russo-realty-061610.jpg
A reader wrote in wondering about the fate of Carroll Garden’s Russo Realty buildings, which we thought we slated for demolition. He noticed that while the interiors and exterior back walls had been gutted, the front facades remain intact. We talked to the manager of the development who shared some good news: “We are fully restoring the properties to their original design. We should be finished with the renovation within the next four months give or take.” Russo, the man himself, lived in the middle red building but passed away a few years ago. They are planning to keep the buildings as residences, and there is no word yet on whether the well-known signs will remain up. We hope so!
Russo Realty Buildings Biting the Dust [Brownstoner] GMAP


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

  1. benson, what’s this suburban bee in your bonnet today? Historic preservation in the United States is largely an urban phenomenon. It started in places like New Orleans, Charleston, and Boston and now is embraced in most cities throughout the nation, even LA has a very active landmarks commission.
    The suburban communities around NYC have been rather slow to embrace preservation ordinances -probably because many are overwhelmingly Republican districts. That is where the property rights sentiment is. I think you are off the mark with your idea that preservation is suburban, that’s just not the case.

  2. Minard;

    I brought in the mention of the LPC. I think I was clear that I wasn’t applying it to this situation. My point remains: the preservationists are taking on all the aspects of a wealthy suburban homeowners’s association and where possible, they use the LPC as their enforcement arm.

    Slopey;

    Ditto what FSRG just said.

  3. slopefarm no one is “objecting” to the owners “preserving”/”restoring” these buildings – the objections (at least mine) is to Brownstoner’s characterization of this non-event as “good news” as if the demolition of these houses and replacement (with virtually anything else), which was what was previously reported would somehow be “bad” news.
    Essentially what it comes down to is that there are a few people here (seemingly tiny #) that dont fetish-ize everything > 4 decades old regardless of how crappy, ugly and non-unique

  4. Who said anything about landmarking? The LPC is not even remotely interested in these buildings, they are too altered.
    That does not mean they couldn’t be restored if the owner chose to do so. Are some saying that older buildings in rough shape MUST be demolished in order to preserve democracy or something? That’s just bizarre.

  5. This doesn’t seem to be a case of LPC landmarking crappy buildings. This seems to be a case of a private landowner doing what he wants with it, restoring these buildings (to what, exactly, it remains unclear). I can’t see why that is objectionable, although I agree with benson that this would be a pretty odd case for landmarking just because we’ve all grown fond of mocking these buildings from the F train for so long. But if the owner thinks there is a gem beneath the siding and wants to reveal it as a result of personal caprice and not government intervention, who are we to argue?

  6. I’m just sad that they weren’t able to save the big blue inflatable gorilla that was on the roof of some autobody place over in that ‘hood. Now that was some nice urban character. But, alas, LPC wouldn’t return my calls.

  7. My bike was stolen in South Slope! It’s a GM Denali Men’s road bike. 1/2 black and 1/2 yellow. Please keep your eyes peeled and call/text me at 908-764-1142 if you see anything that meets that description. Thanks so much!

1 2