Developer to raze Bell Labs Holmdel facility, birthplace of the cellphone
by Ryan Block 
posted Jul 5th 2006 at 1:23PM
The facility in question, one time Holmdel, New Jersey home to Bell Labs -- one of the most prolific technology innovators of the 20th century -- was owned by Lucent technologies until a recent round of asset liquidations. Barely 40 miles out of New York City, in its heydey the six-story, two million square foot campus, employed over 5,600 people who toiled away in its bowels; it became home to the work of numerous Nobel laureates, and has long since been cemented in the annals of tech history as the birthplace to some of the most important communications technologies ever conceived. And it'll soon be torn down.
Designed and erected between 1957 and 1962 by the inimitable and infamous Eero Saarinen, Holmdel is former home to Bell Labs' optical transmission, microwave, and wireless work, including the High-Speed Networks Research Department, High Speed Mobile Data Research Department, and Data Networking Systems Research Department. It was Holmdel's Wireless Research Laboratory, however, and the work Richard Frenkiel and Joel Engel that ranks among all Bell Labs' most notable contributions. In the early sixties Frenkeil and Engeld led a team of over 200 engineers to develop the first cellular wireless voice transmission technology, and eventually created AMPS (Advanced Mobile Phone System), the first and one of the most widely deployed cellphone technologies (still active even today in many parts of rural America). Holmdel is effectively the birthplace of global wireless movement, possibly the most crucial communications development of the 20th century, the internet notwithstanding. But there's more. Lots more.
So what is to become of this irreplaceable landmark? Well, Lucent sold the site to a billion dollar real-estate developer known as Preferred Real Estate Investments, whose founder and CEO Michael O'Neill remarked the "useful life" of this facility is over. Perhaps O'Neill might is right that as a hotbed of technological ferment and advanced research and development Holmdel's life may have come to an end -- but certainly not so as a historic site for technology and the communications industry. Preferred Real Estate Investments has expressed their intentions not to repurpose the facility as such a historic site, or even retrofit the mammoth campus as an office space anew, but instead to raze and replace it with a three facility office park.
The other option, of course, is to directly petition Preferred Real Estate Investments whose founder and CEO (Michael O'Neill), board of directors, and senior management can all be reached by phone or email here. (We will not post O'Neill's email and phone number here -- they're currently listed under "Principals" -- but we imagine a torrent of phone calls and emails might soon find that page removed from their site, so we assume you, dear readers, will take care of preserving that information for others.) We do not suggest anything but metered, reasonable, and kind -- but firm -- requests of PREI to suck up the financial burden and reinvigorate the Holmdel facility into a museum of science and technology -- perhaps even under the auspices of Lucent -- as well as gutting and repartitioning the old space for use by new technology companies in the New York metro area. Because honestly, it really doesn't take a Bell Labs scientist to see what a remarkable and truly historic monument to man's technological ingenuity the Holmdel facility is -- while it's still around, anyway.
IEEE's "Lab for Sale," Bio of Harald T. Friis
CE Hall of Fame - Richard Frenkiel and Joel Engel
MIT's Inventor of the Week Archive
Bell Labs / Lucent - Penzias and Wilson, Chraplyvy, Walker, and Tkach, Foschini, Linn Mollenauer
Reference.com - Karl Jansky
GA - Saarinen's work at Holmdel
Images via Bell Labs and DLT Consulting
Additional research and thanks to Joseph Ferrara.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Harold Nelson @ May 21st 2008 5:02PM
COMSAT and the State of Maine could not save the AT&T Long Lines RADOME built for TELSTAR in Andover, Maine in 1962. Thankfully, some artifacts, such as the ruby for the maser, a gold plated platinium ring that connected the movable portion of the horn to the stationary part, and other artifacts, are preserved at the New England Museum of Telephony in Ellsworth, Maine.
Those intersted in preserving the history at Holmdel should cultivate a good relationship with the developer so that photographs of the facililty and grounds can be taken, and a "Virtural Holmdel" could be created online. Imagine an online world where one could enter and sit in on discussions with a virtural Harald Friis, and other BTL notables.
Those who worked at Holmdel were the technological cousins of 'the greatest generation'. BTL and AT&T, Western Electric served America well, and helped keep her free.
It is imperative to act fast to preserve history, both physical buildings, and those whom occupied them. I was fortunate to have known, though only through emails, Gene O'Neill, Project Director of TELSTAR, Nelson Upthegrove, who worked on TELSTAR at Cape Canaveral, and Irwin Welber.
Best of luck to those who work to preserve this history!
Tarry @ Aug 12th 2008 2:57AM
This is great news!
http://www.chasetheglow.com
nate @ Jul 5th 2006 1:33PM
Much less a Saarinen-designed complex. It's truly a beautiful complex, as opposed to what would probably be dropped in!
Hank Cazorp @ Jul 5th 2006 1:40PM
"So if you're anything like us, you immediately began wondering what we can do about this. Unfortunately they now own the property, so legally the general public's options are limited."
So, okay, we should abandon property rights in order to preserve an existing office park and prevent it from being made into a new office park. I guess I'm not anything like you guys, because I care about liberty and freedom and ideas a hell of a lot more than some crufty old buildings.
Richard @ Jul 5th 2006 1:42PM
Why Care? Yeah, yeah, famous things were done there, is anyone going to visit it? I won't. Take some nice photos and let's move on with our lives.
Morel @ Jul 5th 2006 1:52PM
Well if any one should be responsible for saving the site for historical reason, it should be Bell Labs/Lucent. I guess they were hard up and didn't have much choice other than to sell the facility.
I think PREI should still tear down most of the facility for new office complexes. Sure the place means a lot to us, but this is the only way the Holmdel facility could contribute to research again. what I do support is preserving a reasonable number of landmarks of the facility, and setting up a small in-house museum reminding people what Holmdel stood for.
Ken @ Jul 5th 2006 1:56PM
C'mon. You should have gotten on your high-horse while Lucent still owned the place. It's a building, for Christ's sake, and not an especially attractive one as places go. Put up a plaque or something, but don't ask somebody to buy the place and then demand they lose money on it by turning it into a museum nobody will go to.
Alex @ Jul 5th 2006 1:56PM
Honestly do you know how long it would take to tour this place? Haha it's HUGE, I've seen it (I used to run cross-country races in Holmdel and I've passed it on the way. There's a really sick XC course there btw, you guys should check it out, haha.)
But I agree with the first commentor. As interesting as this place might be, it's a waste of money/space and an invasion of our rights as Americans to think that we can control what happens to this place.
bollewolle @ Jul 5th 2006 1:56PM
One small side remark though: The Big Bang theory itself was not invented (or thought up) by these scientists, that was done by a Belgian Priest named Georges Lemaître. Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson just confirmed it by discovering the cosmic background radiation.
see here for more info: http://space.about.com/od/astronomyhistory/a/bigbangtheory.htm
dave @ Jul 5th 2006 1:57PM
I completely agree with comments 1 and 2. and for that reason, I assume I can count on Hank and Richard's support in my campaign to raze the Empire State Building, the Sears Tower, and the Transamerica Building in order to make room for more condos.
Matt @ Jul 5th 2006 2:04PM
Why would you put the burden on PREI? If Lucent found it unworthy of continued ownership, shouldn't those who purchased it be free to develop it as they see fit? True, remarkable things were done there but the accomplishment is more than simply the building where it was done. I would say that those who feel strongly that it be left intact should put their money where their collective mouths are and buy it from PREI. Then they would be free to do with it as they wish.
Matthew Winship @ Jul 5th 2006 2:04PM
I pent some time there doing consulting work while Lucent was in the process of spinning off Avaya, it was quite an impressive place. They had a wall which listed the thousands of patents that came from research at that facility. It was well into the thousands if I remember correctly.
William Beem @ Jul 5th 2006 2:08PM
I used to work for Lucent and I've been to that site many times in the past. Part of me is disappointed to see it go, but it's the only realistic thing to do. It's old and inadequate for future use. Besides, Bell Labs is about looking forward. Take a picture for posterity and tear it down.
J. Wang @ Jul 5th 2006 2:08PM
No one is asking us to "abandon our freedoms" or give up our property rights... chill out you posters above me!
It is perfectly reasonable to preserve certain cites as monuments to American achievement. More importantly, this structure is a reminder that innovative design and architecture can improve our lives and working conditions. None of us wants to be working in a gray cube 10 feet underground. Buildings are not strictly shelter. At their best they can serve as points of civic and national pride.
We can't just tear down everything old and sell it as scrap to the highest bidder.
Dan @ Jul 5th 2006 2:12PM
I think trying to shame them based solely on the 'historical' value of the place is gonna go absolutely nowhere. Better to pitch the Saarinen/architectural significance angle. At least this way they might be shamed into replacing the place with some decent looking office buildings, rather than the cookie-cutter crap we're more likely to see.
Special_K @ Jul 5th 2006 2:12PM
Okay, how about this: raise the millions of dollars necesary to buy the developers a comprable piece of property, and raise a few more million to turn the whole place into a museum cum research facility. I think we have to realize that these people will be looked upon a few centuries from now as the Edisons of their time, and we owe it to future generations to preserve the present so that, when it's the past, it's still crystal clear. Everything needs context, and inventions are no exception: this provides a context for people, in order to understand the magnintude of these inventors' accomplishments. I agree that property rights are great, but doesn't NY have some sort of historical property protection regulations? In Ontario, if something's declared an historial site, you have to maintain its exterior structure, and the general interior structure. There are houses in Toronto that are declared historical just for being old, this place is the birthplace of the cell phone- I'm sure getting it historicised would be a cakewalk.
Markarian @ Jul 5th 2006 2:19PM
I'm a geek and also a real estate investor. I have to say that, with the price of real estate the way it is, developers can't honestly be expected to really care much about tech history. While this building has a rich history of innovation, and is attractive in itself, modern professionals, seeking office space will not want to set up shop in a 50 year old building with lousy parking. Historical Sites are a white elephant. The person who owns Frank Lloyd Wright's "Falling Water" can't make any changes to it, even though the damn place is threatening to fall apart, because it's a historical site.
Older buildings are a pain to maintain. They contain asbestos and who knows what, they're not up to code oftentimes, and are expensive to retrofit.
This would never generate revenue as some sort of museum. Nor would it function as an office complex. It's design is too centralized to be useful for the many disparate companies that are probably waiting to lease space in this area. Could you imagine a lawyer who has an office in Holmdel, and has to have his clients park that far away, simply because there's only one building?
This isn't the Empire State Building or the Sears Tower. This wasn't some public building that was a internationally-recognized household name, a symbol of that area. This was a private office building, where numerous technological innovations took place, and it happens to have an exotic (for the time) design. Someday, they'll want to raze the thouroughly unremarkable-looking Intel campus in San Jose and no one will care.
mahoney @ Jul 5th 2006 2:27PM
AMPS (introduced in 1984) was not the first cellphone system in the world. NMT (Nordic Mobile Telephone) was operating three years earlier, in 1981.
Patrick @ Jul 5th 2006 2:27PM
"First, someone who knows the score needs to get in touch with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection's Historic Preservation Office"
Uh...good luck with that!
Ben @ Jul 5th 2006 2:38PM
Being a historical buildings buff and truly enjoying older buildings and their history makes seeing a complex like this disappear difficult. However I also live in a region where several old steel mills have been preserved as museums that Nobody goes into and the land could be so much more valuable as something else... Land is the one thing this country isn't producing any more of and while this complex is awesome, it is a gross waste of otherwise prime land. Maybe build a small tributary building on the site, but as for preserving it... I don't see the true value of that.
Jason @ Jul 5th 2006 2:44PM
Wow. I had no idea they were going to tear down this facility. Having grown up in Holmdel, 5 minutes from Bell Labs, I am a bit surprised to hear this. My dad even worked there when he was in high school. My guess would be the developers are not going to care about the historical significance of the building because the houses they are going to put up are going to make them large sums of money. Holmdel is overdeveloped and real estate is expensive. It's a shame...
Christopher @ Jul 5th 2006 2:51PM
The developer is full of shit.
I used to visit that site a lot, and I knew the chief engineer for the entire site. That complex was nothing less than state of the art; does anyone here really think the telecom in there alone isn't a compelling feature for repurposing?
Lucent and AT&T were saving money any way they could, so they spun all of their buildings off to management companies and leased them back, until the telecom world shook out a little bit (and we see how that shook out today). Remember, AT&T sold their 4 million square foot corporate HQ for money, and Lucent was lead by the same mold of CFO.
Beauty of the architecture notwithstanding, on purely quantifiable merits, the developer can't find a way to make it work as it stands. As an office park or corp HQ, it would be terrific, but I'm sure the developer sees more money in the shitty stripmall he'll install.
Holmdel will miss the rateables, I can tell you that. Watch the school system decline as the budgets start climbing and the McMansion residents see a jump in property taxes. Good going, NJ!
-C
bclark @ Jul 5th 2006 3:09PM
While it is true that historical/old buildings are difficult to retrofit and are also often difficult to bring up to today’s codes, as we begin looking down the barrel of the environmental gun we have aimed at ourselves, we must consider the colossal waist of resources tearing a perfectly good building down is. Firstly, imagine that most of the building materials, unless they take special care to recycle them, will go into a landfill. Secondly, imagine the amount of resources that went into getting the building there in the first place. Manufacturing of building materials uses a lot of energy and creates a lot of pollution (think about the amount of energy that goes into creating portland cement, or refining aluminum, etc.). Thirdly, imagine the additional wasted building materials from new construction that will go to the dump (go check out the dumpster at your local construction site or the house being built down the street, now scale accordingly).
This building would probably not support itself as a museum or some sort of shrine to days gone by. With a little creativity though, the building could be fairly easily repurposed as an office facility that supports the current owners goals. It is a cop-out to say that building new is less expensive than remodeling/repurposing a good existing building (Donald Trump even agrees with me on that point), it is a lazy-man's way. If the structure of the building is intact and in fair shape, it will almost always be less expensive than building new, even if you factor in asbestos abatement and necessary remodeling, even if you had to demolish everything but the building structure. It is irresponsible to our environment (and thus in the public interest) to tear down a good building. If the current owner is too lazy or not creative enough to find a useful new purpose for the building then they should sell it to someone that can. They could buy up some property or work a land trade to get space to put up their new development.
Mark @ Jul 5th 2006 3:15PM
Having done a summer internship in that building, and then spent several more years commuting there in a weird "job-like" position, I remember the building fondly. It's a decent building, but not Saarinen's best. It was enlarged in the late 1970's(?), which threw off the scale of the building.
The interior is very difficult though -- there are no window offices, and no easy way to build them.
John Stracke @ Jul 5th 2006 3:31PM
There's one thing you're missing. When I read about this a few weeks ago, the developer's main problem with the site was that it's completely unsuitable to be a modern office building. Modern companies don't build gigantic buildings like this, because they need agility; if they lay off 5% of the company, they need to be able to get rid of 5% of their space. In a monolithic HQ, you can't do that; you can't lease it out, because everybody has to come through the same space, so you just clear out part of the building and turn out the lights (but probably not the heat).
Moreover, this thing is so old, and so firmly focused on research scientists, that it doesn't have cubes, it has offices. Lots and lots of windowless offices--fine for a scientist who needs someplace quiet to concentrate, not so hot for teams that need to be able to look over the cube wall and talk.
The very fact that it was sold to a developer indicates just what a white elephant it is--Lucent entertained various bids, but no company wanted to buy it for themselves.
Shane @ Jul 5th 2006 3:41PM
"This isn't the Empire State Building or the Sears Tower. This wasn't some public building that was a internationally-recognized household name, a symbol of that area."
Are you implying that the Empire State Building and Sears Tower are "public"? Both are private commercial ventures, no different then this site.
Scott @ Jul 5th 2006 3:48PM
Does anybody really care what the cubicle where the cell phone was invented looks like? Maybe if they had some ancient never-before-read Dilbert comics on it? I agree with everyone else that has posted before me. This writter has taken the wrong stance on this issue. No more than 10 people care if it's torn down.
flamer's grill @ Jul 5th 2006 4:11PM
If you are going to petition to make this property a historical site, that sort of thing needs to be done BEFORE it is sold. To do so now would require a full reimbursement to the buyer of all sales costs, fees, and capitol spent planning the demolition and development of the entire site, if the buyer so chooses. To change the status of the site after sale would be a breech of contract.
Having the government intervene is a terrible idea. I understand this site was of historical significance, but making this site a historical one would benefit who? This hardly looks like a site that is publicly accessible. Who would appreciate the historical value? A very small number of geek tourists. The site has outlived it's usefulness, and this IS New Jersey, where land is at a premium. Forcing a developer to retain the original building for the sake of an alleged historical value is absurd and should be beyond the capability of our government. Preserving contracts and observing property rights should be of the utmost importance to our government, not jumping in and prohibiting the demolition of any building over ten years old.
liquid @ Jul 5th 2006 4:24PM
looks like it would make a nice mall.
Napoli @ Jul 5th 2006 4:55PM
As a life-long resident of Holmdel, I would be sad to see it go. I drive by the building daily and growing up a lot of my friends' parents worked in that building and were part of some of the things that were created there. I would that if more people understood the significance of that building they would be upset with the razing of the building but fact of the matter is that it is old and it hasn't been filled to maximum occupancy since the tech bubble burst. We also have two other Lucents in Holmdel/Middletown that closed up over the past few years.
jalabi @ Jul 5th 2006 5:06PM
Reading about the new owner and his intended repurposing of this historic site reminded me about that old Stephen King novel, "Pet Sematary" :) I hope the ghosts of Arno Penzias and the many other Bell Labs geniuses come and haunt the PRE dudes :)
Cheryl Newman @ Jul 5th 2006 5:08PM
In its heyday, Holmdel was a great place to work. Now its time is past. However, the concept of keeping a memento to the great work done there has merit. Thus, how about leaving the water tower (transistor model), with a commemorative plaque?
rickm @ Jul 5th 2006 5:32PM
Historical? Yeah, right. It's their land, it's a bit late to fight it now. It's not like it's an old battlefield or historic home that has some meaning. If the cubicle where the phone was invented is so important then see if the Smithsonian wants it.
I wonder if the structure could be kept and the units turned into apartments/upscale condos?
Adam @ Jul 5th 2006 5:53PM
They should turn it into a technical institute for learning, ya know, computers, electronics, telecommunications etc..
k. benton @ Jul 5th 2006 5:54PM
re: Adam : That's New Jersey actually, not New York
As it happens, you're basically right that the public interest isn't served by declaring this a historic site or suing the developer, or whatever.
Asking the developer to take the significance into account is, on the other hand, eminently reasonable. They can listen or not, but it's certainly not harmful to ask.
My displeasure (not opposition, note) is pureley aesthetic. The building itself may or may not be functional, but the area and grounds are quite appealing, visually. I have absolutely no faith that the office park that will be dropped in it's place will offer even a passing nod towards architechtural style.
Sadly, the free market doesn't offer much incentive to artistic expression, even when it would offer intangible benefits. It's not the place for government, I agree, but I do think it's unfortunate. We can continue to look forward to inefficient big-box stores (and empty ones as profits fall and the company moves on to more exploitable environs), clear-cut McMansion clusters and drab, uninspiring office parks. So much for the future.
Will @ Jul 5th 2006 6:14PM
A can't help but correct Markarian who said above that "Historical Sites are a white elephant. The person who owns Frank Lloyd Wright's "Falling Water" can't make any changes to it, even though the damn place is threatening to fall apart, because it's a historical site."
The above statement is pretty much completely wrong. Fallingwater is owned by the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy, and has undergone significant repairs. Fairly large sections of flooring were removed (and later replaced) to allow installation of high strength steel cable in the sagging cantilevers. Other parts of the restoration project include strengthening another cantilever with carbon fiber, repairing corroded steel parts that comprise most of the houses door and window framing, and waterproofing the buildings which has often suffered from leaks and mildew/mold problems.
Just thought I'd throw that out there. If people are willing to come forward and help, historical buildings aren't just old pieces of junk that sit around and rot while people stand there and take pictures of them falling apart. Things like this are monuments to the accomplishments of mankind, and are worth preserving if at all possible.
caster @ Jul 5th 2006 6:21PM
Cool campus, i'm sure 20 years from now people will drive by the condo's there and say look, years ago this area used to be relevant! now its just a monument to urban sprawl. Who needs the past? push your parents into a retirement home and get on with your life, you have better things to do with your time than listen to them and their stupid stories anyway.
give me money and screw the future! thats my moto.
Steve Stanger @ Jul 5th 2006 6:49PM
I didn't know anything about this. The facility is about 15 minutes from where I live. I used to go there weekly many, many years ago. A neighbor of mine was an engineer there and also one of the instructors of the Explorer Scouts that met there. Being the young computer geek I was he used to get me in to hang out. The facility is amazing.
-Steve
http://www.themacattack.us
aeo @ Jul 5th 2006 6:54PM
Aw gee that's sad.... well, I hope they put in a Starbucks!
Alex @ Jul 5th 2006 7:05PM
I wholely support the idea of saving the Holmdel facility. I have already sent my e-mail to the directors of PREI. I remember learning about the facility and the research done there back in my sophomore year in college. So much of what is computing and is technology was developed there. Too many people take history for granted. Save the landmarks we have, we'll miss them later.
paul @ Jul 5th 2006 7:26PM
Here in New Jersey we see the Murry Hills office as Bell Labs. This is where UNIX and C were born.
Ken @ Jul 5th 2006 7:31PM
It's really a shame to see this happen to a Saarinen building, though admittedly Lucent did some horrible things to it before selling it off. My first real job was in this building working for AT&T. As AT&T made its exit from the building to move to renovated facilities in Middletown, Lucent was busy filling the open-space between the internal buildings with cube farms. Its a pretty spectacular building, though definitely in need of some love. Sad to see it go...
Peter Fessel @ Jul 5th 2006 8:17PM
The term "Big Bang" was not coined by Penzias and Wilson after their 1965 discovery.
It was coined in 1949 by UK astrophysicist Fred Hoyle, who was an opponent of the theory, and meant to be derisive.
PJ @ Jul 5th 2006 8:29PM
Regarding PREI's recent acquisition of the Bell Labs / Lucent Technologies Holmdel Facility:
It should be noted, that there are TWO existing facilities in Holmdel, one significantly smaller, older, and more preservable.
I worked at this Holmdel facility, contributing to Bluetooth before it was mainstream, as a 16-year-old high school summer student, and again as a college Junior working on life-saving cell phone technology. I can offer only personal experience and humble opinion.
Every day I set foot in this facility, I felt honored to walk the same halls as Nobel Prize winners, brilliant scientists, and the superstars and idols of the research and development world. A brisk ascent to the top of the big green hill offered a quasi-religious experience for a young technophile, and gazing up at the worlds first RADAR antennae left me with inspiration, and a sense of awe and wonder. My supervisor comically referred to them as "Big Toys" - with a smirk that revealed his deep and abiding RESPECT for the decades of scientific discovery these inventions stood for. And I always felt that these treasures should be shared with the world.
With the acquisition of this property, there stands a one-time immense opportunity to hunt for, dig up, gather and present the remarkable stories of remarkable individuals who have paced Holmdel's halls - seeking answers to impossible questions, and devoting their lives to connecting people across the globe. Today, we take their work for granted - we have here a simple and powerful way to honor their legacy.
No doubt, the facility as it stands will need some dedicated individuals to convert the site to a museum-worthy historical preservation site, but in a country which increasingly idolizes sports stars and Hollywood celebrities, a little inspiration for scientifically minded youth could go a long way. It certainly did for me.
Alternatively, this developer can choose to replace the history-laden laboratories with office space. The thought of such a rich and landmark-worthy estate buried beneath the sands of time truly saddens me.
The fact remains that this facility stands as a rare gem of scientific legacy for both NJ and the United States. I can already see the class-trip school busses rolling in. Where else in this country will you find this kind opportunity for preservation of innovation history?
Thank you for your open ears and hearts.
anti-mahoney @ Jul 5th 2006 9:05PM
Mahoney:
Cooper demonstrated the cellular phone in 1973. He worked at Motorola, and not this Bell Labs place.
http://inventors.about.com/cs/inventorsalphabet/a/martin_cooper.htm
So your NMT thing is much later.
Dave @ Jul 5th 2006 9:07PM
I agree that that the Bell Labs site is a historic place. I would say however that Bell Labs greatest invention was the transistor. This predates Holmdel (1948.
duestown @ Jul 5th 2006 10:17PM
Ah yes, my mother, father and uncle all worked in this building, and I live just a couple miles away from it. It will be sorely missed... the cubicles were very impersonal, yes, but in a badass sort of way. They always had cool stuff there on Christmas Eve when employees could bring their kids in, like a massive Christmas tree in the lobby. As a kid I was particularly fond of the big fountain and the glass elevator, although now I'm more appreciative of the countless technologies that were developed here.
Hopefully I'll be able to give the place one more visit before they knock it down, or maybe get drunk and go to the destruction ceremony. At least they're keeping the transistor water tower up.
joseph ferrara @ Jul 5th 2006 11:56PM
In my research,I was truly amazed by the number of truly brilliant minds that worked at the Holmdel lab & the breadth of their seminal scientific work. Nobel prizes are not door prizes. I urge all of you serious about the subject to research Bell Labs at the Lucent site and in the news reports & scientific journals before making an educated decision on the worthiness of some official historic recognition or preservation of all or part of the building. I think after doing so, you will agree with Ryan Block & myself that some form of recognition beyond a plaque on a headstone is appropriate. It is not our generation which will thank us but the ones that come afterward. We just may be too close to the events to appreciate the true historic value. I have enough respect for the New Jersey DEP & National Register to abide their decision, regardless of my personal opinion. At least those trained in this area will examine the evidence. All we ask is for someone to take a good hard look.
Some word on the context: The property is appoximately 472 acre & while the building is quite large, it is a small fraction of the total property. No one is suggesting the developers lose money on the surrounding acreage. In fact, I would argue that they may find a way to profit from the preservation if they apply their capitalistic creativity.
The issue is simply what to preserve from the site and how best to acknowledge, in a meaningful & tangible way, Bell Labs'legacy for the future. If on total review a plaque says it all, so be it. But at least give it a fair review.
You should also know that the Holmdel town officials are strongly protective of the Bell Labs' legacy. See the mayor's comments in an April 2006 article in the Asbury Park Press. (link below)
PREI, is on record of being both respectful of the legacy and intent on demolishing the building, according to the NY Times article, which initally sparked my interest in the subject. I had a conversation today w/ Scott Tattar who told me PREI is a community conscious developer who has met with the Holmdel residents & intends to have more meetings. Perhaps attendance at one of these meetings is in order for myself & others who want to get both sides & more.
In closing, I think all involved in the discussion, pro and con, are showing the true value of citizen jouralism. If something is done to preserve the building, it will be a blogger & his readership, & not the established print/TV media, that brought it about. That, in itself, is a testament to technology's value.
http://www.goprea.com/news/pdfs/06-04-01_APP_Lucent.pdf
Adam @ Jul 6th 2006 12:01AM
Here it is.... FROM SPAAAAAAAAACE!
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=40.365136,-74.166963&ie=UTF8&ll=40.365136,-74.166963&spn=0.011167,0.026951&t=k&om=1
themoose @ Jul 6th 2006 12:20AM
its a shame to tare the thing down. its HUGE and beautiful. wonderfully designed and has a rich technological history. to simply tare it down to build another huge (probably ugly building) is a waste of new materials and a perfectly good existant building. why not make it into a mall, or a combination of buisness, comercial and residential? its got so much potential and oportunity.
and to the ppl who think wanting to save the building is against their freedom of choice and all, thats complete bs. we just apprechiate the building for what it was and could be in the future and dont want to see it be wasted.