Analyzing Discontinued Studies of our Past and Present Environments

Center For Urban and Environmental Studies (CUES)

Project Introduction

        My name is Daniel Panucci, and as a third-year civil engineering student at NYU Tandon, I have chosen to explore the history and impact of the Center for Urban and Environmental Studies (CUES), a pioneering yet now-defunct research group active at the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn during the 1970s. CUES emerged during a period of heightened environmental awareness in the United States, when concerns about urban pollution, waste disposal, and energy efficiency began shaping public policy and engineering practice. Though CUES was eventually phased out as institutional priorities shifted and environmental research fragmented into more specialized departments, its early work, such as computerized incinerator design, represents one of the first local efforts to apply systems thinking and emerging technology to environmental engineering. For me, this topic is significant not only as a piece of my university’s legacy but also as a reflection of how civil engineers historically addressed ecological challenges, offering lessons that remain urgently relevant today.

Introduction of CUES and Poly

Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn - NYU Poly - NYU Tandon School of Engineering

The Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, originally founded in 1854 as the Brooklyn Collegiate and Polytechnic Institute, emerged as one of the most prominent centers for engineering, applied science, and technology education in the United States (Rodengen, 2018). Over the decades, the institution built a strong reputation in the fields of civil, electrical, and chemical engineering. It distinguished itself through rigorous academic standards and a growing research culture, establishing a legacy of innovation and technical advancement. As New York City became an increasingly important hub for technological development, the Polytechnic Institute played a pivotal role in preparing engineers and scientists who would go on to shape industry and infrastructure both locally and nationally.

However, by the early 1970s, both the Polytechnic Institute and New York University (NYU) were both facing mounting financial challenges (New York University, n.d.). For NYU, these difficulties were particularly pronounced at its University Heights campus in the Bronx, which had been home to its School of Engineering and Science. Declining enrollment and a significant budget deficit led NYU to sell the University Heights campus to the City University of New York in 1973. This sale marked a turning point in the trajectory of engineering education in the city. To maintain its dominant influence in engineering, NYU entered into a strategic merger with the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, resulting in the formation of the Polytechnic Institute of New York (Goldman, 1986). This union reflected a pragmatic response to fiscal constraints, but also a commitment to preserving and advancing the field of engineering through collaboration.

Figures 1 and 2 - Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, circa 1912 (left) and 1955 (right). Retrieved from Brooklyn Visual Heritage

Despite the challenges of merging two large academic cultures, the Polytechnic Institute retained its identity and continued to evolve. In 1985, it became known as the Polytechnic University, signifying its independent growth and continued excellence in science and engineering education. The relationship with NYU was further strengthened in 2008 when the university formally integrated with NYU, becoming the NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering (NYU Tandon School of Engineering, n.d.). This process culminated in 2015 with a transformative philanthropic gift from Chandrika and Ranjan Tandon, which led to the school’s renaming as the NYU Tandon School of Engineering (NYU Tandon School of Engineering, n.d.). This transition not only marked a new chapter for the institution, but it also reinforced its commitment to interdisciplinary innovation and to addressing global technological challenges through research and education.

Figures 3 and 4 - NYU Poly circa 2012 (left) and NYU Tandon School of Engineering circa 2025, present. (right). Retrieved from Poly Archives and NYU Tandon

Center for Urban Environmental Studies (CUES)

During the late 1960s and into the 1970s, just before the merger and amidst these institutional changes, Polytechnic was already beginning to expand its academic goals beyond only traditional engineering disciplines. It was during this period of intellectual growth that the Center for Urban Environmental Studies (CUES) was founded.

The Center for Urban Environmental Studies (CUES) was an interdisciplinary research program founded in 1967 during the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn era (New York University Archives, n.d.). The center was designed to integrate expertise across various engineering departments at the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, CUES focused on critical urban and environmental challenges, including transportation systems, pollution control, urban planning, building codes, biomedical engineering, flood management, and fire safety. The program was led by notable professors in various engineering fields, academic advisors, directors, and alumni. Such examples include John G. Duba, then head of the Civil Engineering Department, and Paul R. DeCicco, who spearheaded efforts to establish a Fire Research Center within the historic Jay Street Firehouse. The CUES program thrived through funding from government, industry, and private sources, producing a wealth of research documented in correspondence, newsletters, brochures, and articles. Though it was a pioneering initiative in urban and environmental studies, CUES was eliminated from the Polytechnic course catalog after 1981 and, as a result, was discontinued from the curriculum of the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, marking the end of its official presence at the institution.

The CUES program produced various newsletters, brochures, and published a wide variety of alumni and professional research projects that were undertaken at the time. One of the first brochures publicly made available is the one shown below from the 1970s, which was taken from the Poly Archives. This front page displays a large piece of construction of steel beams and concrete foundations on a site surrounded by a widely urbanized area, symbolizing CUES’s hands-on infrastructural approaches to tackling urban environmental issues, specifically in the city of New York in the 1970s.

Figure 5 - CUES brochure front cover (circa 1970). Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

        When turning the page on this brochure, the reader is met with a brief introduction on the program's founding, goals, and various research programs, which were probably meant to provide individuals with the biggest takeaways from joining this program and the potential positive impacts they could make if they did join. Additionally, the crowded subway station in the background visually reinforces the urban focus of CUES, which immediately brought awareness to the reader of the real-life, high-density environments the program aimed to study and improve.

Figure 6 - CUES Brochure introductory page (circa 1970). Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

According to this brochure introductory page of the 1970’s, the main goals of CUES were to expand the knowledge of current engineering departments and develop research program that tackle topics in urban environments, such as transportation, air and water pollution control, solid and liquid waste treatment, water resources, storm drainage and flood control, building construction, life sciences, and urban planning. Facilities and members of staff of all departments at the Polytechnic were invited to participate in the programs of CUES.

Flipping a couple of pages in this same brochure, another section outlines the "Fields of Service" in which Polytechnic Institute faculty and staff contributed their expertise. Presented in a clean, type-centric design, the document reflects CUES’s broad interdisciplinary approach to urban challenges, listing areas such as air pollution control, sociological problems, water resource management, and urban development. The listed services emphasize the center’s commitment to addressing systemic urban and environmental issues through applied research, policy innovation, and academic collaboration, making this page a valuable artifact that captures the scope and ambition of CUES programming during the 1970s.

Figure 7 - “Fields of service” page of CUES Brochure (circa 1970). Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

        The last few pages of this brochure feature a detailed listing of twenty-six individuals referred to as “distinguished staff,” who played key roles in the administration and research initiatives of the Center for Urban Environmental Studies (CUES) during the 1970s. Spanning four pages, the list presents each staff member’s title and academic affiliation within the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn at the time, followed by their educational history, including institutions attended for bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees. Additionally, each entry concludes with a statement of the professional interests of each individual, ranging from hydraulic engineering to public health. In my opinion, this was a great step towards getting new members enlisted in the CUES program, because it provides insight into the wide range of areas of study that are covered in the center’s diverse research focus. These “areas of interest” serve as a valuable reference point for prospective collaborators, students, or new members seeking alignment with CUES’s mission to address complex urban and environmental issues through applied, multidisciplinary research.

Figures 8, 9, 10, and 11 - “Distinguished staff” pages of CUES brochures, circa 1970. Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

        Professors Paul DeCicco and John G. Duba are the two most impactful individuals mentioned on this list. Paul DeCicco, director of CUES (NYU Poly Archives, n.d.), was listed as an Associate Professor of Civil Engineering who appeared to have earned his Bachelor's and Master's degrees in civil engineering at Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn (PIB) in 1948 and 1949, respectively. His “areas of interest” within the CUES program were listed as “public health engineering” and “computer science,” which could closely tie to his involvement in the fire safety research led by him and Professor Robert J. Cresci, and William H. Correale (Poly Archives, n.d.).

        John G. Duba appears to also be a director of CUES, but from an earlier time, dating back to at least 1968. On the brochure, he was listed as a Professor of Environmental Engineering and also as the Head of the Civil Engineering Department. His “areas of interest” were listed as “public administration, public works, city planning, and urban renewal.”

Figure 12 - Paul R. DeCicco, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, undated. Retrieved from Poly Archives Portrait Collection

Figure 13 - John G. Duba, Head of Civil Engineering Department, undated. Retrieved from Poly Archives Portrait Collection

Another Center for Urban and Environmental Studies brochure (undated), looks to sponsor CUES by another approach, and that is to show the recent projects that CUES staff and students have worked on in previous years. The projects listed on these brochures can be seen to tackle many environmental/urban issues arising at the time, such as analyzing the behavior of fish in certain environments and correlating them with heavy amounts of metals in the waters, which was a project conducted by Polytechnic behavioral scientists with the help of the CUES funding, a development of repulsive testing paint developed as a deterrent to the ingestion of lead based paint by children, which is still a prevalent issue in many homes today, to fire detection devices, tests, and models of stairs and pressurized building corridors to analyze various behaviors of fires and smoke to possibly design for the prevention of them. As seen from project “c” in this brochure, the mechanical engineering students who developed the fire detection device seem to be accompanied by Professor Paul DeCicco, which further proves his influence in CUES was to teach about fire safety, highlighting the programs investments in the field as a more serious urban/environmental issues to solve at the time.

Figures 14 and 15 -  “Recent CUES Projects” brochures, undated. Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

Environmental context: United States and New York in the 1960s-1970s

Studies of sustainability and urban environments in the 1960s-1970s, when CUES was founded, were not yet the most popular since not as many innovative technologies were known at the time. Environmental concerns, however, gained traction with local newspaper postings growing public awareness, and an increasing urgency around visible pollution in highly populated urban areas. Nationally, this period saw the emergence of landmark environmental milestones such as the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 and the first Earth Day that same year (EPA, 2025). These developments marked a turning point in how the public and policymakers viewed issues related to air and water quality, waste management, and the broader impact of industrialization.

In New York City, these concerns were amplified by local crises that drew attention to the need for immediate action and long-term planning. Such events include the 1966 smog event, which covered the city in harmful pollutants and served as a dramatic scenario of the health risks that could be developed by urban pollution. These conditions helped shape a growing interest in responses to such environmental challenges, as the issues at the time crossed boundaries between engineering, public health, infrastructure, and city planning. Within this backdrop, the Center for Urban Environmental Studies (CUES) at the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn could have emerged as a timely and proactive academic response. CUES was allowed for faculty professionals and researchers to examine complex urban environmental systems.

New York City Smog Event (1966) and First Earth Day (1970)

The 1966 New York smog event is remembered as a major air-pollution episode and environmental disaster, as the 3 day event from November 23-26 filled the city’s air with damaging levels of toxic pollutants. This event happened because on November 23rd, a large mass of stagnant air over the East Coast trapped pollutants in the city’s air, and for three days, New York City was engulfed in dangerously high levels of carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, smoke, and haze. Voluntary steps to minimize various gas emissions were asked of the leaders of local and state governments, and health officials recommended that people with respiratory and heart conditions remain fully indoors for the duration of this catastrophic event (Ross, 1999). Additionally, it has been discovered a few months after the event that the smog had significantly harmed public health, and there were estimates that 10% of the city’s population had suffered stinging eyes, coughing, and respiratory distress (Daily Mail, 2023).

Figure 16 - Front cover of The New York Times of the 1966 New York City smog event. The photo was taken from Neal Boenzi the morning before November 25th, 1966. Retrieved From The New York Times

        The first Earth Day, held on April 22, 1970, marked a pivotal moment in the rise of environmental awareness in the United States. Sparked by growing concern over pollution, industrial waste, and environmental degradation, the event mobilized over 20 million Americans in protests, teach-ins, and community cleanups. Organized by Senator Gaylord Nelson and coordinated by activist Denis Hayes, Earth Day was created as a way to bring national attention to the need for environmental reform and helped pave the way for significant legislation. This context strongly reflects the relevance of CUES’s founding during that same period (Wired, 2011).

Figure 17 - William K. Reilly with Gaylord Nelson (Earth Day founder), circa 1990. Retrieved from EPA History: Earth Day

        Events such as the New York Smog in the 1960s are seen to have greatly impacted the development of the CUES program, as a similar picture from the New York Smog event of 1966 was used as a front cover of a postcard envelope for various brochures and other publications developed from CUES. This proves that environmental tragedies such as the New York City smog event were taken into great consideration for the funding of the program, and the use of this picture on their envelope greatly emphasizes the need for advanced studies in the fields of environmental/urban sustainability at the time.

Figure 18 - CUES postcard, circa 1970. Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

Environmental concerns arising in 1970’s

The New York Times article “Birds Today, People Tomorrow?”  from the Mayor’s council mentions growing public concern over pollution and urban sustainability in the early 1970s. The imagery of a dead bird subconsciously imposes fears that environmental degradation could soon have serious consequences for human health. The subsequent pages show community-driven solutions, which emphasize waste disposal, reduced air pollution, and sustainable consumer habits. The push for individual action, all the way from buying returnable bottles to using public transit, aligns with CUES’ interdisciplinary approach to urban environmental challenges. These efforts marked a shift toward institutional awareness, which programs like CUES sought to develop into actionable research and policy.

Figures 19, 20, and 21 - Pages from “Birds Today, People Tomorrow?, New York Times”, April 18, 1971. Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

On a broader, national context, the U.S. was on the cusp of an environmental reckoning in 1971. Industrial pollution, which was long seen as a necessary byproduct of progress, had become impossible to ignore. The TIME magazine Environment section from May 17, 1971, captured these crucial moments through a series of stories reflecting innovation and resistance in the presence of new environmental standards.

The first story talks about a new U.S. Steel plant that was declared a model of cleaner industrial design in Baytown, Texas. It featured advanced emission controls, water recycling systems, and the use of natural gas to fuel furnaces. The plant’s cleaner operations, however, were the exception rather than the rule. Modernizing older facilities remained expensive at the time, and water pollution continued to plague nearby ecosystems (Time, 1971).

Meanwhile, on a national level, the federal government was taking its first major steps to regulate air pollution. Under the newly passed 1970 Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency was tasked with establishing national air quality standards. These included limits on carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, sulfur oxides, and other particulate matter. The response from industry was swift and defensive. Automakers decried the new rules as impractical and costly, fearing the economic impact of stricter emissions controls. Scientific studies have increasingly linked air pollutants to respiratory illness, smog, and broader public health risks. Cities like Detroit, Cincinnati, and New York were beginning to model pollution forecasts and experiment with mitigation strategies (Time, 1971). This broader awakening allowed for academic and governmental initiatives such as CUES to hit the ground running. This was made possible by this new era of environmental consciousness, where cleaner air and water, and a better way of life were no longer abstract ideals but urgent, measurable goals backed by science, legislation, and a rising tide of public demand.

Figure 22 - “Environment” newspaper article (May 17, 1971). Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

Werthamer’s The State’s Role in Land Use Development: New York State During the 1970s examines how the state and government influenced land use and urban planning in New York in the 1970s (Werthamer, S.K., 1976). Additionally, the article Another Side of New York City in the 1970s Before Environmental Clean-Up. This source provides a visual and historical representation of environmental and urban issues plaguing New York during the decade. According to the article, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency embarked on a massive project by the name of “Documerica” to report various instances of pollution and its effects on the country. More than 20,000 photos were taken, and they led to three decades of environmental revolution. The most impactful photos were taken in the city of New York, which are the ones shown in this article. From these photos, one can see the issues of pollution, waste accumulation, and urban decay before major environmental reforms. Since one of CUES’s primary focuses was pollution control in air, water, and waste management, this source provides essential background information on the urgency of such research for the city of New York at the time. As seen from the pictures in the article, New York City was not in the best condition when it came to sustainable living conditions, as debris, abandoned vehicles, and forms of used appliances were left out in the cities’ oceans, beaches, bays, and construction sites without any real intention of being there or to be removed, causing large amounts of environmental pollution (Unbelievable Facts, 2017).

Figure 23 - An abandoned car in the waters of Jamaica Bay, June 1973 (Image source: Arthur Tress). Retrieved from Another side of New York City in the 1970s before environmental clean-up. Unbelievable Facts

Figure 24 - An illegal dumping area near the New Jersey Turnpike, facing Manhattan across the Hudson River. In the background is the World Trade Center, and to the South is the landfill area of the proposed Liberty State Park, March 1973 (Image Source: Gary Miller). Retrieved from Another Side of New York City in the 1970s before environmental clean-up. Unbelievable Facts

Figure 25 - Old refrigerators were dumped in front of an incomplete apartment building at Breezy Point High Rise, Construction was stopped by the city to preserve the area for public recreation, May 1973. (Image Source: Arthur Tress). Retrieved from Another Side of New York City in the 1970s before environmental clean-up. Unbelievable Facts

Records, Newsletters, Statements, Industry Publications

This section will focus on presenting key archival materials from CUES, including departmental correspondence and financial receipts related to producing promotional materials and brochures. Additional CUES News newsletter articles offer further insight into the center’s pioneering fire safety research, particularly the tests conducted at 30 Church Street. This section also highlights an important industry publication by Professor Paul DeCicco on computer modeling for the analysis and design of municipal incinerators—an early example of technological innovation aimed at promoting urban sustainability during the 1970s environmental and engineering reform era.

CUES and the Fire Safety Breakthrough at 30 Church Street

In the summer of 1973, the Polytechnic Institute of New York’s Center for Urban and Environmental Studies (CUES) published a special issue of CUES News, which defined a pivotal moment in urban fire safety research: the fire experiments conducted at 30 Church Street. This newspaper story, entitled“From Hypothesis to Law: The Tests at 30 Church Street,” details a landmark initiative by CUES scientists, faculty, and engineers, particularly Professors Paul DeCicco and Robert Cresci, to test the effects of pressurization and smoke exhaust systems in high-rise buildings under simulated fire conditions. The study played a direct role in shaping Local Law No. 5 of 1973, an ordinance requiring stricter fire safety mechanisms in New York City skyscrapers (CUES News, 1973).

The tests were conducted in a decommissioned 22-story office building at 30 Church Street, which stood near the World Trade Center. Beginning at 5:00 a.m., CUES engineers and firefighters from the FDNY ran four large-scale fire experiments designed to simulate real-world emergencies. They observed how stairwell pressurization and smoke exhaust systems could prevent the upward spread of fire, smoke, and toxic gases, which offered critical data that informed urban safety legislation. Notably, these tests marked the first full-scale fire experiments of their kind in the United States. They were supported by a wide range of collaborators, including the New York Fire Department, the Mayor’s Office, and several private engineering firms.

Findings revealed that pressurizing stairways significantly reduced the risk of smoke infiltration and, therefore, improved escape conditions for occupants. CUES engineers proved that increased stairwell pressure created a protective barrier, preventing smoke from flowing through cracks or elevator shafts. Additionally, the success of the exhaust systems in clearing corridors further validated the combined approach that would become standard in urban building codes. As the report explains, the CUES team also experimented with smoke behavior in elevator shafts and HVAC ducts, areas overlooked in fire design but critical to containment strategies (CUES News, 1973).

This research must be situated in the broader context of 1970s urban policy, architecture, and environmental safety. Following several deadly high-rise fires in the 1960s, public attention increasingly turned toward structural fire resilience and the responsibilities of urban design in protecting life. The tragic 1967 fire at the Paramount Hotel in Boston and the 1970 Andraus Building fire in São Paulo underscored the deadly consequences of poor fire ventilation systems (Meacham, 2004). Consequently, New York City’s Local Law No. 5 was part of a broader movement toward life-safety-based codes that emphasized not just structural integrity, but the interaction between mechanical systems, human behavior, and fire dynamics. CUES’s research at 30 Church Street aligned directly with this shift, offering empirical justification for the law’s requirements and laying the foundation for future standards.

The involvement of CUES in this initiative also reflects the Center’s unique role as a hybrid institution, one that is seen to close the gap between academic research and municipal policy. Established at NYU Polytechnic in response to urban crises, environmental neglect, and infrastructure strain, CUES took a bold, interdisciplinary approach to urban research. This 1973 fire safety study exemplifies how CUES used its engineering expertise not in abstraction, but in direct service to New York City’s evolving needs. By transforming an abandoned high-rise into a controlled fire lab, CUES created a precedent for how university-led research could directly shape public legislation, a model rarely achieved in urban planning or fire protection engineering at the time.

This journal entry illustrates how technical research can have a profound regulatory and environmental impact when conducted at scale and with civic intent. CUES’s commitment to interdisciplinary, community-serving engineering serves as both inspiration and blueprint for how civil engineers can, and should, engage with the public good.

Figures 26 and 27 - CUES News Volume 3, Number 2 issue “Fire Safety Tests at 30 Church Street Conducted by CUES Researchers” (Summer 1973). Retrieved from CUES News, Polytechnic Institute of New York.

Computational Incineration: CUES and Paul DeCiccio Research Report

In the mid-20th century, as urban populations expanded and the waste crisis escalated, a quiet yet profound transformation began within the discipline of environmental engineering. The report titled Computer Utilization in the Analysis and Design of Municipal Incinerators by Paul R. DeCicco and Henry F. Soehngen, published through the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn, represents a critical node in the convergence of early digital computing and environmental infrastructure. This work, conducted under the auspices of the Center for Urban Environmental Studies (CUES), stands as a testament to how engineering visionaries anticipated the complexities of modern waste management long before they entered public consciousness.

The report opens with an acknowledgment of the escalating municipal waste problem in American cities. In an era before widespread recycling and environmental regulation, incineration was regarded as a viable solution to the urban refuse dilemma. The authors emphasize the daunting scale of the issue: per capita solid waste production had exceeded 4 pounds per day, with national totals projected to surpass 250 million tons by 1980. The necessity for a refined, scientifically-grounded approach to waste incineration was apparent.

Incineration, as defined in the report, is the reduction of municipal refuse by controlled combustion. While the concept was not new, DeCicco and Soehngen were among the first to recognize that the solution would not lie in mechanical furnaces alone, but rather in computational systems capable of modeling, optimizing, and automating the design of incineration plants. Here, the authors outline a key distinction between older incineration methods and those envisioned through computer-aided design: precision, repeatability, and adaptability.

On pages 162–163, the authors present one of the earliest conceptual frameworks for computational environmental design. Through a flow diagram, they trace a structured progression from raw input variables, such as refuse characteristics and air supply requirements, to detailed outputs like thermodynamic computations, furnace configuration, and plotting of general plant layouts (DeCicco & Soehngen, ca. 1970). Each subprogram was designed to simulate a portion of the engineering process. The computational sequence began with the input of waste parameters (moisture, ash content, density), and then moved through heat balance and air requirement computations, culminating in the graphical output of a proposed incinerator layout. These schematic depictions reflect both a pioneering use of digital modeling and a remarkably holistic grasp of systems integration—qualities that would become standard practice decades later. Notably, this modular structure anticipated modern software workflows: simulation-based optimization, cost-estimation algorithms, and automated layout plotting. In essence, DeCicco and Soehngen were practicing what we now call "computational environmental engineering" before the field had a name (DeCicco & Soehngen, ca. 1970).

This report was one of the significant research outputs of CUES at the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn. Established to respond to growing urban environmental pressures, CUES aimed to integrate scientific research, municipal engineering, and computer science, which was deemed to be a rare interdisciplinary ambition for the 1960s. Paul R. DeCicco, the principal author and CUES director, played a pivotal role in this transformation. With a background in chemical and civil engineering, DeCicco recognized the latent potential of computing not only as a design tool but as a means of urban planning and policy innovation. His leadership in CUES aligned with national trends, particularly the passage of early environmental legislation in the late 1960s, which demanded a new generation of engineering solutions for air, water, and waste pollution. Professor DeCicco’s influence extended beyond just the incinerator study. Under his guidance, CUES engaged in research on air pollution control, wastewater management, and land use planning, always emphasizing the role of computation. This approach helped establish the Polytechnic Institute as an early node in what would eventually become NYU Tandon's global leadership in environmental systems engineering.

Though today’s municipal incinerators are designed with advanced CAD platforms, real-time sensors, and AI-enhanced controls, the foundational concepts laid out in this report remain recognizable. The effort to automate complex design logic, account for environmental variables, and iteratively simulate outcomes is as relevant in 2025 as it was in 1965. Moreover, this report offers a critical archival insight into how institutions like CUES—and engineers like DeCicco and Soehngen—reframed environmental burdens not simply as civic nuisances, but as computational challenges. The foresight to apply digital tools to ecological problems decades before the rise of “green technology” or environmental data science marks this study as one of the earliest innovations in sustainable infrastructure planning.

Figures 28, 29, and 30 - “Computer Utilization in the Analysis and Design of Municipal Incinerators” Report (1970), Pergamon Press. Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives, Industry publications, 1970-1975, inclusive box: 1, folder: 4 (Material Type: Mixed Materials).

Correspondances/Receipts

This section will analyze a series of internal documents from 1968 that reveal how CUES’s polished public image might have been underpinned by complex logistical efforts and subtle organizational issues. The documents include two internal memos by Harold Rubin, Director of Public Relations, and a letter from Distinguished Professor Donald F. Othmer. They are seen to reveal essential behind-the-scenes operations that supported the public image and outreach strategy of CUES. Together, these materials expose the institution’s intense focus on promotion, prestige, and inter-institutional networking, but they also hint at some early administrative frictions and operational vulnerabilities within the CUES program, which may have then led to its discontinuation in 1981.

The first document, dated November 1, 1968, involves Harold Rubin’s coordination with the Alumni Office over the printing of the CUES promotional booklet. Rubin carefully explains that the smog photograph used in the brochure booklet already includes a pre-designed dot pattern and must be handled with technical precision. His concern for returning the original image underscores a highly curated, almost delicate management of CUES’s visual identity (Rubin, 1968). The booklet was seen as a brand vehicle for CUES, and Rubin’s memo reveals the degree to which the visual aesthetics and overall presentation were embedded in the mission. However, this also hints at a possible shift in priorities, where image-making risked overtaking infrastructural or research robustness. The memo could suggest a culture preoccupied with managing appearances rather than solving environmental problems, which may have diverted attention from long-term planning or programmatic sustainability.

Figure 31 - Inter-office correspondence: Memo to Mr Robert Van Valer, Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn Alumni Office (November 1, 1968). Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

The second document, dated July 1, 1968, again from Rubin to Professor John Duba, details the process of mailing over 2,600 booklets to individuals on the President’s Mailing List for the CUES program. Organized by zip code and alphabetized within each area, this large-scale outreach effort was both analog and computer-assisted. Rubin’s warning about human error resulting in machine error, and his instructions to mark deletions only with colored pencil, exposes the ambition with the concern of fragility of their distribution system. The reliance on computer labels in 1968 was innovative, yet the need for human correction and strict procedural compliance also indicates how thin the margin for error was, and everything needed to be checked more often (Rubin, 1968). This suggests a program working ambitiously at the edge of its logistical capacity. As we’ve seen in previous analyses of fire safety tests and early computational incinerator design, CUES excelled in high-concept research. But in this memo, limitations of such implementations are notable, where minor technical oversights or miscommunications could lead to larger organizational issues down the line.

Figure 32 - Inter-office correspondence: Memorandum to John Duba replying to CUES Mailing List (July 1, 1968). Retrieved from  Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

The third document, dated July 19, 1968, is a letter from Donald F. Othmer to Professor John Duba once again, congratulates CUES on its “very handsome brochure” while suggesting minor additions to its content. Othmer’s feedback reflects both the prestige CUES had accumulated and the kinds of elite scientific circles it moved within. He references work with the UN, WHO, and the Polish government on major environmental engineering efforts, which validate CUES’s international credibility. His suggestions about missing fields of service and agency listings underscore a possible lack of comprehensiveness or foresight in the original brochure (Othmer, 1969). Even though Professor Othmer praises the work, his recommendations for future editions indicate blind spots. When combined with the previous documents, we see a pattern: a program driven by ambition and image, but perhaps hindered by logistical strains, incomplete planning, or a lack of focus.

Figure 33 - Letter from Donald F. Othmer to Professor John Duba (July 19th, 1968). Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives

Together, these documents highlight how CUES, while pioneering in urban environmental research and public communication, may have faced internal tensions between administration, presentation, and execution. The cracks we see, whether in overly meticulous visual curation, manual corrections to digital processes, or after-the-fact content revisions, may foreshadow the challenges that eventually undermined the program’s longevity.

Fire Safety Research at NYU Poly 

This section will look to explore the pivotal fire safety research conducted at NYU Poly during the 1970s, primarily through the work of the CUES. As New York City faced mounting concerns over high-rise building safety, CUES emerged as a leader in experimental fire testing and urban resilience. Their groundbreaking work, most notably the full-scale fire tests at 30 Church Street and additional tests of brownstones through the Bushwick community in Brooklyn, N.Y, contributed directly to legislative change and influenced national safety standards. This research highlights NYU Poly’s critical role in shaping safer urban environments and reflects the intersection of civil engineering, public policy, and environmental responsibility during a time of growing urban complexity.

“Set a Fire to Stop a Fire”: Experimental Methods in Urban Fire Safety Research

The story “Set a Fire to Stop a Fire,” published in Form & Function, Issue 4 (1975), tells the story of NYU Poly’s CUES-led fire safety experiment and was retrieved from the Polytechnic archival collections.

In the 1970s, urban centers across the United States faced a severe crisis in housing safety, particularly in low-income neighborhoods composed of aging, combustible structures. The Form & Function article titled “Set a Fire to Stop a Fire” (1975) recounts a remarkable and unprecedented research initiative undertaken by the Center for Urban and Environmental Studies (CUES) at the Polytechnic Institute of New York. Led by Professor Paul R. DeCicco, the research involved setting controlled fires in abandoned row houses in Bushwick, Brooklyn, which was one of New York’s most fire-affected neighborhoods at the time, to evaluate material resistance, structural vulnerability, and fire-containment systems.

The primary targets of the study were spaced in the apartments called cocklofts, which are concealed voids between ceilings and roofs that allowed fire to travel rapidly between dwellings. The study’s experimental design had twenty-four controlled fires ignited across multiple attached structures to examine how fire-stopping systems, like SHEETROCK Gypsum Panels and THERMAFIBER Mineral Fireproofing, performed under extreme thermal conditions (Form & Function, 1975).

Professor DeCicco emphasized the moral imperative of the project: “We need to save [these structures] to house our low-income population for many years to come,” he stated, while also noting that row houses, despite their poor condition, must be made safe through technological and legislative reform. These tests demonstrated that inexpensive interventions, which cost roughly 50$ per building, could drastically enhance fire containment and prevent disaster. In one test, temperatures in a burning unit reached 1,700°F, but adjacent buildings protected with THERMAFIBER showed no sign of fire or smoke infiltration (Form & Function, 1975). The images below illustrate pages from the actual published story, which also shows pictures of live tests showing the fire-stopping ability of drywall and fiber insulation, the installation of gypsum board tests like SHEETROCK and THERMAFIBER as well as their test results, and also Professor DeCicco performing the tests himself and describing the technical aspects of them to New York Fire Commissioner O’Hagan and Chief Dunn (Form & Function, 1975).

Figure 34 - “Form & Function” cover page, Issue 4 (1975). Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives, Industry publications, 1970-1975, inclusive box: 1, folder: 4 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)

Figure 35 - “Set a Fire to Stop a Fire” Page 1. Form & Function”, Issue 4,1975, p. 6-7. Retrieved from  NYU Poly Archives, Industry publications, 1970-1975, inclusive box: 1, folder: 4 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)

Figure 36 - “Set a Fire to Stop a Fire” Page 2. Form & Function”, Issue 4,1975, p. 8-9. Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives, Industry publications, 1970-1975, inclusive box: 1, folder: 4 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)

Figure 37 - Professor DeCicco igniting furniture in a living room test. Retrieved from “Set a Fire to Stop a Fire” Page 2. Form & Function”, Issue 4,1975, p. 8

Figure 38 - Professor DeCicco (left) described the fire test to New York Fire Commissioner O’Hagan and Chief Dunn. Retrieved from “Set a Fire to Stop a Fire” Page 2. Form & Function”, Issue 4,1975, p. 9

This research fits squarely within CUES’ mission to tackle urban environmental challenges through applied science. The Bushwick fire tests reflect CUES’ interdisciplinary approach, merging civil engineering, materials science, and public policy to inform safer housing codes. These experiments were not isolated incidents but part of a broader campaign by CUES to use empirical research to influence policy, including earlier tests conducted at 30 Church Street and innovations in incinerator design. For the Polytechnic Institute of New York at the time, this work stood as a testament to its role in shaping responsive, urban-focused engineering solutions. Today, for civil engineering students, this research remains a blueprint for civic responsibility, material innovation, and systemic reform.

The Bushwick fire tests conducted by CUES had a wide-reaching impact, garnering coverage in The New York Times and later inclusion in the EPA’s “Documerica” photo archive, which helped document environmental crises nationwide (Unbelievable Facts, 2017). These tests not only influenced fire safety standards and building codes but also became part of a national visual record that inspired environmental reforms and highlighted the role of scientific intervention in urban public safety and sustainability.

Figure - 39 “House Set on Fire In Test of Materials” (June 23, 1974). Retrieved from The New York Times Archives

Figure 40 - A building set on fire by Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute to test wires and insulation, June 1974. (Image Source: Danny Lyon) Retrieved from Another Side of New York City in the 1970s before environmental clean-up. Unbelievable Facts

Jay Street Firehouse Records, 1972–1981

The Jay Street Firehouse Records document the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn’s acquisition, renovation, and adaptive reuse of the historic Old Brooklyn Firehouse, located at 365–367 Jay Street. Designed by architect Frank Freeman in 1892, the Romanesque-style building served as Brooklyn’s fire headquarters until 1972 and was listed on the National Register of Historic Places that same year (Hall, 1979, box: 2, oversize: 1 (Material Type: Text)).        

In 1976, following extensive planning and negotiation, the Polytechnic Institute entered a long-term lease agreement with the City of New York to convert the site into a cutting-edge fire research facility. Launched by none other than CUES director Paul DeCicco, the renovation initiative aimed to integrate applied fire science research with urban development concerns. Architect William A. Hall led the design of the multi-functional space, which included simulation labs, wind tunnels, a fire reference library, and public exhibition areas  (Hall, 1979, box: 2, oversize: 1 (Material Type: Text)). The project was supported through a combination of federal, state, and private funding sources, reflecting Poly’s collaborative approach to research-driven urban problem solving. This initiative embodied CUES’s mission to merge academic inquiry with real-world application, particularly in the realms of public safety, environmental design, and community engagement.

Figures 41, 42, and 43 - Jay Street Firehouse Plans & Elevations (1980). Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives, William A. Hall & Associates Plans, 1979 October, undated box: 2, oversize: 1 (Material Type: Text)

CUES Today and Lasting Impact

Why Was CUES Discontinued?

Despite its groundbreaking work in fire safety, waste systems, and urban environmental design,the Center for Urban and Environmental Studies was quietly discontinued in 1981. As the archival documents analyzed suggest, this dissolution was not sudden but rather the result of internal administrative strain, shifts in institutional focus, and the challenge of sustaining interdisciplinary, publicly engaged research over time. While CUES no longer exists in name, its mission may be more relevant than ever, which is reflected in modern programs that carry forward its spirit of urban innovation, such as NYU’s Center for Urban Science and Progress (CUSP).

Center For Urban Science + Progress: A Modern Day CUES

Founded in 2012, the Center for Urban Science and Progress (CUSP) at NYU Tandon focuses on data-driven solutions to complex urban challenges. Unlike CUES, which emphasized physical experimentation, such as fire tests and material performance, CUSP leverages advanced technology, including AI, big data, and urban informatics, to improve urban systems like energy, infrastructure, and environmental monitoring. CUSP's work on "urban observatories," smart cities, and predictive modeling of traffic or air quality reflects an evolution of CUES’s mission into the digital age (NYU Tandon School of Engineering, n.d.).

Even though the tools and technologies have changed, the goals remain strikingly similar: understanding and improving the urban environment through applied research. CUSP represents a systemic continuation of CUES’s interdisciplinary ethos, now amplified through computational capacity. Whereas CUES built physical models and conducted real-world tests, such as those at 30 Church Street or Bushwick, CUSP conducts large-scale simulations using sensor networks and city-scale data. In both cases, research emerges from a deep entanglement with New York City's infrastructure and population needs.CUES was a response to the material and regulatory crises of the 1970s, while CUSP can be seen as a response to the data, sustainability, and resiliency challenges of the 21st century.

Figures 44 and 45 - Center for Urban Science + Progress (CUSP) at NYU Tandon School of Engineering (website home page and program description page). Retrieved from NYU Tandon School of Engineering: Center for Urban Science and Progress (CUSP)

Personal Reflection on CUES Legacy

 As a civil engineering student, CUES has proved to me that environmental/urban development is a field that requires a wide range of thorough analyses and tests to verify new methodologies of research. These tests and research methodologies are a great example of something that can be implemented in academics through rigorous courses or research programs, and CUES was a prime example of such a program. From incinerator modeling to smoke-control experimentation, its work offered pragmatic solutions grounded in urban realities. Its dedication to combining scientific rigor with public good left a legacy of engaged scholarship that bridges environmental, social, and regulatory domains. CUES also demonstrated that engineering education should not exist in isolation from the communities it serves, which is as relevant now as it was in 1968. Overall, CUES at the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn helped shape safety legislation, environmental awareness, and technical standards in an era when such connections were still emerging, and through programs today similar to it, such as CUSP, the legacy of CUES continues, and can be expected to continue for years to come.

References

Primary Sources

• Center for Urban and Environmental Studies (CUES) (circa 1970) Brochures. Retrieved from CUES brochures, circa 1970. box: 1, folder: 3 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)
• Harold Rubin (1968), Inter-office correspondence: Memo to Mr Robert Van Valer, Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn Alumni Office.. Retrieved from Correspondence & Receipts, 1968-1969, inclusive. box: 1, folder: 1 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)
• Harold Rubin (1968), Inter-office correspondence: Memorandum to John Duba replying to CUES Mailing List. Retrieved from Correspondence & Receipts, 1968-1969, inclusive. box: 1, folder: 1 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)
• Donald F. Othmer (1968), Letter from Donald F. Othmer to Professor John Duba. Retrieved from Correspondence & Receipts, 1968-1969, inclusive. box: 1, folder: 1 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)

• Time (1971, May 17) “Environment” newspaper article. Retrieved from Newspaper and magazine clippings, 1971, undated box: 1, folder: 5 (Material Type: Mixed Materials) 

• The New York Times (1971, April 18) Birds Today. People Tomorrow? What can you do to end New York's environmental crisis? Retrieved from Newspaper and magazine clippings, 1971, undated box: 1, folder: 5 (Material Type: Mixed Materials) 
• Paul R. DeCicco & Henry F. Soehngen (1970) Computer Utilization in the Analysis and Design of Municipal Incinerators Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. Vol 4, pp. 161-186. Pergamon Press. Retrieved from Industry publications, 1970-1975, inclusive box: 1, folder: 4 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)
• Poly Buildings (1980) Jay Street Firehouse Plans & Elevations. Retrieved from Poly Archives & Special Collections, Bern Dibner Library of Science and Technology 5 MetroTech Center, Brooklyn, NY 11201
• William A. Hall & Associates Plans (1979 October). Retrieved from Series I: Jay Street Firehouse Records, 1972-1981. box: 2, oversize: 1 (Material Type: Text)
• unknown, “Paul R. DeCicco,” Poly Archives, accessed April 22, 2025, https://polyarchives.hosting.nyu.edu/items/show/584 
• Poly Archives at Bern Dibner Library of Science and Technology. (n.d.). John G. Duba [Photograph]. NYU Special Collections. https://hdl.handle.net/2333.1/sxksn6jz
• Brooklyn Visual Heritage. (n.d.). Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn. Retrieved April 21, 2025, from http://www.brooklynvisualheritage.org/home/polytechnic-institute.html
• Polytechnic Institute of New York (1973) Cues News Volume 3, Number 2. Retrieved from NYU Poly Archives, CUES Newsletter, 1971, undated box: 1, folder: 3 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)
• Form & Function. (1975). Set a fire to stop a fire (Issue 4, p. 6). Polytechnic Institute of New York. Retrieved from Industry publications, 1970-1975, inclusive box: 1, folder: 4 (Material Type: Mixed Materials)

Secondary Sources

• Rodengen, J. L. (2018). 150 years of invention, innovation, and entrepreneurship: A commemorative history of the NYU Tandon School of Engineering. NYU Tandon School of Engineering. https://engineering.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/2018-09/Polytechnic_eBook-150-years.pdf 

• Mann, C. C. (2011, April 21). April 21, 1970: Earth Day marks the birth of the environmental movement. WIRED. https://www.wired.com/2011/04/0421first-earth-day/

• Daily Mail. (2023, June 29). NYC's major air pollution disaster that killed 168 people in 1966. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12171099/NYCs-major-air-pollution-disaster-killed-168-people-1966.html

• Excelsior University. (n.d.). Online degree programs. Explore Excelsior. Retrieved April 21, 2025, from https://explore.excelsior.edu/UWBRAND_V2.html?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=FY24CWGENERAL_BY_PDSE_BRND_FY24Q1&msclkid=b84f79c3c4ef1dec28b911c52521fd6e&utm_term=online%20degree%20programs&utm_content=Non%20Branded
• New York University. (n.d.). Polytechnic Institute: Historical facts – 1973–1985. NYU Archives. Retrieved May 10, 2025, from http://www.nyu.edu/library/bobst/research/arch/test/175/facts8.htm
• Goldman, A. (1986, January 5). Brooklyn’s Polytech: A storybook success. The New York Times. Retrieved May 10, 2025, from https://www.nytimes.com/1986/01/05/education/brooklyn-s-polytech-a-storybook-success.html
• NYU Tandon School of Engineering. (n.d.). NYU–NYU Poly fact sheet. Retrieved May 10, 2025, from https://web.archive.org/web/20161008154357/http://engineering.nyu.edu/files/ftp/files/NYU-NYU-Poly-fact-sheet.pdf
• New York University Archives. (n.d.). Guide to the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn Department of Civil Engineering course outlines and descriptions RG 017. NYU Special Collections. Retrieved May 10, 2025, from https://findingaids.library.nyu.edu/poly/poly_rg_017/

• Werthamer, S. K. (1976). THE STATE'S ROLE IN LAND USE DEVELOPMENT: NEW YORK STATE DURING THE 1970S (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Chicago).
• Poly Archives.Taking the Measure of Hell: A History of Fire Safety Research at Brooklyn Poly. (2025). Nyu.edu. https://polyarchives.hosting.nyu.edu/exhibits/show/fire-safety 
• ‌Unbelievable Facts. (2017, September 28). Another side of New York City in the 1970s before environmental clean-up. Unbelievable Facts. https://unbelievable-facts.com/2017/09/new-york-city-in-the-1970s.html 
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2025). EPA history: Earth Day. https://www.epa.gov/history/epa-history-earth-day
• Anderson, H. Ross (1999). "Health Effects of Air Pollution Episodes". In Holgate, Stephen T.; Koren, Hillel S.; Samet, Jonathan M.; Maynard, Robert L. (eds.). Air Pollution and Health. San Diego, California: Academic Press. ISBN 978-0-12-352335-8.
• NYU Tandon School of Engineering. (n.d.). Center for Urban Science + Progress (CUSP). https://engineering.nyu.edu/research-innovation/centers/cusp
• Meacham, B. J. (2004). Performance-based building regulatory systems: Principles and experiences. International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction. https://cibworld.org
• NYU Tandon School of Engineering. (n.d.). Center for Urban Science and Progress (CUSP). https://engineering.nyu.edu/research-innovation/centers/cusp