January 11, 2007
Broken Angel Solution: Condos
Wow. The NY Times reports that Broken Angel owners Arthur and Cindy Wood have agreed to (1) dismantle part of the roof at 4 Downing Street and (2) to "share ownership [of the building] with a local developer, Shahn Andersen, who would turn most of the building into condominiums." Broken Angel would have living and studio for the Woods, plus "some form of community space."
While Arthur Wood, who designed the building, would have rather kept the house himself, it's a great story about members of the community trying to help the Woods. City Councilwoman Letitia James who is also a lawyer represented the Woods in their case; Pratt Institute teacher Brent Porter, who calls the Woods' creation "outsider art, and his students have been working to "prove that the house was structurally sound"; neighbor Vladimir J. Charles helped convert Arthur Wood's designs "into digital architectural plans that comply with building codes." And Arthur Wood ultimately wanted to make sure the building wouldn't be totally torn down, telling the Times, "I have to do something. Everything I own is there: paintings, thousands of dollars worth of equipment."
What do you think of Broken Angel going condo? Here are our posts on Broken Angel and here's a NY Times slideshow of the building.
| 
Heartbreaking on so many levels.
How does any of this make sense?!
dave chapelle's gonna be so sad!
dave chapelle doesn't care
....and, another one bites the dust.
Okay, gonna TRY and not think of this as a loss and more like a message to developers that they can think outside of the Tribeca/Wall Street labrat boxes.
....I'm gonna try.
VideoDame
I live at Grand and Greene (can see the BAH from our roof) and honestly, apart from the "honor" of living in what was once a neighborhood landmark, I'd hate to live at the Broken Angel House.
It's trapped in an L shaped corner street and is seems a total hassle to get to. I remember even trudging to the Salvation Army on that same block is a march from any nearby bus or subway stop.
But people will buy anything if they have the money.
your link to the NYT slideshow needs an "h," right now it starts with "ttp."
Why is this a "loss"? Because this building, which was already notable on its own, original architectural merits has been turned into a mirrored gazebo playhouse for burnt LSD heads? Sorry, dude, but you can't just nail some shit to your house. Even if you're, like, totally conked. What if I just destroyed my fine example of fin de siecle public architecture (in the interest of turning it into a rathole in which my hippie wife and I could burrow and horde)?
Anyway, Dave Chappelle has already stated his interest in hosting a benefit concert to "save" the house. And someone with the sense that Arthur Wood lacks (like Brett Porter) will help preserve this building in a way that actually pays lip service to obedience of civil law and building codes. Because, like, even if you're an artist, you're not licensed to make your building structurally unsound.
Sorry, but I have to agree with John Haifz. Call me a reactionary, tasteless, Gehry-hating Phillistine, but from what I can see, what's visible of the original building looks much better than what's been grafted onto it over the years. It looks like nothing so much as one of those ratty, makeshift treehouses you often see kids meeting in in the movies.
The original building, and indeed much of that neighborhood, was abandoned and uncared for when Wood began his project. Who knows if it would have survived to this day at all. He created something unique and beautiful, and like much of the creativity in New York, it's soon to be sapped from the landscape.
Errr...anyone ever heard of Antoni Gaudi? If not take a Google at some of his apartment buildings. If the shared solution works for the Woods its great. NB: noticing "hippy" is the new (insert your least favorite slur word). What does that mean? You're probably talking about your parents "dude".
sorry, the hippie comment was in a previous BA post.