firm encourages a relaxed but active working environment that underscores a work hard/play hard mentality: Principals to Interns enjoy in-office collaborative charrettes, Friday morning break with design chats, and collaborative discussions to assist in our continuing education. When the workday is over, members of our team find our "footings" in climbing Fourteeners, skiing, biking, running, roller and ice skating, playing hockey, and enjoying the Fort Collins craft beer scene.
We are unique in our staff and office culture by bringing a "family" attitude to the office both during the workday and after hours. We value integrity, quality, and lasting relationships, extending those same values into all of our projects. RB+B is known for consistently exceeding client expectations and setting a new standard for how architectural services are delivered. We focus on fostering a work environment that encourages individuals to excel and develop their own professional skill sets as well.
The ideal candidate for this job has a purposeful attitude with a regard for the details. They are confident in their design pursuits, and motivated with a passion for creative and innovative design. They find communication and open collaboration a staple for good design, and use effective time management skills to organize their work.
If you enjoy working with dynamic and talented team members who care about sustainability and positively serving communities through architecture, send jniemann@rbbarchitects.com your resume and portfolio. Tell us why you think you'd be a great fit! We'd love to consider you for our team.
Someone who likes to collaborate and have fun!


text:
The Jonas Brothers announce their first tour in almost a decade
Get ready for nostalgia overload. The Jonas Brothers are going on tour.
The sibling trio on Wednesday announced a 40-date North American tour, their first in nearly a decade.
The Happiness Begins tour will kick off August 7 in Miami, two months after the release of the Jo Bros' highly anticipated album, "Happiness Begins."
"The moment we've all been waiting for... The #HappinessBeginsTour is coming to a city near YOU," the brothers tweeted .
The tour, which also features Bebe Rexha and Jordan McGraw, will stop in Atlanta, New York, Toronto, Dallas, among many other cities, before wrapping up in Los Angeles on October 20. Tickets go on pre-sale May 7 .
Nick, Kevin and Joe Jonas surprised fans last week with the announcement of their new album. The Jonas Brothers broke up in 2013, citing a "deep rift" after a disagreement over the band's musical direction .
But the Grammy-nominated group's new song "Sucker" — which topped the Billboard Hot 100 — has already made fans reminisce about the days when the brothers were making hits like "Burnin' Up," "Year 3000" and "S.O.S."
All three brothers have seen big changes in their personal lives since their last tour in 2010. Nick Jonas married actress Priyanka Chopra last year, while Joe Jonas is engaged to "Game of Thrones" starlet Sophie Turner. Kevin Jonas, the oldest brother, and his wife have since welcomed two daughters.
The Jonas Brothers make their first awards-show performance together in 10 years tonight at the 2019 Billboard Music Awards .


text:
Explore Abroad
Choose Texas
Global Learning On Campus
Study English
Immigration Advising
Global Engagement Opportunities
Department and Staff Resources
Global Alumni Relations
Global Programs and Innovation
International Education Week
Mexico Global Gateway
Request a Delegation Visit
About Texas Global
Senior Vice Provost Welcome
Global Engagement & Strategy
Open add menu
Texas Global partners with faculty, departments, colleges and schools across the university to advance UT Austin's mission and enhance its international reputation.
Global Connections on Campus
The depth and scope of UT's global academics are evident in the vast network of centers, programs and organizations dedicated to international scholarship, research, creative activity and teaching.
Global Research and Creative Activity
UT faculty engage in research and creative activities on every continent, advancing UT Austin's academic mission and global impact.
Global Risk and Safety
Inaugural UT International Education Fee Scholarship Recipient Graduates with Skills to Change the World
Suvi Bhalgat
Alumna Shania Robinson is ready to change the world. As the first UT student to receive the International Education Fee Scholarship, she has made the most of her four years on the Forty Acres, giving back to Austin communities, supporting Caribbean students on campus and engaging with the numerous global opportunities UT has to offer.
Following her graduation in May 2021, Robinson will begin her new job as a business analyst for McKinsey & Company with two degrees in hand: one in finance from the McCombs School of Business and the other in international relations and global studies from the College of Liberal Arts.
Robinson is from San Fernando, Trinidad and Tobago, and chose UT Austin to gain skills and knowledge to benefit her community. Growing up, she always felt the Lone Star State was her second home. She moved around between San Fernando and wherever her father's work took them in Texas. Her elder siblings attended Texas public universities, so it made sense for Robinson to follow in their footsteps and go to Texas, too. Of the universities she applied to, Robinson was most drawn to UT because of its location as well as the McCombs School of Business' prestigious rankings.
After her acceptance into the university, Robinson was concerned about tuition and applied to the International Education Fee Scholarship, a highly competitive award covering up to four years of tuition and related expenses on the Forty Acres. The scholarship is awarded annually to one incoming international freshman facing financial hardships, allowing them to focus on studies instead of constantly worrying about money.
Initially, Robinson did not feel very confident in her chances of earning the award but decided to give it her best shot. In her words, "why not?"
"The scholarship application was an opportunity to showcase my aspiration for my college degree or my university experience," she said. "That was an intrinsic reflection exercise for me. There is really no downside to applying, and of course, financial aid is incredible."
Robinson was the first Longhorn selected to receive the award, marking the first time the International Education Fee was used to fund four years of tuition for an international student at UT.
In her sophomore year, Robinson chose her concentration in finance and says the most rewarding decision she made at UT is adding her second major in international relations and global studies (IRG) in the College of Liberal Arts. The hard work has been worth it as she has been able to go in-depth into two different disciplines she feels passionate about.
"I liked both majors desperately," she said. "Finance is a very practical major: you can see it everywhere, it's relevant everywhere, and it provides some options in terms of a stable career path. IRG is really what I'm interested in. Thinking about, why is the world the way that the world is, how can we change the world and was it always like this? The intellectual freedom of IRG really appealed to me. In just pursuing one path, I felt I would have lost something."
As part of her IRG degree plan, Robinson spent a Maymester in Santiago, Chile where she took an introductory course and toured various local government and international organization offices, including the region's World Bank Office, the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, and El Museo de la Memoria y Los Derechos Humanos. Her favorite activity was exploring Valparaiso, Chile, and the many murals that adorn the creative city's walls.
Robinson says the most difficult part of the immersive program was navigating the language barrier, especially because she sometimes felt intimidated by the number of fluent Spanish speakers in her program. However, these types of challenging experiences were what she wanted from her university experience.
"I knew that I wanted to grow and mature intellectually," Robinson said. "I wanted to push myself. I wanted to have certain experiences, and I really do think I've been able to accomplish all of that."
One of Robinson's goals at UT was to explore all of the avenues available to her in and out of the McCombs School.
Robinson found a community on campus in the Caribbean Student Association. The group regularly held talks on pressing issues facing their home region, such as climate change and evolving industry practices. She says the club aims to build a community for students like her as well as others interested in the culture, since Austin does not have a large Caribbean population.
After taking her freshman year to find clubs and activities outside of the McCombs School, including adding her IRG major, Robinson realized she needed to start taking full advantage of the business school.
"The opportunities McCombs presents are a bit insane when you think about how well McCombs can set you up if you put in the time and the work to utilize those resources," she said. "I was looking for an organization that would develop my skills for my college and professional career moving forward as well as something I was genuinely interested in so I would like the work I was doing and the people I was working with."
One of the student organizations that spoke to Robinson and aligned with her values was Texas CYC, a student-led organization that helps local nonprofits and small businesses grow by providing free consulting services.
"Right away, the emphasis was on service and really giving back to your community," she said. "Everyone was so intelligent, so driven in their own ways, but also very down to earth. Everyone brought something new to the organization: a different perspective, a different background, different interests."
She says the organization introduced her to people who cared about the same things she did.
"I found people who were thinking about big picture systemic issues but also people who shared my interests like football, European football; people who also had parents who were moving all over as well; people who had crazy ambitions and were unlimited and what they wanted to do with their life," she said. "That grounded me and gave me the confidence to go on to pursue other opportunities."
These experiences with her student organizations helped Robinson tap into her passions for solving climate change, food insecurity and resource scarcity. Furthermore, they have helped her land a post-graduation offer at McKinsey & Company as a general business analyst this coming fall.
In this job, she hopes to specialize in the public and social sectors.
"McKinsey & Company offers you the latitude to build your own career and pursuing projects that you're most passionate about," she said. "I am excited for the opportunity to engage in the social sector work, like their public policy process, social equality projects, sustainability functions and working to make the world as simple as possible."
As someone who was intimidated by the scholarship's selectiveness four years ago, Robinson encourages incoming students to apply to the International Education Fee Scholarship, no matter how daunting it may seem.
"Go for it," she said. "It is incredibly impressive that you were admitted to UT because they admit very few international applicants, so have the confidence in yourself and that you deserve to be here."
When applying to awards like the International Education Fee Scholarship, she suggests students take a moment to think about what they want from their university experience.
"Try your best to articulate and demonstrate that, while you may be one out of 50,000 students, you are going to make an impact on this institution," she said. "As long as you have that conviction in yourself, have that confidence, ambition and desire to accomplish those things and convey that, you have a solid shot. Apply, because there is nothing to lose."
View the Texas Global Newsroom
Read through a collection of stories featuring UT's globally engaged faculty, students, alumni and programs.
For media inquiries, email global@austin.utexas.edu
Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies Leads Campus Response to War on Ukraine
International Graduates Celebrate After Unprecedented College Experience
Ukrainian Scholars Offered Temporary Faculty Spots on the Forty Acres
2400 Nueces Street
8 a.m. – 5 p.m.,
8 a.m. – 2 p.m.
Information for Departments
International Travel Policies


text:
Station Assenede was een spoorwegstation langs de spoorlijn spoorlijn 55A (Zelzate - Eeklo) in de gemeente Assenede. Het station is nog tot 1976 gebruikt als goederenstation met verbinding naar Zelzate. Daarmee is station Assenede het langst gebruikte station op spoorlijn 55A. Inmiddels is op de oude spoorwegbedding een fietspad aangelegd.

Na de sluiting van het station is het gebouw gesloopt om plaats te maken voor een nieuwbouw (welke qua bouwstijl een beetje aan een station doet denken). De Post heeft hier tot het begin van de 21e eeuw betrekking in genomen. Inmiddels zijn ook zij verhuisd en werd er een huisartsenpraktijk in gevestigd.

Assenede
Assenede


Oldham Under 16,s produced a 5 star display Vs Leyland in the Northwest National qualifying league. Oldham began the game with real intent and quickly set the pace of the game, Leyland new they were in for a tough time after the first few minutes. Oldham's starting 7 of; Susie Armstrong, Elinor Hull, Ellie Fitzhugh, Morgan Evans, Jasmine Newell, Amelia Hall and Lucy Stevenson ensured Leyland spent most of the first quarter chasing shadows. As Oldham continually thwarted any Leyland attacks they made no such mistakes themselves with both Amelia Hall (GA) and Lucy Stevenson (GS) ending the first quarter with 100% shooting accuracy; the 1st qt ended 22 – 4.
Quarter 3 and 4 proved just how much Oldham wanted this win with some statistics that had head coach Pam Hazleton praising her player's attitudes and commitment throughout the game. The game finished Oldham 82 Leyland 17. Oldham's shooters had world class statistics that goes to show hard work and training pays off.
The whole team contributed to the most impressive statistic of them all and shows the team is gearing up nicely as they look towards the Northwest finals in March. Oldham turned the ball over 15 times and on every occasion they scored. Head coach Pam Hazelton stated she had never seen that level of conversion before.
Oldham now look forward to their next game Vs Didsbury at the end of February.


text:
Q: Alternative for float on moving banner I'm in the process of making all my containers stay "fullsized" and positioned correctly, when the viewport is smaller than the resolution of the website.
So far everything has gone easy, except for the navbar.
On resize of window, the navbars text moves.
It's currently held in place with float: right;
is there an alternative to float that will work in this instance?
I tried defining left and right margins, but the text doesn't stay in a straight line.
Website in question is: njdartistics.com

@charset "utf-8";
/* CSS Document */

@font-face {
    font-family: 'Bebas';
    src: url(Website%20Specific%20Resources/BEBAS.TTF)
}

body {
 background-image:url(Website%20Specific%20Resources/Background.png);

 width:1920px;
 margin: auto;
}

.outercontainer{
      height:100%;
      width:100%
}

.container {
 width:960px;
 margin: 0 auto;
  border-left:solid #000;
  border-right:solid #000;
background-color:#AAADAD;

}

.header {
 background-image:url(Website%20Specific%20Resources/New_Banner_.png);
 height: 300px;
 width: 100%;
 top: 0;
 position: fixed;
}

A {
 text-decoration:none;
 font-family: "bebas";
 color: #fff;

}

li {
 list-style:none;
 float:left;
 padding-right:50px;
 margin-left:25px;
 padding-top:15px;
 font-size:24px;

}

.nav {
 float: inherit;
 position: absolute;
}
.content {
font-family: "bebas";
width: 900px;
background-color:#AAADAD;

}

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<title>Index</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="styles.css">

Home

About  Us

Products

Gallery

Contact  Us

asdasdasdasdaf

asdasdasdasdafasdasdasdasdafasdasdasdasdafasdasdasdasdafasdasda

sdasdafasdasdasdasdafasdasdasdasdafasdasdasdasdafasdasdasdasdafasdasdasdasdaf

Thanks in advance.

A: As I'm understanding this, you want the navbar text responsive and to stay all on one line, correct?
To start, try changing the following css to something like this:
body {
background-image:url(Website%20Specific%20Resources/Background.png);
font: 100%/1.5 serif; /* 16px */
width:1920px;
margin: auto;
}

li {
list-style:none;
float:left;
font-size:1.5em;
font-size:3vw;
padding:0 1%;
width:15%;
}

.nav {
float: inherit;
position: absolute;
width:100%;
}

Using a combination of em and vw handles the font-size (but it should be noted that vw, or viewport width, doesn't work in every browser (see here). For the browsers that don't like it, em can attempt to handle it by basing its size on whatever font size you set  for the body.
Alternatively (or, really, in addition--wrangle it as you please), you can use a media query to handle smaller viewport/screen sizes when it comes to the font-size. For example:
 @media (max-width: 600px) {
    body { font: 80%; }
}

You can size up or down based on your needs. If you set it on the body, you don't have to rewrite the li or nav css, as the em units will respond accordingly. I would avoid setting font-size in anything BUT em, as px doesn't have much flexibility.
That said, after alllll this, you really should set different breakpoints for mobile devices to, for example, stack the menu or semi-hide it with the hamburger menu icon, as the text will get very, very, very small otherwise.

A: header {
    background-image:url(Website%20Specific%20Resources/New_Banner_.png);
    height: 300px;
    width: 1920px;
    top: 0;
    position: fixed;
}
This was the issue. Width was 100% instead of a fixed resolution.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


The AutoPilot Mach 3 Computerized system is Innova Longarm's exclusive robotic longarm system. Regardless if you are quilting edge to edge patterns for efficientcy, or precision heirloom quilting, AutoPilot has the tools necessary to work precisely and efficiently. Each tool has a built in help menu for easy use and quick learning. Options can be hidden when they are not needed, making the screen sleek and easy to use. Exclusive Lightning Stitch integration puts the controls literally at your fingertips. With our steel reinforced belts and quick release system you will have precise computerized stitching and switch easily to beautiful hand guided quilting.
All Innova AutoPilot machines include an extra day of custom quilting training. Each student leaves class able to create a wholecloth quilt like the one pictured here.
Watch the Innova with AutoPilot Mach 3 stitch over these layers perfectly. Even we were amazed!


text:
2084 results for New York
Monocle Minute
Special episodes
New York used to be such an easy city to crack for the visitor. Not only was there that simple-to-master grid of streets but, really, who wanted to stray from Manhattan? Today, while that stretch from Wall Street to the…
Travel / Americas
The New York Auto Show doesn't quite attract the media attention of the season-opener in Detroit, but for consumers it's by far the bigger event. Monocle looks at the role of the regional auto show in car manufacturer's…
Business / Transport
New York: The Monocle Travel Guide
New York can easily live up to its movie-star good looks but it can be a city that surprises, too. Monocle has had a bureau in New York since its launch in 2007 and this has made us passionate about this city and its amb…
Edits / Travel
Alexandra Champalimaud's interior-design firm has left its mark on the world's finest hotels.
Business / Arts
My last meal: Alice Waters
Food is an entire philosophy for Alice Waters, founder of restaurant Chez Panisse in Berkeley, California. She would choose to dine with family for her hypothetical last meal, and on the menu would be fresh produce bought…
Edits / Food & Drink
Cogan's run
Andrew Cogan, CEO of design firm Knoll, has made some hard decisions (letting a fifth of his staff go) while building a loyal team. His management style sees him choosing face-to-face over Skype and Jay-Z over management…
Business / Architecture
Living the art
New York-based Serbian performance artist Marina Abramovic´ is not about 'easy' art. Preparations for her recent show involved her and 39 people living in a barn with no food and no talking for three days. Here she explains…
Andaz 5th Avenue
The latest opening in Hyatt's chain of boutique hotels is a rare beast – a friendly and relaxing NYC establishment where even native New Yorkers will be able to experience a fresh take on their city.
Edits / Hospitality
The Monocle Travel Guide, New York
The Monocle Travel Guide series cuts through the hype and offers you real experiences, which – as this is New York – aren't hard to come by.
Print / Travel guides
On display: New Museum
The New Museum on Manhattan's Lower East Side has been championing the contemporary since its inception in 1977. We meet the team dedicated to bringing new artists to wider attention.
Nation statement
Artist Matthew Day Jackson's work is influenced by everything from terrorism to the space race. Following a period of intense creative activity Jackson's new still-life work has come to focus on empires, tackling issues…
Art on show
The distinct portraiture of American painter and sculptor Eric Fischl helped define US art during the 1970s and 1980s by defying concepts, fads and fashions. Here he talks about a new series inspired by art fairs and his…
Safe and sound?
The UN Security Council is the iconic roundtable heart of diplomacy that decides when to act on some of the globe's most pressing issues. But is the historic body still fit for purpose? We paid a visit to its HQ to find out…
Affairs / Diplomacy
When Monocle published a lighthearted idea encouraging Brazil, Sweden and Turkey to work together, its message reached their capitals. We brought together the three foreign ministers for this issue's round table series.
Affairs / Government
Within the monolithic UN Headquarters there's a chamber that is being restored to its former retro glory. It was originally designed by the Danish architect Finn Juhl and now, in a brave move, it's being put back to exactly…
Design / Architecture
Husband-and-wife team Martine and Prosper Assouline have built their luxury publishing house by doing what feels natural. Since starting in their Paris apartment nearly 20 years ago, Assouline is now a US-based market…
Business / Media
Results for 'New York '
Monocle on Design