• Home /
  • Boogie Beat /
  • Write Margaret Chin to Uphold Landmark Status for 135 Bowery

Write Margaret Chin to Uphold Landmark Status for 135 Bowery

Posted on: August 23rd, 2011 by

The battle lines are drawn. As usual, preservation is pitted against gentrification.  That’s how countless historic structures have already fallen on the Bowery, including 35 Cooper Square.  With 135 Bowery already landmarked, its owner is gunning to overturn the ruling by appealing City Council.  Nothing will happen here without a fight. For starters, the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors recently drafted a petition and collected 250 signatures.

And thanks to Boogie reader Ralph Lewis, resident of the similarly threatened 206 Bowery, we now have some additional ammunition. He drafted the following letter for you to send to Council Member Margaret Chin, saying “Reversing that [decision] by a City Council vote would piss off the LPC, devastating future preservation on the Bowery.”  See below:

Councilmember Margaret Chin
New York City Council District #1
Chatham Green, 165 Park Row, Suite #11
New York, New York 10038
email:  chin@council.nyc.gov

Re:   Landmark Designation of 135 Bowery

Dear Councilmember Chin:

As a local resident who cares deeply about the unique and indispensable history of the legendary Bowery, I write to congratulate you and express my gratitude for your efforts to get 135 Bowery designated a historic landmark. I was extremely gratified to learn that the Landmarks Preservation Commission recently and overwhelmingly voted in favor of this rare Federal-style row house.

I understand that the next step is for the City Council to approve this designation, and that the full Council vote will follow your lead as the property’s representing Member. I am a registered voter in this district, and I fully support and encourage you to affirm the LPC’s landmark designation of 135 Bowery.

With the rapid development currently taking hold on the Bowery, the community is grateful to you for seeing that our history is preserved. Adding 135 to over a dozen Bowery landmarks builds on a historic district that’s based on architecture, education, diversity, and cultural significance and will protect the low-rise neighborhood and immigrant community threatened by encroaching gentrification.

The recent and unfortunate destruction of the Federal-style house at 35 Cooper Square has rallied the local residents who are gravely concerned about preserving the remaining Bowery houses. In this case, having passed the LPC’s incredibly stringent process, 135 Bowery has earned the immediate attention of preservation laws to ensure its survival. Thank you for your past support of this irreplaceable house, and I look forward to your affirmation of its landmark designation.

Sincerely,

  • Inarmsway

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    The block between Broome and Grand, on which this important Federal house stands is almost completely as it was at the end of the 19th century. Somehow this small  stretch of the Bowery remained untouched by the hand of the 20th century and is the only block on this vitally important Great American thoroughfair where one can experience this historical behemoth of a road almost entirely intact as it was in the days when the Bowery was one of the worlds great destinations for it’s concert halls, museums, beer gardens and countless other amusements. 
    Finally after 100 years of being forgotten by world travelers and NY residents, they are coming back, and rediscovering the Bowery. The sidewalks are filled with visitors speaking as many languages as one would hear there in 1870. Tour buses cruse it nightly rolling up the same course  the 3rd Ave line horse-drawn trolleys did during the Civil War. Local residents take leisurely walks down the the lower Bowery because it is one of the few places one can feel a visceral connection to our epic past without passing a corporate coffee chain or luxury condo development to pull them back into 21st century.
    Places like this special block are rare in modern NYC and are culturally and economically essential to our city.  Multitudes of visitors from around the world come here to see an authentic slice of our ledgendary city and this block is exactally that. The preservation of this house is utterly important in preserving this sliver pf the bowery forgotten by the modern age. Please respect and defend the interests of the majority of residents of this community and not those of an off shore bank. The right thing has been done in protecting this historic building and your constituents and neighbors expect that you will diligently work to uphold the Landmark designation of 135 Bowery.

    The block between Broome and Grand, on which this important Federal house stands is almost completely as it was at the end of the 19th century. Somehow this small  stretch of the Bowery remained untouched by the hand of the 20th century and is the only block on this vitally important Great American thoroughfair where one can experience this historical behemoth of a road almost entirely intact as it was in the days when the Bowery was one of the worlds great destinations for it’s concert halls, museums, beer gardens and countless other amusements. 
    Finally after 100 years of being forgotten by world travelers and NY residents, they are coming back, and rediscovering the Bowery. The sidewalks are filled with visitors speaking as many languages as one would hear there in 1870. Tour buses cruse it nightly rolling up the same course  the 3rd Ave line horse-drawn trolleys did during the Civil War. Local residents take leisurely walks down the the lower Bowery because it is one of the few places one can feel a visceral connection to our epic past without passing a corporate coffee chain or luxury condo development to pull them back into 21st century.
    Places like this special block are rare in modern NYC and are culturally and economically essential to our city.  Multitudes of visitors from around the world come here to see an authentic slice of our ledgendary city and this block is exactally that. The preservation of this house is utterly important in preserving this sliver pf the bowery forgotten by the modern age. Please respect and defend the interests of the majority of residents of this community and not those of an off shore bank. The right thing has been done in protecting this historic building and your constituents and neighbors expect that you will diligently defend our interests.

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

  • Sallysonegun

    Dear Councilwoman Chin,

    I am a member of the Bowery Alliance of Neighbors, and I did the research on this house, and other houses on the Bowery. It is remarkable that this house still stands, and it deserves to continue to stand in all its glory of almost 200 years. The house was originally owned by John Hardenbrook. The Hardenbrook family was one of the Bowery, and Lower Manhattan area’s oldest families. I have found drawings of other Hardenbrook family members in the Valentine Manuals. 
     One, painstakingly thing I do when I research a building is to read “The Minutes of the Common Council” various dates-I usually start for info on Bowery buildings in the late 1700′s. Reading the minutes is a painfully long process, but it can supply much needed information about the state and conditions of things in a given area-in this case, the Bowery. The Hardenbrook family was quite active with the Common Council and the Hardenbrook family name is mentioned often, and family members were members of the Common Council, which was a much smaller version of our City Council today. At the time 135 Bowery was built, these were the concerns of the Common Council concerning the Bowery: Wells needed permission to be dug, the street needed permission to be paved, lamps needed to be lit, all this done at the personal expense of residents, that then went to the Common Council for reimbursement. Rope walks ran off of Bowery-(you needed a stretch of land to make ropes), pigs ran freely and ordinances needed to be made to control this. Much of the Bowery was still gardens or farmed land, the common lands being sold-this is what John Hardenbrook bought. He first built his soap and candle making factory, then later his home at 135 Bowery. Houses were built and raised by the area people-this was not a development company coming in, these houses are our Vernacular buildings of NYC. John Hardenbrook’s profession is called a Tallow Chandler. Tallow comes from the fat of beef-the cattle yards close by at Canal (then Pump) Street, that were next to the Bull’s Head Tavern. Now we’re putting a picture into place. The Federal Houses at 134/136 Bowery(recently rejected by the LPC-altered fronts, which are glued on Marble on the first story), were built it the late 1790′s, by the Delapleine family, and 140 Bowery, another Federal Style, turn of the 19th century, was part of the Post Family, who had a paint business, and I’ve recently discovered drawings of the Post Paint Business, established in 1754, at an Elizabeth Street location in 1805. This too was rejected due to an added front. All of these are removable additions. This area of the Bowery was also a(“Butcher’s row”). The Delapleine family were Butchers, and although we see the Post family as having a paint business, we also have the Post Family as Butchers. Probably all were related. The butchers made their homes on Bowery because they were near the Cattle Yards. Minutes of the Common Council sees them vying for market space at Fly Market, Washington Market, etc. etc.. So there were butchers, tallow chandlers, cattle markets, and also saddlers, and the related lists of professions went on and on. As more people moved in-at this time most were still Row Houses, other professions followed to serve the people that now resided on Bowery, and passed through the Bowery, as it was a very important thoroughfare. Taverns and Oyster Houses began to be established on the Bowery at this time, but also stores and businesses that served its new residents were also established at this time.

    This is history as it spans 200 years. There was an established City Council back then that was getting the Bowery established. It is remarkable that houses from this time period still stand. to demolish them to me would be an un-reversible act, and blatant destruction of history that is only protected by a decision by the Landmark Commission of NYC. There was a vote passed by the LPC that rendered 135 Bowery a NYC Landmark. As a Councilmember, please uphold this decision that you recently spoke in favor of to the LPC, which we gratefully acknowledge that you put in to motion.

    There are houses that still stand on Bowery that have witnessed all of its changes and still stand.  Our civic duty is to protect and preserve these houses. Demolition and development should not even enter in to the vocabulary or discussion of these buildings-in particular, in this case 135 Bowery.

    I understand you will vote soon on the City Council approval of the Landmark status of 135 Bowery. I urge you to vote is favor of designation. We can never bring back history once its been demolished, but i’m sure we can always find a vacant lot or something for construction of “affordable office space”.The demolition of Historic Buildings should never be coupled with “affordable space”-in this case “affordable office space”. Destroy forever early NYC HIstory, that coupled with history of the NYC Council Members, over “Bank affordable office space” is trading history for …fill in the Blanks…

    Do the right thing 
    Councilmember  Margaret Chin, We’re Counting on You!!
     

Recent Stories

St. Jerome’s on Rivington is Officially Dead
Featured Food

St. Jerome’s on Rivington is Officially Dead

Anthropologie Facade Revealed at 250 Bowery, Opening Delayed
Fashion

Anthropologie Facade Revealed at 250 Bowery, Opening Delayed

Sticker Campaign Pokes Fun at Facebook Privacy
Art

Sticker Campaign Pokes Fun at Facebook Privacy

MOSCOT Opens New Orchard Street Flagship
Fashion

MOSCOT Opens New Orchard Street Flagship

Soha’s Leather Calling it Quits on Orchard
Real Estate

Soha’s Leather Calling it Quits on Orchard

Mars Bar Memories: The Diet Coke and Basement Dweller
Featured Food

Mars Bar Memories: The Diet Coke and Basement Dweller

Post-Punk Comic Book Stars
Art Featured

Post-Punk Comic Book Stars

Report: Turmoil at the Lower East Side Tenement Museum
Featured Real Estate

Report: Turmoil at the Lower East Side Tenement Museum

Delivery Day at Paulaner Brauhaus on the Bowery
Food

Delivery Day at Paulaner Brauhaus on the Bowery

[Photo: Manhattan Portage]
Fashion

Manhattan Portage Taps Keith Haring for 30th Anniversary Line