Phase Two of Park Slope Landmarking Taking Shape


After the Park Slope Historic District expanded last spring, neighborhood preservationists got back to work on Phase Two. For the past two years, they have focused on landmarking the northern area of Park Slope, specifically north of Union Street and above 5th Avenue. Very soon, March 6 to be exact, the Landmarks Preservation Commission will hold an invitation-only meeting for homeowners within the LPC’s proposed expansion area. The LPC will provide the proposed landmark boundaries map and answer any questions. The Park Slope Civic Council, which has spearheaded the expansion of landmarking in the Slope, expects the LPC will follow with a public hearing later this year. And if all goes well, the LPC should release a designation report and hold a vote in 2014. The Phase Two area will be about half the size of the most recent South Slope expansion, and include somewhere between 250 to 300 buildings. The blue outline, above, shows the council’s proposed Phase Two expansion. The area inside the red outline is the existing district.
Photo via the Park Slope Civic Council

11 Comment

  • Long overdue, with blocks upon blocks of architectural goodies that need protection. Good luck, PSCC, you’ve certainly worked hard for this.

    • Probably a good idea to get as many buildings as possible protected near the Barclays Arena. The Park Slope historic district is already the largest in New York City with 2,575 buildings protected (Greenwich Village is 2,315 buildings protected and the Upper West Side is 2,020 buildings protected). If this expansion goes through, Park Slope will have nearly 2,875 buildings protected making it by far the largest contiguous swath of protected buildings in the city and I believe the largest in the U.S. (not by acreage, but by number of buildings protected). Good luck indeed!

  • Makes sense to me. It looks like they’ve cut off the buildings bordering on Flatbush, though. While a lot of them are bland new builds, there are a few old gems (thinking of that big old building between Flatbush and Sixth on St. Marks–could use a good cleaning on its facade, but a really lovely building to look at) that would be nice to see preserved.

  • If the lines had been drawn this way to begin with, 910 Union would not have been ruined by that ugly addition. Now it seems once the damage has been done the developer will have his way–his building will be in a landmarked district.

  • I agree with MM this is very much so long overdue. This area has some really good gems. I hope all goes well…

  • The map is somewhat misleading. The blue outline is the “study area” we’d hoped for; the LPC’s actual study area was rather smaller than that; and the proposed extension, whose boundaries are still being finalized, is even smaller than that. Apologies for the confusion.

  • Please, where can I find the actual study area?

  • I think the LPC’s “study area” was (approximately) north of the rear lot line between Union & Berkeley, to Flatbush Ave, and east of the rear lot line of buildings facing 5th Ave, to the existing historic district.

  • so basically this article is factually incorrect, and we should pay no attention to it? is that what you’re saying?

  • Too bad, if it isn’t this big. Having lived years in the ‘hood, in 3 buildings within the current historic district, and in 2 outside it (one that would now be included, according to the new map posted, if that is accurate), I must say it IS both long overdue and necessary. I never understood why the original district was so limited to begin with…perhaps it was all they could shoot for politically at the time.

  • The article is basically correct, but the map shows an inaccurate study area. Also at this time, the LPC has not yet released the boundaries of the proposed extension. They will do so at the upcoming meeting.