Fed Agency: Admirals Row Situation ‘Inexplicable’

In a letter dated yesterday, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, a federal agency that’s acted as a consultant to the Army National Guard with reference to Admirals Row, said the agency is “troubled by the recent turn of events” at the row, particularly the National Guard’s recent assertion that Building B cannot be stabilized. The letter has some strong words about how “it is inexplicable that the NY District did not complete the stabilization of Building B” before this winter and notes that the National Guard transferred $2 million to the guard’s NY District two years ago “for the express purpose of stabilizing Building B and the Timber Shed.” (The district has also said that the Timber Shed, the Admirals Row structure aside from Building B that was supposed to be preserved, has deteriorated beyond repair.) Click through to read the letter in its entirety.
Letter via HDC’s Facebook.

Ny Ngb Admirals Row Disposal-buildling b Con 11may11

0 Comment

  • Sounds like there was some ineptness, stupidity and laziness within this part of the government.

    Now there’s a surprise.

  • After all this time, now they want to restore this property??? it is too far gone already, it should should just be razed already, plant trees and call it a day.

  • They should just tear these things down so people can stop thinking about them and hoping that one day they will get repaired. It’s not going to happen, and anyway the army corps of engineers has way bigger fish to fry- I mean look at what is currently happening with the levees in the mississippi delta….repair historical structures to make nimby plusas like montrose Morris and DIBS happy or save real people’s lives….hmmmm, touch choice there.

  • It’s the Army. Their expertize is in blowing up old houses and villages, not in repairing them.

  • Actually, I don’t care one way or another about these particular buildings.

    I was just commenting on the ineptness of the government. I also don’t drive a Chevy so there’s no way for me to get to the levee.

  • At this point, the National Guard should just get out of the way, turn over the $2M allocated for stabilization to the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation and let the latter do the work. The incompetence of the National Guard, especially two years into the Section 106 process, is dumbfounding. They’re without shame.

  • Two years? Don’t give the Guard so much credit – they’ve been f**king this project up for 10 times as long as that!

  • I predict that by end of summer all the houses will be razed and the Army will hand over a vacant site to the Navy Yard.

  • From the first time I saw these buildings a year ago, I did not see any alternative to demolition.
    They have been left to decay too long.

  • In a way, my point exactly WBer. It is one thing for the Guard to have been irresponsible for decades when no one was looking, but to continue while elected officials and others are participating in the Section 106 process and watching the Guard in (in)action is stunning.

    mcKenzie, the environmental review will not be completed until the fall and the feds are going to leave the cost of demolition (or rehabilitation, if anyone still has any optimism left) to the next owner.

  • Since the plan was to turn the buildings over, in any case, choosing between saving these buildings and rebuilding levees was not a choice the Guard had to make. FWIW, randi, neither DIBS nor Montrose are nimbys, just because they love old buildings and advocate for responsible preservation. But then, I don’t expect you to be able to understand complex thinking or attitudes.

  • q man
    so you say, but the negotiations have not yet started on the money deal and all’s fair in real estate and war.

  • Hey, if my name is forever associated with preservation causes like this, I consider my comments and actions a battle well fought.

    This has nothing to do with levees or any other necessary project that the National Guard, or the Army Corp of Engineers, or any government agency is doing. Those are all good and necessary works, but are you trying to imply that they can’t walk and chew gum at the same time? That fixing the levees so ties up their expertise and attention that they can’t focus on a small project like this?

    IF they had just signed in over years ago, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Preservationists have been advocating for Admiral’s Row longer than Brownstoner’s been around, longer than I’ve lived in NYC, to way back when many of you were still in Pampers. They didn’t just discover these houses in the jungle like Ankor Wat. They were in use by the Navy in the 1970’s, and then abandoned. They’ve been on the preservation radar ever since, because they are an important piece of the history of the Navy Yard, New York and the United States’ military history and heritage, and therefore important to all of us.

    This was a totally preventable situation. And since they won’t let anyone near the site to see if the two buildings are actually unsalvageable,as they claim, then what has been pronounced will become fact. Which was the idea all along.

  • I wasn’t bloviating on a blog mickey; I was making two statements of fact.

  • Obviously these agencies want the buildings razed to the ground.

  • MacKenzie- take note. That’s a “g” in “g man”, not a “q”

    Hi g man! :)

  • bxgrl, have we met? Is the anonymity of my nom de plume a sham? Everyone likes to have their opinions validated and I am no exception, but I feel like I am missing something here.

  • er…..huh? Uh, no but Mackenzie was calling you q man. I thought if he looked at your sham of a name he might figure you know something he doesn’t. :)