A few figures
DATE
Early 1910s through early 1950s
ARCHITECT(s)-
Charles Peck, George Wells, Andrew Thomas, Robert Tappan, C.D. and D.E. McAvoy
DEVELOPER
Queensboro Corporation, Edward MacDougall
BOUNDARIES
76th (East), 88th (West), Northern Boulevard (North) and Roosevelt Avenue (South)
-New York City Landmarks Preservation Committee
TYPE
“garden apartments”, “garden homes” and rowhouses
PUBLIC TRANSIT
Subway
E F G R V 7
Bus
Q32 Q33 Q45 Q47 Q49 Q53
DEVELOPMENTS
Municipal: Community United Methodist Church Complex, Saint Joan of Arc RC Church Complex, Public School (PS) 69, Post Office, Queens Borough Public Library, Country Club, Tennis Courts & Golf Course
Residential: Hawthorne Court, Elm Court, Hampton Court, Laburnum Court, The Towers, Hayes Court, Ivy Court, Spanish Gardens, Cambridge Court, Cedar Court, Linden Court, Hamilton Court, The Chateau, The Greystone Apartments, Laurel Court, Colonial Apartments, Plymouth Houses, Roosevelt Terrace, Dunolly Gardens, Oban Court & Penrhyn Court
A concise history
The development of Jackson Heights Queens is largely linked to investment in infrastructure such as the Queensboro Bridge in 1909, the extension of the subway as far as Flushing and the growth of Long Island City as one of the city’s largest manufacturing centers (NYCLPC 10). As transit was developed linking Manhattan with the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens these farmlands became profitable business ventures and expansion continued.
The Queensboro Corporation was formed by a number of Queens businessmen in 1909. Between 1910 and 1914 the corporation purchased 350 acres of undeveloped land in the Trains Meadow section of Newton, Queens. The expansion of the subway is intimately tied to the Queensboro Corporation. Mayor John Purroy Mitchell had served as President of the Board of Aldermen for the Queensboro Corporation, pushing through a number of subway extensions with stops along Queensboro’s tract of land.
While development within Jackson Heights was varied due to financial restraints of the Great Depression and World War II, there are a number of common elements present throughout the neighborhood. These commonalities include:
-planning and design of residential building types using the city block as a base unit
-integration of commercial, institutional, entertainment and transportation facilities with residential units
-plan of cooperative ownership in garden apartment complexes an interior block of undivided landscaped space
-cross ventilation, light and views due to landscaped space
Most early building by the Queensboro Corporation was centered around developing infrastructure for the development of Jackson Heights. In this process the corporation differed from a number of other developers by planning the community in such a way that increased light while also reducing the amount of coverage on each site. Queensboro Corporation actively practiced reduced lot coverage, for example 58% with Plymouth Apartments and Willow Court. This figure was substantially less than the legal seventy percent established by the Tenement House Law of 1901. This reduced lot coverage proved financially successful and attractive to the middle and upper class the corporation was seeking to attract; providing shared open spaces down the center of each block, creating garden views and radically different environments than previous communities. The grid system of Manhattan was continued in Jackson Heights, however the long orientation of blocks was in a North-South orientation rather than East-West as in Manhattan; this orientation allowed for greater light exposure and quality.
The residential units in Jackson Heights were also unique by including a number of contemporary features such as push-button elevators and attached ground floor garages. The first few developments in Jackson Heights, the rowhouses on 82nd street and Laurel Court (see pages 10 & 23), were primarily apartment style housing integrated with municipal and commercial buildings. Queensboro was receptive to the demand of World War II veterans and widened development to include single family and “convertible” two family homes. By the 1920s Queensboro had begun selling parcels of its land to outside developers with the agreement that Queensboro would manage the properties for the first ten years. While the introduction of outside developers clearly changed the continuity of design, the original principles of shared landscaped spaces, cross ventilation, the city block as the planning unit and increased light and views remained frequently pursued.
From the start of development the Queensboro Corporation had in mind the construction of a total community by including religious, social, commercial, educational and recreational buildings in its plans for Jackson Heights. These communities were established through a series of adventurous building projects including a mixed-used development featuring: a 500-room hotel, forty stores and a taxi/bus terminal (see page 21)(NYCPLC 24). As world events led to a changing economic landscape Queensboro began to redirect its energies into producing more affordable apartment buildings and cooperatives with features of the original garden apartments and houses. The first apartment buildings produced by Queensboro were rentals and it was not until 1919 that the corporation followed a track of cooperative ownership (NYCPLC 26).
The process for cooperative ownership consisted of Queensboro Corporation selling the apartment buildings it had erected to corporations of tenant-shareholders. The tenant-shareholder corporation would own full equity of the apartment building and Queensboro Corporation would manage the property for the first ten years. Therefore a buyer would not purchase a property/apartment outright rather they would purchase stock/share in the tenant/shareholder corporation and would be given a proprietary lease to an apartment. “Instead of paying the entire equity price of the apartment prior to occupancy, the buyer made an initial payment of ten to twenty percent of the total equity price, which included the underlying mortgage, and paid the balance monthly on the same basis as rent over a period of eight to twenty years. Half of each monthly payment was applied to the purchase price and the balance was applied to maintenance of the property” (NYCPLC 26). Queensboro Corporation marketed these cooperatives as a way to invest in a safe, stable community while also receiving a profitable return on a tenant’s investment.
The earliest residential units constructed in Jackson Heights consisted of the rowhouses built in 1911 on the west side of 83rd street. These rowhouses consisted of three levels: an upper level, a lower level and a basement. These rowhouses were designed by Charles Peck and are characteristic of rowhouse development in New York during the early 20th century. These serve as an indicator of what Jackson Heights may have looked like had Queensboro Corporation not switched development paths to the “garden apartments” and “garden houses.” A significant shift occurred in development when George H. Wells and Andrew J. Thomas began designing for Queensboro Corporation.
In 1914, 1915 and 1916 along west 82nd street Queensboro Corporation developed its first apartment buildings, designed by George H. Wells. These apartment buildings utilized long tracks of building and the city block as the planning unit. Focus was placed on reducing lot size to allow for greater amounts of light and ventilation however these apartment buildings were only steps towards the “garden apartment” complexes Jackson Heights became known for. They included: Laurel Court, Oban Court and Penrhyn Court, Willow Court, Colonial Apartments and Plymouth Apartments (see pages 24, 28, 25, 26). Plymouth Apartments and Willow Court mark a definite departure from Wells’ earlier work by reducing lot size and moving closer to the “garden apartments” than the other designs. The Greystone Apartments (see page 23)marked the further development of the “garden apartment” block planning. Advances consisted of reduced lot coverage, only 38%, and unified “T-shaped” buildings that join to for “U-shaped” courts that continued to the rear of the lot forming gardens. “Each room opens onto either the tree lined street or the landscaped rear garden” (NYCPLC 30).
Andrew J. Thomas was raised in tenement housing, worked collecting rent in tenement housing and later became a reformer of tenement housing producing what we now recognize as the “garden apartment.” He was a largely untrained, self-taught architect who gained most of his design experience while working for the Emergency Fleet Corporation designing tenement housing (Stern). It was announced by MacDougall, of the Queensboro Corporation, in 1917 that an entire block of garden apartments was being planned for development. The responsibility for this design was given to Thomas since he had recently gained recognition in New York City for his work with the City and Suburban Homes Corporation and the Emergency Fleet Corporation. Thomas’ experience with high-density tenement housing proved fruitful for the development of the garden apartment blocks promised by the Queensboro Corporation.
At Linden Court (see page 20)Thomas’ design consisted of two detached blockfronts framing an interior garden. These blockfronts were formed by identical buildings with punctures periodically, actually driveways, allowing for entrance to the inner garden. “Among the other innovative features of the complex, besides the provision of ground-level garages, was the introduction of the enclosed loggia, “creating not only an aspect of a country house in an apartment house, but the comfort as well.” (NYCPLC 33) The formal design qualities were not only reflected through built structures though, attention was given to landscaped space throughout the design of these garden blocks. “After the streets had been laid out, each block was framed by a continuous grass strip that ran on all four sides between the street curb and the sidewalk” (NYCPLC 35). The apartment buildings themselves were then set back from the building line producing a buffer of green space contributing to the emphasis on garden greenery and creating a dialogue with the interior gardens that ran through the center of the housing block.
The production of a community rather than just another development of apartment complexes was a serious concern for the Queensboro Corporation. This was reflected in MacDougall’s thrust to establish municipal and commercial ventures. Until the 1920s there were no religious structures in Jackson Heights, instead congregations held service in empty storefronts. Queensboro supported the development of these religious institutions by donating land and funds, specifically in the case of the Community United Methodist Church (see page 29). Other religious institutions developed afterwards though with different histories, these include: St. Joan of Arc R.C. Church Complex (see page 30), First Church of Christ-Scientist, the Jewish Center and Young Israel. Municipal buildings continued to be developed from the 20’s through the 40’s and were located on or near the main commercial street of 37th avenue (NYCPLC 41).
Commercial spaces in Jackson Heights maintained the regularity and continuity of the garden block style by utilizing similar architectural style and also incorporating features of adjoining residential buildings. Two commercial thoroughfares exist in the historic district of Jackson Heights, these include the spine of 37th avenue and the intersecting block of 82nd street between Roosevelt Avenue and 37th street (see page 15). The 82nd street block was within close proximity to the elevated train station providing opportunity for commercial ventures. A cluster of commercial buildings were erected at the intersection of 82nd street and 37th avenue, the first being designed/constructed in 1921-1922 followed by a series of other buildings to follow, including the Queensboro’s very own headquarters.
Response to Jackson Heights
Largely the project undertaken by the Queensboro Corporation in developing Jackson Heights Queens introduced a number of innovations into the realm of city planning within the United States in the early twentieth century. These innovations were modelled after contemporary community plans in Europe at the time, informed by a number of suburbs though specifically the German suburb of Charlottenburg.
The Queensboro Corporation proved to be fairly innovative in a number of ways and developed a cohesive model for other urban communities. Unlike much (then) contemporary American development Queensboro Corporation retained a commitment to reducing lot coverage that created a distinct amount of green space. The impetus for this was provided by the Tenement House Law of 1909, a reaction to the atrocious housing conditions of the times. The law reduced legal lot coverage to seventy percent while also increasing the minimum area of courtyards and air vents/shafts. Queensboro was unique in further reducing lot coverage while also maintaining a marketable residential community that was enhanced by a green block down the center of most blocks.
The effect of this lot coverage reduction was two-fold however. It was not only that Queensboro Corporation was innovative by creating more green space for residents by pushing the buildings to the outer edges of the block, it also included the utilization of the physical block as a planning unit. Unlike most developments of the time residential complexes lacked continuity and flow, apparent in the disjointed plans of tenement housing. This created difficulty in organizing space as the production of said space was sporadic at best and introduced a wide array of undesirable results. Through the use of the city block as a planning unit the ability to produce a continuity impacted by a larger vision was enacted.
For Queensboro Corporation this “larger vision” included the integration of mixed-uses within the planning of these residential blocks. If the city block were to be divided in thirds length-wise, Queensboro Corporation aimed to devote at least 1/3 of the space to green land. This plan incorporated a certain amount of flexibility, establishing the opportunity to introduce commercial and municipal spaces within the overall plan for a given block. Due to the inclusion of this central green space down each block center a myriad of benefits were generated. These included but were not limited to desirable views, ventilation, quality of life, dynamic social space and integration within the entire neighborhood.
Jackson Heights was not limited to a single building type such as single family homes with attached garages or the (then) more current rowhouses. The ability to provide an array of choices was both the product of the economic landscape before and during the postwar period and the flexibility of Queensboro Corporation in meeting the demands of the market. I believe this characteristic contributed to the success of Jackson Heights in a number of ways. The homogeneity of many planned communities today introduces a real problem for both planners and residents by limiting variation and difference. From discussion within the seminar we have addressed the issue of different economic strata and the ability to either layer these strata or separate them spatially. Originally Jackson Heights was planned and marketed to the rising middle class within America, introducing three types of residential units: rowhouses, single family and “convertible” two family homes. While the original intent of Jackson Heights clearly excluded those outside the middle class, both the economic landscape of the early twentieth century and the force of time have counteracted that intent through the introduction of cooperative ownership and also the meshing of Queensboro’s total control with outside developers.
There were also a number of municipal amenities provided for the residents of the neighborhood including a school, post office, public library and recreational facilities. As the expansion of the subway line into Flushing spurred the production of Jackson Heights, the neighborhood also provided its residents with a moderate commute to midtown Manhattan and accessible circulation throughout the city. It is also of key importance that an acting board member of the corporation was mayor for a time and heavily impacted the creation of subway stops throughout the Jackson Heights neighborhood.
Then, as now, there was relatively little space planned for automobiles besides the city streets. Some houses introduced a ground-level garage but the street was mainly utilized for parking. As of today there is little to no constructed space for parking. Most land usage is dedicated to multi-family dwellings and public institutions. I believe this lack of parking structures is key in urban development as the automobile is fairly unnecessary for many city dwellers situated in a community such as Jackson Heights, with a plethora of public transit opportunities to circulate throughout the city.
When considering both the initial plan of Jackson Heights and its function today I feel its strongest points are the diversity of residential spaces, integration of planning through the use of the city block and its proximity to public transit. The city block as a planning unit established a set of principles for the Queensboro Corporation that functioned to combat the qualms of earlier tenement housing. Through planned integration of residential, commercial and municipal spaces Jackson Heights was, and remains, a continuous community. Heavy reliance for this continuity is due to the green corridor that runs through the center of most blocks. This corridor is central to the character of Jackson Heights and establishes a number of unequalled opportunities due to its inclusion.
The diversity of residential spaces must be considered a key point of the planning. By providing housing opportunities for a series of combinations rather than a specific array, such as the single family with attached two car garage, I believe Queensboro Corporation demonstrated a planning principle that needs to be repeated to ensure the quality of communities- difference and variation. While it can easily be said that the corporation did not accommodate a diverse enough client base I believe through a range of price points and multiple dwelling types they at least introduced a concept that can be further elaborated.
The impetus for Jackson Heights’ construction was the expansion of public transit into Flushing. This really cannot be stressed enough as a positive point as it mostly eliminates the need for a car and provides residents with easy access to circulation throughout the city. The reliance on public transit and investment in its expansion proved fruitful for Jackson Heights though the city’s accommodations for automobiles interrupted what may have been an even more grand design. Having stated this I believe the corporation produced a wonderful design in terms of the city block however the city grid clearly introduced an obstruction to an even more continuous plan that would have provided an even greater expanse of desired green space. With over ten bus and subway stops in the neighborhood respectively a greater success in terms of planning may have been situated in interrupting the city grid or somehow more dynamically integrating it.
These concerns are mainly involved with increasing the diversity of availability to different social strata and encouraging a further emphasis on the introduction of green corridors in place of pavement based design. None of these concerns are mutually exclusive and I feel that Queensboro’s planning introduced a number of concepts that can be refigured to meet today’s demands. While the corporation introduced fairly progressive standards the community was typically exclusive and did a poor job of integrating different social classes. These suggestions and concerns should also interrogate the function of the green corridors which are a hallmark of the development. As concern for green space and sustainability is largely a contemporary production, the utility of the green corridors appeared largely untapped in the past and is a terrible shortcoming as a number of sustainable practices could have been enacted to benefit the community.
Notes
New York City Landmarks Preservation Committee, “Jackson Heights: Historic District,” (October, 1993) 1-244.
Stern, Robert; Gilmartin, Robert; Mellins, Thomas, New York 1930-Architecture between the two world wars (New York City: Rizzoli, 1987), 479-791
Stern, Robert; Mellins, Thomas; Fisman, David, New York 1960-Architecture and Urbanism between the Second World War and the Bicentennial (New York City: Monacelli Press, 1995), 993-993
