Desperately Seeking Doris -- The Remaking of Duke Farms

South Gate Entrance, Duke Farms, Hillsborough, NJ

Duke Farms is the 2,740-acre former estate of Doris Duke (1912-1993), the one-time “richest woman in the world.” It has been reincarnated by the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation as a nature preserve and exemplar of sustainability, ostensibly in accordance with her testamentary wishes. It opened to the public in the May 2012, but not without controversy.

One sultry, late-summer morning some years ago, a friend and I set out on a bike ride in Somerset County, New Jersey. Our trip this time took us along the South Branch of the Raritan River, where we were ferreting out historic 19^th C. bridges in an area known for its exciting examples. (That day, we were on a quest to see the 1886 Nevius Street bridge at Raritan, New Jersey, the north end of which, as it happens, terminates at the Duke estate pump house... but a little more about that later.)

After an hour of riding, the road began to follow alongside a low stone wall, punctuated by locked iron gates that seemed long closed. Occasionally we'd pass a strange, overgrown stone folly at the side of the road - a niche for statuary, a tempietto, a crenelated section of the wall, the flat interstices at just the right height to be stone seats. The sun-dappled forest beyond the wall had no visible signs of occupation or activity– no buildings, no people, no tire marks on a road into the property that quickly disappeared around a blind curve. There was only a deadly quiet, mysterious woodland.

Distinctive stone walls and pergola at Duke Farms.

“It's the Doris Duke estate,” my biking companion called out as we rode on. “She died a long time ago. The estate has been closed for years.”

The Duke estate was a passing curiosity on my ride that day, nothing more. Having grown up in a small, industrial town in upstate New York, I knew very little of Doris, in fact, any of the Dukes. Hers was one of those celebrity names I would hear occasionally in the news, but her lifestyle was so far removed from my reality that it left no lasting impression.

That is, until this summer.

The Reblooming

In May 2012, a reincarnated Duke Farms opened to the public as an environmental center, an exemplar of sustainability, and a model for ecological stewardship in the 21^st Century. The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation spent some $47 Million renovating land, infrastructure, and buildings.

The estate's 1905 Farm Barn was “repurposed” as an orientation center, renovating it to the U.S. Green Building Council's LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Platinum standards. 
 

1905 Farm Barn, now Orientation Center at Duke Farms (2012).

Inside, a very modern cafe in a now-pristine space that once housed farm animals.

Cafe in Orientation Center, Duke Farms (2012)

The extensive lawn areas were transformed into meadows, wetland habitats were created, invasive species of flora were rooted out. The exploding deer population, which once threatened to overrun the property, is now drastically reduced and excluded from the property by tall wire fencing.

Native species of wildflowers abound in the Great Meadow.

An extensive community garden was created west of the orientation center, just opposite a large solar array that powers the entire complex. Some 22 miles of paths are open to pedestrians and bicycles, which can be rented at the Farm Barn. An electric tram is available to transport less mobile visitors around the site.

The site is impressive. On my first visit, we only had time for a walk around the main route, which is also used by the tram. The core area of the site is located at the center of the property adjacent to “Dukes Parkway West,” a public right-of-way that passes through the estate between the orientation center and the core of the restored areas. 

The paved main path first takes you by the ruins of the Hay Barn (1905, Kendall, Taylor, and Stevens, Archs.; destroyed by fire in 1915). Doris had created a outdoor room for statuary within the walls, which are now covered with trumpet vines. 

Contemplative place inside the ruins of the Hay Barn.

Next, the Orchid Range (1899-1901), which was renovated to LEED Gold Standards and today houses a wonderful display of exotic orchids - a flower beloved by Doris Duke. 

An Orchid specimen in the Orchid Range greenhouse (2012).

The Old Foundation, also along the main path, is all that remains of an abandoned scheme of James Buchanan “Buck” Duke, Doris's father, for an enormous mansion and gardens (commissioned 1909, Horace Trumbauer, Arch.; never completed). The only feature of the project that was completed was a piazza with elaborate balustrade that now overlooks the Great Meadow.

The Old Foundation, Duke Farms (2012).

Interpretive signs at each feature contained a few historical photos and information on the native habitats or species highlighted at various stops. I saw birds I had never seen before, including the brilliant yellow American Goldfinch – New Jersey's state bird.

Judging by most standards, and borne out by the large number of visitors, the new incarnation of Duke Farms is a great success.

So... what's missing?

During my first visit to Duke Farms, I felt a strange, nagging sense of disorientation. Something essential was missing. What was this troubling void hanging over my experience that spectacular vistas, a collection of historic structures, interpretive plaques, and breathtaking carpets of wildflowers could not disspell?

For one thing - as inconsequential as this might seem to some - there are no guidebooks for sale at the site. They are available as a free download at the website, the staff told me. (It's also available in hard copy if you order it from an independent book vendor.) This was no help, since I was standing at the main desk of the visitor center, miles away from my computer. I didn't view the tiny screen of my smart phone as an acceptable alternative. The only available information about the estate at the site is a visitor's map, which includes other basic information about Duke Farms and a guide to programs.  Since I am a big fan of hard-copy guidebooks, I found the map helpful but I was hungry for more information. I like to know what I am looking at.

A few days later, still trying to pinpoint the source of my discomfort, I turned to research. I read about the history of the Duke family and the original assembly of the estate from some forty farms along the Raritan. Central to Buck Duke's complex waterworks was a pumping station conveniently located at the terminus of the Nevius St. bridge, not far from the gates of the Duke estate just across the river. From there, the waters of the Raritan were propelled under the river and up the hill, where the flow fed the estate's eight lakes and many waterfalls before gravity allowed it to cascade back down into the river. 

The mothballed pumphouse for Duke Farms waterworks, Raritan,
NJ, just north of the Nevius St. Bridge (2012).

Then there was Buck's death in 1925 and young Doris's fight to wrest the estate from her mother, Nanaline, who wanted to sell it. Doris's two ill-fated marriages; a child lost in infancy; the tragic death of a friend with Doris at the wheel. And Doris's enormous wealth – she once reigned as “the richest girl in the world” - that never seemed to bring her happiness. The Duke family history is quite the romantic tale.

Doris Duke's associations with the Somerville estate are both significant and enduring. In contrast to the picture painted of her in the tabloids, Doris had many serious, wide-ranging interests in arts and culture. She collected an astonishing array of arts and antiques from Asia and Europe; she was a dedicated horticulturist; she loved music (particularly jazz) and dance; and she studied languages. Among the many causes she supported were conservation of the environment, architectural restoration; medical research; and animal welfare. She loved her animals, and most of all, perhaps, she loved her gardens – especially her world famous “Garden of Nations,” housed in a large conservatory and series of greenhouses on the Somerset estate that she opened to the public in 1964.

Of all the properties she owned around the world, of all the exotic places she could stay, beyond all the riches she could amass, Doris regarded Duke Farms as her “homey home,” as one source put it. It was here she relaxed, swam in the Mermaid Pool, tended her extensive greenhouse gardens, and played with her dogs. Ultimately, Doris retreated into seclusion, trusting no one (as her father admonished her on his deathbed), wanting little more out of life than her privacy.

There seems insufficient evidence of this history in the new iteration of Duke Farms.

"That's what is missing," I concluded. "The Dukes are missing."

Second Look

I was disturbed enough by this thought to return to Duke Farms for a second look – this time exploring the north and eastern sections of the property. Less attention seems to have been paid to the buildings and landscaping in these areas during the recent makeover. Of these, the 1917 Conservatory (Horace Trumbauer, Arch., Lord & Burnham, Builder), located on the far eastern section of the estate, is perhaps the saddest of them all.

The 1917 Conservatory (Horace Trumbauer, Arch.).

Both J.B. Duke and his daughter Doris were avid horticulturalists. The Conservatory was the center of production for those activities. Doris Duke began its transformation in 1958 as the Indoor Display Gardens, also known as the “Garden of Nations.” These consisted of 11 separate indoor greenhouses joined together in a walkable rectangle, each representing the horticulture and aesthetics of a different country. Joseph D'Agnese, reporting on it for the New York Times in 1995, called it “a public treasure.” Doris herself sometimes led tours through the gardens. 

The Duke Farms Foundation closed the Conservatory to the public in 2008 in preparation for the makeover. Today, it remains shuttered, devoid of plants, statuary, or other remnants of that legacy. When it closed, Tim Taylor, Duke Farms's Executive Director, tried to reassure people who wanted to save the displays that materials removed from the greenhouses would be used in the new gardens, and “leftover” plant materials were to be donated to other botanical and display gardens. “We're not destroying anything,” Taylor is reported to have said at the time. 

 

View of the interior of the 1917 Conservatory in 2012.

Granted, there were all sorts of issues in trying to keep the indoor gardens open to the public – there were accessibility problems, including the difficulty of negotiating the narrow stepping stone paths and bridges through the garden rooms; the Conservatory glazing leaked and was very energy-inefficient. It was unheated in winter. In summer, temperatures inside the building topped 100 degrees. And then there were the costs just to maintain the specimens and displays, which were an enormous financial drain.

So, the decision was made to dismantle the indoor gardens in the large building, and focus available resources on restoring the smaller Orchid Range. A single interpretive sign near the 1917 Conservatory now provides an aerial view, some photos of the current nursery, and a paragraph or two of background on the building. The Conservatory is neither labeled on the visitors map, nor is there much said about the importance of the Conservatory to the Duke family in any other informational materials available at the site.

And, while the Orchid Range greenhouse displays of exotic orchids are delightful, they don't fully compensate for the loss of the world-renowned "Garden of Nations" in the 1917 Conservatory, in my view.

Then, I set out to locate the “Country Manor” - the residence Doris Duke called home. This, too, has been mothballed. Like the Conservatory, the house is not labeled on the visitors map. The path that leads down the hill to the manor is closed and locked. The furnishings, clothing, jewelry, art and antiques Doris housed at the Duke estate were auctioned off by Christies in 2004, generating some $35 Million for the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. 
 

At a recent presentation at the 2012 New Jersey Statewide Historic Preservation Conference, the Duke Farms makeover was the subject of a workshop, presented by Mr. Taylor and the project architects from VITETTA. Mr. Taylor summarily dismissed the Duke manor house, saying that the architectural consultants to the project found the 18^th Century house and its later additions to be “not significant.” I found the comment mystifying. And somewhat incredible. What, I asked myself, can be “not significant” about an 18^th Century home that was birthplace and life-long home to Doris Duke, one of the most consequential philanthropists of the 20^th Century?
 

Duke family manor at Duke Farms in 1910.
Courtesy of InternetStones.com.

In any event, Mr. Taylor – who reportedly served as a former terrorism expert for the United States Navy and in various real estate management roles – noted in a 2005 interview with J.P. Capuzzo of the New York Times, “As I read the will, there was no mention of this being an historical place. It was all about the environment.”

Executing Doris's Wishes

The Board of Trustees of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, guided by the terms of Doris Duke's Last Will and Testament, no doubt feel that they have followed the letter and the spirit of that document. It is true, Doris's Last Will divided the Somerville estate into three portions. The first was to be dedicated to the preservation of endangered species of flora and fauna. The second portion was to be dedicated to “farmland and growing areas.” The remainder of the Somerville property, including all “structures and improvements located thereon” were to be given over to the newly created “Doris Duke Charitable Foundation.”

The spectacular $45 Million makeover of Duke Farms as a model of environmental stewardship does seem consistent with Ms. Duke's intentions. And perhaps, given the secluded, isolated life she chose to live during the last decade of her life, dismantling her collections at the Manor and preventing it from becoming a tourist attraction based on her celebrity is also consistent with her wishes. At the end, she didn't seem to put much store in all of her material goods, in any event. She clearly wanted them to be put to better use by the Foundation. As it happens, the $34 Million went a long way towards realizing the current environmental center.

There is no doubt that the Foundation has overlaid a worthy public mission on what could have been an underutilized private resource. Preserving 2,700 delightful acres of open space, recreating native habitats, and opening it to the public, free of charge – this is an extraordinary enterprise.

Balancing History and Environment

Now, I don't see myself as a celebrity groupie, especially a dead celebrity. It is not my goal to revive a cult of personality around Doris Duke. But I do think that an important layer of history seems to be little appreciated there. And the site is the poorer for it.

But never fear, the estate has not been irrevocably compromised. A few tweaks by the Dukes Farms Foundation would allow the larger history of the site to co-exist comfortably with the new environmental mission as it continues to develop the site. Here are a couple of suggestions, which, if anyone from the Foundation is listening, I hope can be taken in the positive spirit with which they are given:
 

• Adhere more closely to the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Treatments of Historic Properties in future rehabilitations. The “repurposed” and renovated 1905 Farm Barn now Orientation Center, albeit “sustainable,” no longer looks or feels historic: the masonry is so sparkling clean, so seamlessly repointed and repaired, that it looks new; all interior features of its previous existence have been totally removed, like the horse stalls, which might have been retained and “repurposed” so as to give some sense of the historic use of the original building. For instance, still in a good state of preservation is the 1903 Coach Barn, now used for group meetings.  It would be a shame to see this building transformed as aggressively as was the Farm Barn. One totally sustainable, LEED-certified conversion may be sufficient for the site as an example. Now we need to show how historic buildings are also sustainable by their very preservation. 
  
  
  

  

  The Coach Barn (1903, Kendall, Taylor & Stevens, Archs.)

• Reopen the 1917 Conservatory (with or without LEED) and recreate, from historical evidence, one or more rooms of the world-famous “Garden of Nations.” The dismantling of this feature is a great loss to the site, and one that had intrinsic cultural value as an virtuoso example of horticulture seldom seen anywhere. It would be a fitting legacy to Doris Duke's efforts as horticulturalist and benefactor of Duke Farms. (The organization could even make this a “premium feature” that requires admission. And a paved parking area is already available near the Conservatory). 
   
• Have guidebooks available for purchase at the orientation center (there's plenty of room), along with other books on nature, environment, books on the history of the Duke family. This may seem a small thing, but it really does help orient people to the raison d'être of Duke Farms. And it would help support the work of the Foundation, if only in a modest way.
   
• Mark the historic carriageways and pathways through the site, so that visitors can understand how they were originally laid out. Again, this would help orient the visitor - which roads are historic pathways? Which are newly created for the current use? We have no way of knowing without a marking system that differentiates them.
   
• Develop a comprehensive history of the estate (if not a National Register nomination) and a Preservation Plan that will help guide future redevelopment of the site. There are many worthy buildings (including the main residence) and much history that should be taken into account. And it could form the basis of other publications that could be sold at the orientation center.
  
  
• Ultimately, as resources permit, the Duke Farms Foundation may want to reevaluate its decision to close the Country Manor, and use it as an opportunity to interpret the history of the Duke family and, in particular, Doris Duke's interests in the environment, gardens, and healthy living. It's understandable that not all areas of the facility can be developed at once – the facility just opened to the public a few months ago, after all. But it would be a lost opportunity if the residence could not also be used at some point in the future to further the mission of Duke Farms in accordance with the wishes of its benefactor.

Gate to Country Manor, now closed to public.

All of my qualms and suggestions aside, Duke Farms is a must-see. It is a remarkable enterprise, and one that will continue to serve the Foundation's mission of sustainability and environmental stewardship for many decades.

Update: Spring 2016

In the late summer of 2015, the Duke Farms Foundation applied to the Hillsborough Historic Preservation Commission for permission to demolish the former residence of the Duke Family, citing as its reasons 1) it had fallen into "disrepair"; 2) it was too expensive to fix; 3) it wasn't really significant anyway; and 4) it didn't fit with its "mission."  This confirmed all of my suspicions about the Foundation's lack of respect for the legacy of the Duke Family and its significant contributions to the grounds and architecture found on the estate. 

Although it was true that the residence had been altered over the some-100 years of occupancy by the Duke family, all of the alterations had been designed by noted architects. And, it must be noted, that the house was meticulously cared for by Doris Duke until her death in 1993; its decline seems to have resulted, in large part, from the Foundation's refusal to devote any funds to maintaining it after it assumed control of the estate. 

The Commission, over the objections of many preservation advocates and former friends of the family and staff members of the estate, ruled in favor of the Foundation's application to demolish the residence. Litigation was waged by the advocates, but ultimately the NJ courts ruled for the Foundation. In April 2016, the demolition was complete and the site cleared. The controversy, from the viewpoint of the preservationists, can be found here: DORIS (Demolition of the Residence is Senseless). 

Resources

“A Thousand to One: Duke Farms open to the Public.” Skylands Visitor - in and around Northern New Jersey. Website. URL: http://www.njskylands.com/attractions-duke-farms.htm accessed 19 August 2012.

At Home with Doris Duke: Selections from her personal home movies. Film. Collections of Doris Duke Foundation Historical Archives, housed at Duke University Libraries Rare Book, Manuscript, and Special Collections Library (https://library.duke.edu/find/all?Ntt=doris+duke+archives). URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bH94cEXq4M accessed 19 August 2012.

Anderson, Geneva. “Emerald Cities”at the Asian Art Museum– the dazzling Burmese and Siamese Treasures of Heiress and Philathropist Doris Duke find a new home.” URL: http://genevaanderson.wordpress.com/2009/12/28/happy-holidays-arthound-will-return-in-2010/ accessed 13 September 2012.

Capuzzo, Jill P. “The Dukes of Hillsborough.” New York Times (11 September 2005). URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/11/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/11njCOVER.html?pagewanted=all accessed 19 August 2012.

“Country Manor, Duke Farms, 1910.” Photograph. In “Doris Duke's Pearl Bracelets.” Internet Stones.com.^TM 

D'Agnese, Joseph. “Destination; A Secret Garden, Under Glass.” New York Times (07 February 1999). URL: http://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/07/nyregion/destination-a-secret-garden-under-glass.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm accessed 19 August 2012.

“Famous Will: The Will of Doris Duke.” Do Your Own Will. Website. URL: http://www.doyourownwill.com/famous-will-of/doris-duke.html accessed 19 August 2012.

“Doris Duke Collection, The: 2 -5 June 2004.” Christie's. Official Website. URL: http://www.christies.com/special_sites/duke_jun04/article.asp?article=1 accessed 31 August 2012.

Duke Farms, Living Habitats. Official website. URL: http://dukefarms.org/ accessed 31 August 2012.

“Duke Farms, Hillsborough, NJ.” Vitetta: Architecture, Engineering, Planning, Interior Design. Official website. URL: http://vitetta.com/duke-farms-project/ accessed 14 March 2019.

Fox, Barbara Figge. “Daddy's Girl: Inside the House and Heart of Doris Duke.” U.S. 1 Newspaper (1 February 2006). URL: [this article is no longer available] accessed 19 August 2012.

--- “Saying Goodbye to Doris Duke.” Princeton Comment (2 May 2009). URL: http://princetoncomment.blogspot.com/search?q=saying+goodbye+to+doris+duke accessed 3 September 2012.

Guide to Duke Farms. Hillsborough,NJ: Duke Farms Foundation, 2012.

Kahn, Eve M. “They Came From Horrorwood: Ackerman Items on the Block – Décor a la Doris Duke.”New York Times (16 April 2009). URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/arts/design/17anti.html?_r=1 accessed 19 August 2012.

Kaluza, Wanda. Ruins at Duke Farms - Doris Duke Hillsborough, NJ Estate. Video. URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMQ2OkTddc0 accessed 4 September 2012.

McKinley, James C. “Doctor Caused Doris Duke's Death With Overdoses, Report Says.” New York Times (26 April 1995). URL:http://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/26/nyregion/doctor-caused-doris-duke-s-death-with-overdoses-report-says.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm accessed 13 September 2012.

Pace, Eric. “Doris Duke, 80, Heiress Whose Great Wealth Couldn't Buy Happiness, Is Dead.” Obituary. New York Times (29 October 1993). URL: http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/29/obituaries/doris-duke-80-heiress-whose-great-wealth-couldn-t-buy-happiness-is-dead.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm accessed 31 August 2012.

Sudol, Valerie. “End of an Era: Duke Farms gardens to close, then reopen a shade greener.” Star-Ledger (4 March 2008).

Stout, David. Bernard Lafferty, the Butler For Doris Duke, Dies at 51.” New York Times (5 November 1996). URL: http://www.nytimes.com/1996/11/05/nyregion/bernard-lafferty-the-butler-for-doris-duke-dies-at-51.html accessed 13 September 2012.

Van Natta, Don. “Accord Clears the Last Will of Doris Duke for Probate.” New York Times (16 May 1996). URL: http://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/16/nyregion/accord-clears-the-last-will-of-doris-duke-for-probate.html accessed 19 August 2012.

---- “Deal Reached Over the Estate of Doris Duke.” New York Times (11 April 1996). URL: http://www.nytimes.com/1996/04/11/nyregion/deal-reached-over-the-estate-of-doris-duke.html accessed 19 August 2012.

Zernike, Kate. “An Oasis, Once Gilded, Now Greened.” New York Times (3 May 2012). URL http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/arts/doris-dukes-farm-hillsborough-nj-opening-to-public.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all accessed 31 August 2012.

.

Blueberry Days, Oneida Lake, NY

Minnow spotting, Horton's Harbor, Upper South Bay, Oneida Lake, NY (1949)

We knew that good times were coming when Dad rolled the empty oil drum out of the garage and filled it with water. The weekend before we headed north, he tested his 2-1/2 hp outboard motor by clamping it to the inside of the drum and pulling on the starter cord until it sputtered into life. After wintering over in the tool shed, the motor needed a little tinkering. Whatever else had to be done, Dad's critical task was complete when the engine began to hum cooperatively and the smoke had drifted away.

Sunset, Horton's Harbor, Oneida Lake, NY (1949).

From 1948 to 1960, we spent our family vacations at Oneida Lake, the thumb of New York State's Finger Lakes. Our destination was Horton’s Harbor, a camp in Upper South Bay at the southeastern end of the lake, where the first two weeks of July were reserved for us every year. 

Horton's had several cottages of varying sizes, ranging from a small frame appendage to the boathouse (our first digs); two smaller cabins  - a single and a double - along the trees on the east side of the lawn; and a large 2-bedroom cottage with living/dining room, kitchenette, and enormous screened porch. We stayed in each one at one point or another. When we became a family of six, my parents opted for the biggest cottage, which was next to the dirt road leading down to the boat launch. It was our vacation home for the next five years.

Horton's Harbor boat launch and cottage (1960).

Dad’s motor was no competition for the monster outboards that populated our home town. Those belonged to the “River Rats,” a club whose members roared up and down the Susquehanna River in speed boats with ferocious-looking teeth painted across their prows. No, Dad’s little blue and white Evinrude was meant for putt-putting leisurely along the lake shore while he fished. It was powerful enough, however, to take us across South Bay to Verona Beach State Park in good time, where we were guaranteed a pristine sand beach with lifeguards and a bathhouse. 

It was a great adventure to go with Dad to the Verona Beach by boat, even with the oversized canvas life jackets we had to wear. Violent storms came up quickly on the shallow lake, so Dad insisted we wear them, albeit faded, damp and mildewed, whenever we were on board. 

Fishing prep, Horton's Harbor, Oneida Lake, NY (1949)

Dad was a former Navy man. He relished the adventure of crossing the bay and arriving by boat on the far shore. When we reached the shallows, he would leap nimbly into the water and drag the rowboat high up on the sandy beach just south of the bathing area. There it would lay undisturbed until late in the afternoon, when it was time for the ride home.

July is blueberry season in upstate New York. Family excursions to the “U-Pick-It” farms were a summer ritual. At least once during our stay at the lake, we went to the local blueberry fields, returning with several quarts of those sweet-tart, dusty blue orbs. They were sweetest just after we picked them, right out of the pail. Later, we ate them immersed in a bowl of milk and sugar; we ate them on our corn flakes; Grandmother baked them into pies with crisp homemade crust. For those two weeks, it seemed like a good 20% of our diet consisted of blueberries consumed in one form or another. Even at my birthday dinner, the chocolate cake I had requested for dessert was always accompanied by a blueberry pie.

A child's life at Oneida was spent out-of-doors. We found the cottage stifling during the day. Air conditioning was a thing of the future; the gentle breezes that rippled across South Bay provided little relief to the upland cabins. One or two table fans strategically placed around the interior provided the only movement of air, evidenced by the swaying amber coil of flypaper that hung from the ceiling. Mom and Grandmother filled much of their time tidying up and making meals. During the short interludes when all was calm on the children front, they remained inside in front of the fans and out of the sun.

Rest period, Horton's Harbor (1954).

The kids spent the quiet times at the picnic table in front of the cottage. We had an ongoing comic book exchange with the twin boys who lived up at the caretaker’s cottage at the top of the hill. After lunch was a perfect time to spend an hour or two reading about the adventures of the Green Hornet or some other superhero verboten to us at home. For their part, the twins enjoyed a change from their usual diet of derring-do, immersing themselves in our collection of Bugs Bunny, Archie, and Classics Illustrated. It was a mutually beneficial arrangement that staved off boredom temporarily.

Sylvan Beach Amusement Park (1954)

The twins were our summer pals, who accompanied us on many of our outings - especially the ones to Sylvan Beach amusement park, just north of Verona Beach. Little in the historic community of Sylvan Beach caught our attention but the rides and the Midway. We handed in our tickets to ride on the Whip, the Rocket, and the Twirling Teacups. Being the youngest, I had to wait until my head reached the red mark on the gatepost before I could drive the Bumper Cars with the boys. At the end of the day, a Popsicle reward. An afternoon at Sylvan Beach was always a highlight of the vacation. 

Some years later, the same picnic table where we had spent so many languid hours became the site that signaled the end of our days at Oneida Lake. My older brother was 16 and in the throes of teenage angst. Spending that much time away from friends, rock ‘n roll, and french fries was torture. He spent his two weeks at the old picnic table, incommunicado, mitigating his days in purgatory by meticulously sanding, painting, and putting decals on his model cars. It was a melancholy summer.

At work on model cars, Oneida Lake (1960).

Finally, thankfully, our two weeks were up. It was the last time we went to Oneida Lake.  

In the years that followed, my brother became old enough to stay on his own. We continued to enjoy vacations as a family of five. After Grandmother died, we became a foursome. Eventually, with all the children grown and out of the house, my parents were free to wander - south in the winter, north in the summer. John and I took our own children on vacations, some more successful than others. None, however, were like Oneida Lake.

The Return

Through the years, my childhood memories of time spent at Oneida remained especially vivid. The smell of those awful life jackets. Watching the fascinating man with the big tongs bring us a new block of ice for the ice box. Sleeping outside on the screened porch of the big cottage. Riding in Dad’s boat across the bay to Verona Beach. Blueberries.

Recently, an insatiable curiosity drew me back to Oneida. Few places on earth are as lush and fragrant as upstate New York in the summer. I longed to see beautiful Oneida again. I wondered if anything I remember still exists. How much of it lives only in my idyllic childhood fantasies? 

I decided that it was time for a mini-road trip. But first, a little preliminary research was needed. I had no recollection of the name of the place where we stayed, so I tried to visualize the angle Dad’s boat took across the bay to Verona Beach, then plot back to a likely location for our camp. I searched for “Cottages for Rent” in the Upper South Bay area, but only found motels on the eastern shore. At last, I discovered one place that had potential.

Hidden Harbor Fish Camp, Upper South Bay, Oneida Lake (2012)

“Hidden Harbor” is located on the lake at Oak Avenue in Canastota, NY. The location seemed right, but Google's satellite view showed the lake front configured very differently from the way I remembered it.  The aerial showed a small earthen breakwater and a marina. The old willow tree at the shoreline was gone. No small cottages were visible under the trees. In place of the big cottage I remembered, was a long building with four rental units. 

The Marina, Hidden Harbor, Oneida Lake (2012)

I corresponded with the owners of Hidden Harbor who, when they heard about my search, kindly gave me permission to stop by their property when I came to the area. As soon as I turned onto the dirt road from SR 31, I knew immediately that this was the site. We had traveled down that road so many times, I felt I knew every inch of it. Although the old cottages and the boathouse were long gone and the shoreline had been rearranged into the marina, the sense of the place I once knew was still very strong. A small cove west of the property has remained, for the most part, undeveloped. We would putt by that cove after dinner some evenings to watch the birds preparing for their nightly roost. Hidden Harbor was every bit as peaceful and delightful as I remembered it, even with all the changes.

Cove west of Hidden Harbor, Oneida Lake (2012).

Leaving Upper South Bay, I drove around to the eastern shore of the lake where Verona Beach S.P. was located. Except for some rip-rap armoring the shoreline where Dad used to beach the boat, it looked unchanged. It was early on Sunday morning when I walked through the park, so the only people I saw were members of the grounds crew. Nevertheless, I could picture it full with people, as it used to be in my childhood. It was still beautiful. The water was deliciously warm and clear.

View across Upper South Bay from Verona Beach S. P. (2012).

The last stop on my journey was Sylvan Beach, where the old amusement park still operates. I learned a bit of the history of the town that I hadn't appreciated as a youth. The town is located on the north shore of the Erie Barge Canal, formerly part of the Oneida Lake Canal. Oneida Lake has been little explored by historians, according to Jack Henke, who has written several books on the heritage of the area. 

History was certainly never the focus of our vacation experience, nor does it appear to be much on the minds of visitors today. The weekend I was in town, it was filled with fans of “Vettes on the Beach” – a classic car rally for Corvettes. It was not surprising that the amusement park was deserted that Sunday morning, given the competition from the “Vettes” and the many obviously well-attended church services in the area.

South bank of Erie Canal at Sylvan Beach-Verona, Oneida Lake, NY

The park itself is now called "Historic Sylvan Beach Amusement Park." Indeed, the rides appeared authentically vintage. I think that I may even have ridden some of them in the 1950s.  But unlike its former slightly seedy self, everything today is freshly painted and appears ship-shape. No discarded cups, no papers, no Popsicle sticks or gum wrappers could be seen anywhere on the grounds. All the trash bins were empty and ready for another busy day. It almost made me forget that carny guy in the Midway who tricked me out of my dollar so long ago. 

Sylvan Beach Amusement Park, Sylvan Beach, NY

The only landmark-chasing I did this trip was a last-minute quest for the historic lighthouses on Oneida Lake. The light at the eastern end is located somewhere near 4th Street in Sylvan Beach. Jack Henke says that one is the most accessible, but I never found it. The second light is located on Frenchman's Island somewhere near the middle of the lake; it can be reached only by boat. I successfully located the third one in Brewerton at the lake's western end, but only after several passes along the lakefront. The unmarked site is down a side street just opposite a fuel company. There is no street sign, just a huge gravel parking lot. At the far end of the lot stands the Brewerton Light, which is endowed with a tiny green space behind it that goes down to the water.  OK, I've done my duty .... but it wasn't nearly as satisfying as finding our old camp in Upper South Bay.

The Brewerton Light on the Erie Canal at Oneida Lake (2012).

Remembrance

This trip to Oneida Lake was all about testing some of my early memories. It was comforting to have verified important ones - at least those of the physical places that I remembered so clearly. The people, well …. they are all gone now, except for my younger brother and me. As I walked across the lawn towards the car, they felt nearby. Perhaps they were in the ethers that hung over the blueberry bushes down the road. Or down at the lakefront, where the old boathouse used to stand. They seemed happy then, for the most part. It would be a good place for them to hang out for a while.

My father, Oneida Lake (1949).

Resources

Alvord, David. "Sylvan Beach in the Golden Age" Oneida [NY] Public Library. Official website, URL accessed 31 July 2012.

"Frenchman's Island Lighthouse [Oneida Lake]." Lighthouse Friends. Website. URL accessed 31 July 2012.

Henke, Jack. From "The Beach" to Brewerton: Stories of Oneida Lake. Utica NY: North Country Books, Inc. 2004.

------    Oneida Lake - "The only happiness": Place Names and History. Utica NY: North Country Books, Inc., 1989. 

Hidden Harbor Fish Camp, Canastota, NY.  Website. URL accessed 31 July 2012. 

 

"Historic Sylvan Beach Amusement Park." Website. URL accessed 2 August 2102.

James, Gary. "Jack Henke Interview - The History of Sylvan Beach." Famous Interview. Website. URL accessed 31 July 2012. 

Oneida Lake Association, Inc.  Website. URL accessed 31 July 2012.

Oneida Lake, N.Y. Boating and Fishing. Website. URL  accessed 31 July 2012. 

“Sylvan Beach.” NY Canals. Official Website. URL accessed 31 July 2012. 

Verona Beach Lighthouse Association. Town of Verona, NY.  URL accessed 31 July 2012.

“Verona Beach State Park.” NewYork State Office of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation. Official website. URL accessed 31 July 2012.

.

Of Gherkins, Glass Onions, and Shards

Looking down the Thames from Millennium Bridge.
Tower Bridge in distance; at right, the Shard.

It’s so deliciously eccentric. So very British. Very unlike staid New York, where buildings bear their corporate names, like AT&T or Hearst. In London, the Brits name their buildings for their shapes.

Hence, the City boasts “the Gherkin” (The Swiss Re building, 30 St. Mary Axe; 2003, Foster + Partners, Arch.); “the GlassOnion” (London City Hall; 2000-2002, Foster + Partners, Arch.); and “the Shard” (Shard London Bridge; 2000 – present, Renzo Piano Building Workshop, Arch.), now nearing completion.

Also in the works are speculative commercial buildings like the “CheeseGrater” (122 Leadenhall Street, Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners, Arch.); the “Walkie Talkie Building” (20 Fenchurch Street; Rafael Viñoly Architects); and, the “Can of Ham” (60 - 70 St Mary Axe, Foggo Associates, Arch.), sited fittingly near the Gherkin. During the economic downturn following 2008, these last three were reported to have been on hold, but recently there has been talk of construction activities beginning again.

"The Gherkin" in background (2003; Foster + Partners, Arch.)

This is just a small sampling of London’s “iconic” contemporary buildings (as opposed to its iconic historic buildings, like Westminster, Buckingham Place, and the Tower of London, for instance). Rafael Viñoly, Renzo Piano, and the extremely prolific Sir Norman Foster are among the internationally-known “starchitects” who, over the past 10 years, have catapulted London’s formerly low-profile cityscape into the company of the world’s skyscraper cities.

The city owes much of this construction boom to Ken Livingston, the maverick Mayor of London from 2000 to 2008, who actively promoted a “tall building strategy,” beginning with his October 2000 statement:

“I support high buildings, both as clusters (such as in the City, Canary Wharf and Croydon), and as stand-alone buildings (such as the Post Office Tower and Millbank Tower), where they are in close proximity to major public transport interchanges and contribute to the quality of London’s environment. I have no objection in principle to London having the tallest of buildings.” (2001 Interim Strategic Plan: 3). 

By 2008, there were some 20 buildings more than 300 feet high in the works, including some, like the Gherkin, which had already been built. But by then, Livingston’s building policy was being hotly debated in all quarters: planners, architects, and heritage societies all weighed in with pros and cons.

 And for good cause.

A Changing City

In May, I returned to London with a friend after a 25-year hiatus. The last time I was there, Southwark – the district on the southern bank of the Thames - looked a bit sketchy. The attractions that today draw people over to the south bank of the river did not exist. Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre (1990 – 1997) was just in the planning stages; the Bankside Power Station (ca. 1950; 1963), which now houses the Tate Modern museum, had been vacant for some 6 years; and the Millennium Bridge between St. Paul’s Cathedral and the Tate would not be completed until 2000. Southwark had been a major target for German bombs during the Blitz; it was still pretty grim in 1987.

The Millennium Bridge over the Thames River (2000;
Foster+Partners, Arch., with Sir Anthony Caro and Ove Arup + Partners)

Since my friend had never been to London, we tried to fit in as many important sights as our feet allowed, including the Globe, the Tate Modern, Westminster Abbey, Big Ben, and the British Museum. As we walked around London, I was very excited to see it looking so urbane. The new engineered forms like the Millennium Bridge and “biomorphic” architecture like the financial district’s Gherkin appearing around the city gave it a new dynamism. Our final excursion - saving the best for last - was the Tower of London. At the Tower, however, the impact of London’s new tall buildings on its historic sites was most evident … and the most disturbing.

The Tower of London Site

England’s first Norman king, William the Conqueror, began construction of the White Tower around 1070. The site he chose was high ground on the north bank of the Thames, which offered strategic sightlines along the river. The White Tower was completed some 30 years later, and over the centuries, the layout of the Tower evolved to include many more ancillary structures, including an arsenal, guardhouses, royal residences, a chapel – all surrounded by a double ring of fortified stone walls. Today it comprises some 18 acres, including the moat.

The White Tower, Tower of London, looking W.

The Tower was set apart from the city fabric by open land known as “the Liberties,” a defensive space over which the Tower exercised sole jurisdiction. Over the centuries, buildings have occasionally encroached within the Liberties, but the current building lines approximately follow its historic boundaries. The boundary stones still remain and every three years the Beefeaters ceremoniously mark them by “Beating the Bounds” with whips.  The tradition lives, in spite of the fact that the Liberties passed to the Metropolitan Borough of Stepney (now the Borough of Tower Hamlets) at the end of the 19^th Century. The Liberties provide breathing room that separates the Tower from the surrounding city, enhancing its prominence.

In the area of "the Liberties," with the Tower of London at left.
At right, London City Hall (2002, Foster + Partners, Architects).

In 1988, United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) World Heritage Committee (WHC) inscribed the Tower of London in the list of World Heritage Sites.

From the very first, UNESCO voiced concerns that the Tower of London is being compromised by surrounding development, expressing “regret” over the lack of sensitivity shown by the approval of the 1973 Tower Hotel – an enormous Brutalist pile - just north of the site.

In 2006, UNESCO threated to put the Tower of London on its “endangered” list after the approval of the 1016-foot “Shard of Glass.” A news article reported that the WHC noted that “local planners had not done enough to ensure that views of and from the fortress would not be obstructed by surrounding development (Satter,USAToday, 1/8/2007).

Core of the "Walkie Talkie Building" rising above the Chapel Royal
of St. Peter ad Vincula within the Tower of London, looking NW.

In December 2011, UNESCO/WHC conducted the most recent “monitoring study,” not only of the Tower of London site, but also Palace of Westminster, because of the number of development projects for tall buildings in the vicinity that are completed, under construction, approved, or proposed. Once again, UNESCO threatened to put them on its endangered list - an action that, if ever carried out, would cause significant embarrassment to the British government.

Experiencing the Tower Today

When you emerge from the Tower Hill Tube station, your first view of the Tower is the Waterloo Block, home of the Crown Jewels, rising above the Tower’s north walls. So far, so good.

The Waterloo Block, Tower of London from Tower Hill, looking S.

Just outside the station, there is a small park with an orientation panel that identifies the buildings you can see to the west of the Tower: a 14^th C. church with 17th C. alterations, rebuilt after WW2; a 1926 memorial by Sir Edwin Lutyens; a 4-story limestone office block (1926); and a 9-story steel and glass commercial building, with a 6-story glass curtain that creates an inner courtyard. This is Tower Place (2002, Foster + Partners, Arch.), also designers of the Gherkin.

View from Tower Hill, with the Mercantile Marine Memorial (1926) in foreground,
the All Hallows Barking church (14th and 17th C.), with Tower Place
in background left (2002).

Tower Place aroused the first ripples of unease. I began to tick through the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties on compatibility that govern my U.S. projects involving new construction and historic buildings – an occupational hazard, I’m afraid. Actually, I grudgingly gave Tower Place better marks than my first impression would have allowed. It was contemporary, yes, with a curvilinear roof profile, and it was larger in scale than the surrounding buildings. But overall, its negative effects on the historic site were mitigated by the regular rhythm of the façade facing the Tower. Even the glass curtain seemed relatively neutral to the Tower – it was angled away from the Tower site and softened the effect of the irregular building footprint on the interior, which would have been more attention grabbing, perhaps, than the curtain. Of course, I could also be doing some mental gymnastics to try to justify this scale of building so close to a World Heritage Site.

The Shard and Tower Place at right. Tower of London's Middle Tower
at left, with moat at lower left.

However, there was no waffling on the question of compatibility when we walked down the Tower’s western wall and looked toward the Thames. There, stomping their concrete footings for attention, were the globular London City Hall and the towering “Shard of Glass,” now nearing completion. There was no escaping them. There was no ignoring them. They were not only visible; you could not take your eyes off them. This flew in the face of anything I had ever learned about appropriate context for historic sites. OK, they were across the river, but their shapes were so eccentric, their scale was so overly large, that there was no pretending that they were part of a neutral urban backdrop.

The Shard (at right) and London City Hall (background) visible
from inside the Tower of London site.

There was no escaping these visual intrusions after you entered the site, either. They remained clearly visible from many vantage points, thus destroying any chance the visitor might have to “suspend disbelief,” no matter how many character actors in 17^th C. costumes there are, dueling or plucking chickens. I left the Tower with a sense of dismay. I had grown accustomed to American development prowess and the toll it took on our more recent historic sites. But London, the UK – champions of centuries of English heritage and tradition – how could they let this happen?

 Rock, Paper, Shard….

The controversy over the amount and scale of tall buildings near its historic core has grown in volume and number of supporters on both sides. Most local planning hearings now receive testimony from English Heritage and the National Trust. Other voices decry what they perceive as a preference to remain architecturally stagnant. Prince Charles, sometimes through his organization, The Prince's Foundation for Building Community, continues to weigh in against modernist architecture, reprising, in a gentler manner, his “carbuncle” speech of 1984.

Apparently, London is getting the message. UNESCO’s concerns in 2006 focused on not only the adverse impacts of Mayor Livingston’s tall building development strategy on the visual integrity of the Tower, but also on the fact that there were substantial “gaps in national legislation and local regulations relating to the protection of World Heritage sites, as there were inadequate guidelines and no impact assessment tools available for new urban development in Greater London.” (See UNESCO/ WHC, Mission Report: Tower of London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)(C488) etc., issued June 2012). 

At its June 2012 session, UNESCO noted that much progress had been made to address these concerns. On a national level, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) that trims back some of the maze of planning policies to a more coherent structure was issued in final form in March 2012. At the local level, Boris Johnson, the current Mayor of London, issued his new master planning document in July 2011. The London Plan 2011 – Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London replaces Ken Livingston’s 2001 plan and emphasizes sustainability and preservation of historic areas:

Development should not cause adverse impacts on World Heritage Sites or their settings (including any buffer zone). In particular, it should not compromise a viewer’s ability to appreciate its Outstanding Universal Value, integrity, authenticity or significance. In considering planning applications, appropriate weight should be given to implementing the provisions of the World Heritage Site Management Plans. [The London Plan 2011, Policy 7.10: “Planning Decisions.”]

Further, it defines “settings,” which are critical to assessing effects:

“Setting is the surroundings in which an asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral.”

In March 2012, the Greater London Authority issued its London’s World Heritage Sites – Guidance on Settings: Supplementary Planning Guidance, which developed concepts of Strategic Views, Protected Vistas, and Protected Silhouettes, and identifies specific locations where “geometric protection” should be applied to strengthen the protection and conservation of London’s World Heritage Sites.

London Plan Policy 7.10 (World Heritage Sites) is the overarching policy for this SPG [Supplementary Plan Guidance]. It states that development should not cause adverse impact on World Heritage Sites or their settings and should not compromise the ability to appreciate the Sites’ Outstanding Universal Value, integrity and authenticity. It also requires LDFs [Local Development Frameworks] to contain policies that protect the historic significance of the World Heritage Sites and enhance both the sites and their settings.

Also since UNESCO’s 2006 statement, other important planning and historic site management guidance has been developed by organizations such as English Heritage, ICOMOS, Historic Royal Palaces, and the Tower of London World Heritage Site Consultative Committee, whose 2010 Tower of London Local Setting Study is perhaps the most important.

The Shard, rising above the Wakefield Tower, from within walls of Tower of London.

In June 2012, in light of the progress that had been made in developing a framework for how to assess impacts of development and redevelopment on historic sites, UNESCO gave London a temporary reprieve on “endangered” status for the Tower and Westminster. “For London’s World Heritage sites,” it notes in its findings, “these tools come unfortunately after the problem of visual degradation of the wider setting emerged and irreparable damage to the visual integrity of both sites has happened.” (UNESCO/WHC, Mission Report: 11.) It noted that the past administration had some of the planning tools already at hand, but “lacked the will” to use them.

View of building crane in Southwark from a Norman
window in the White Tower.

In addition, the Committee recommends that development in Southwark near the Shard be “tightly regulated to avoid the further construction of tall buildings that could exceed the height by which they would become visible above the on-site historic buildings of the Tower complex. The development of more tall buildings that would become visible would destroy the visual integrity and seriously damage the Tower’s Outstanding Universal Value, possibly beyond repair.” (Mission Report: 12)

My Next Trip to London

The issues that confront a dynamic, historic city like London are no different to those found in older cities elsewhere. My first introduction to the now fully-blown controversy was in 1984, with Prince Charles’s modernism-as-carbuncle speech to the Royal Institute of British Architects. At the time, I thought it was a stuffy speech – rather short-sighted and dripping with the arrogance of the Old Guard. I enjoy modern architecture – particularly such exciting examples such as the Gherkin, the Glass Onion, and the Shard.

Since then, I have developed a greater understanding of the complex web of interrelationships that is an urban built environment. It is a struggle to make the new and the old work together. Parsing through the planning studies for the Tower of London has been an engrossing exercise – the studies are incredibly sophisticated, the stakes are high, the effort by all participants monumental. With all that paper behind it, let’s hope that the London can arrive at a more sensitive approach to balancing exciting new buildings with its historic heart. Perhaps I will be able to see the results on my next trip. It better be sooner than 25 years from now, or I’ll never make it up the stairs of the White Tower to see Henry VIII’s suit of armor again.

Resources

Architects in this Article:

Foggo Associates. Architect of 60-70 St. Mary Axe (a/k/a the “Can of Ham”), London UK (approved 2008). Official website: http://www.foggo.com

Foster + Partners, Sir Norman Foster, Principal. Designer of Millennium Bridge (1996-2000) with co-architects Sir Anthony Caro and Ove Arup + Partners; London City Hall (2000-2002); the Swiss Re Building (a/k/a “The Gherkin”), 30 St. Mary Axe (2003); and Tower Place (1992 – 2002), with Stanton Williams, co-architect; all four located in London, UK. Official website. http://www.fosterandpartners.com/ accessed 29 June 2012. 

Rafael Viñoly Architects. Architect of 20 Fenchurch Street (a/k/a the “Walkie Talkie” Building), London, UK (2008 – present). Official Website. http://www.rvapc.com accessed 29 June 2012.

Renzo Piano Building Workshop. Architect of London Bridge Tower/Shard London Bridge (a/k/a “the Shard”), Southwark, London, UK (2000 – present). Official Website. http://www.rpbw.com/ accessed 29 June 2012. 

Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners, Architect of The Leadenhall Building, 122 Leadenhall Street, London.URL: http://www.rsh-p.com/rshp_home accessed 30 June 2012.

Other Resources: 

The Getty Conservation Institute. Conservation Perspectives – Historic Cities Issue. Newsletter. Vol. 26, No. 2. Fall 2011. URL: http://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications_resources/newsletters/26_2/ accessed 30 June 2012.

Gray, Louise. “Prince of Wales hits out at modern buildings as 'energy-guzzling glass boxes'.” The Daily Telegraph. 3 Feb 2012. Internet edition. URL: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/9056928/Prince-of-Wales-hits-out-at-modern-buildings-as-energy-guzzling-glass-boxes.html  accessed 2 July 2012.

Greater London Authority. London’s World Heritage Sites – Guidance on Settings: Supplementary Planning Guidance. London: Greater London Authority, March 2012. http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/World%20Heritage%20Sites%20SPG%20March%202012%20lowres_0.pdf accessed 30 June 2012. 

International Conference: World Heritage and Contemporary Architecture - Managing the Historic Urban Landscape. Conference held from 12 to 14 May 2005 in Vienna, Austria, under the patronage of UNESCO and welcomed by the 29th session of the World Heritage Committee (Durban, 2005) (Decision 29 COM 5D). URL: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2005/whc05-15ga-inf7e.pdf  accessed 30 June 2012.

Historic Royal Palaces. Tower of London World Heritage Site Management Plan. Surrey UK: Historic Royal Palaces, 2007. URL: http://www.hrp.org.uk/Resources/Tower%20of%20London%20World%20Heritage%20Site%20Management%20Plan.pdf accessed 30 June 2012.

Jenkins, Simon. “Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone are gripped by a phallic obsession that is destroying London's skyline.” The London Evening Standard. 29 November 2011. URL: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/boris-johnson-and-ken-livingstone-are-gripped-by-a-phallic-obsession-that-is-destroying-londons-skyline-6373146.html  accessed 30 June 2012.

Johnson, Boris, Mayor of London. Greater London Authority. The London Plan - Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. London: Greater London Authority, July 2011. URL http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/The%20London%20Plan%202011.pdf accessed 30 June 2012.

Land Use Consultants and Colin Buchanan. Tower of London Local Setting Study: An Assessment of the Local Setting of the Tower of London and Guidelines for its Management. Report prepared on behalf of the Tower of London World Heritage Site Consultative Committee. August 2010. URL: http://www.hrp.org.uk/Resources/TowerLocalSettingStudy301110_2.pdf  accessed 30 June 2012.

Livingston, Ken, Mayor of London. Interim Strategic Planning Guidance on Tall Buildings, Strategic Views and the Skyline of London. London: Greater London Authority, October 2001). URL: http://legacy.london.gov.uk/mayor/planning/docs/tall_buildings.pdf accessed 30 June 2012.

“Mayor sets out new planning guidance for London’s World Heritage Sites.” Greater London Authority. Official Website.12 March 2012.   URL: http://www.london.gov.uk/media/press_releases_mayoral/mayor-sets-out-new-planning-guidance-london%E2%80%99s-world-heritage-sites accessed 29 June 2012.

Modern Architecture London. Website. http://modernarchitecturelondon.com accessed 30 June 2012.

 “Nicknames of London Buildings.” Squidoo.com Travel and Places – United Kingdom. Website. URL: http://www.squidoo.com/nicknames-of-london-buildings#module149304522 accessed 30 June 2012.

Satter. Raphael G. “UNESCO says Tower of London threatened by skyscrapers.” USA Today. Internet edition. 8 January 2007. URL: http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2007-01-08-tower-london-unesco-endangered-skyscrapers_x.htm#.T_GHMiOs5Us.email  accessed 2 July 2012.

[UK] Department for Communities and Local Government. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).Published 27 March 2012. http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/2116950.pdf  accessed 30 June 2012.

UNESCO, World Heritage Committee. Mission Report: Tower of London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)(C488) and Westminster Palace, Westminster Abbey and Saint Margaret’s Church (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)(C426bis) 5 – 8 December 2011. Report. Presented at the 36^th Session of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee, Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation. 24 June – 6 July 2012. URL: http://whc.unesco.org/en/documents/117028  accessed 30 June 2012.

Weaver, Matthew. “London Elections 2008: Livingstone's Towering Legacy - A planning regime that allowed tall buildings to flourish has won the mayor both powerful friends and vocal enemies.” The Guardian. Internet Edition. 19 February 2008. URL: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/feb/18/london08.london1 accessed 30 June 2012.