« Wednesday Food & Drink Round Up Affordable Housing Sticking Point for D'town Tower »

March 7, 2007

Petitioning Bruce to Spare Ward's Bakery

wards030707.jpg
Ron Shiffman of Pratt Institute wrote the following email to urge preservation-minded citizens to sign the online petition to save the 1911 Ward's Bakery from Bruce Ratner's bulldozers:

Despite what you might have read, the fight to stop and revise Forest City Ratner's proposals for the Vanderbilt Yards (Atlantic Yards) is far from over. A number of lawsuits have yet to be decided. The federal lawsuit will be heard by the Judge, and a decision of whether it will stay in federal court or shift to the state court will be made next month. Other cases will be filed as well. Let's ask our elected officials to do the responsible thing for a change, and keep FCR from further harming our community by demolishing these beautiful & significant buildings. If it can happen here, it can happen in your neighborhood next. Downtown Brooklyn today, Manhattanville tomorrow, & who knows where the day after. HELP Stop the demolition, & then get engaged! Let's unite in solidarity.

Even if you're one of those people who can't help writing in D-O-N-E-D-E-A-L in the comments of any post about Atlantic Yards, it's hard to argue with the fact that saving this building for "adaptive reuse" (as they call it in the preservation biz) is a no-brainer. It would also be a great p.r. move for Bruce to pretend he has some grasp of what's wonderful about old Brooklyn.
Stop Demolition of Ward's Bakery [Petition Online]
Photo by Tracy Collins




Posted by Brownstoner at 9:29 AM | Comments (23)
Categories: Atlantic Yards, Brooklyn, Preservation, Prospect Heights

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/679

Comments

The Magistrate has ruled on the federal case - there is virtually ZERO chance that the presiding Judge will change the verdict, especially since Magistrate Levy is far and away the most likely jurist in the Eastern District to be sympathetic to the AY-opposition.

Posted by: David at March 7, 2007 9:45 AM

Yeah, it's over - and no one but a flunky Pratt professor would care at all about this decrepit structure.

No one cares! The hundreds of thousands of Brooklyn residents who live in small, cramped, expensive apartments simply do not care about these ridiculous old buildings. Give it up already.

Posted by: Eryximachus at March 7, 2007 9:59 AM

attack now! attack attack attack! AY opponents are know nothing losers! lost in unreality! attack! i speak for the community! i am the decider! attack! Pratt be damned!

Posted by: TT Rider at March 7, 2007 10:03 AM

Actually, I think the pathetic turnout for the various protests and community board meetings proves my point.

But, I do believe the selfish nature of anti-development crowds should be attacked. Until developers are allowed to build enough housing to satisfy the incredible demand in this city, any and all selfish attempts to keep out those who do not yet have a home should be relentlessly opposed.

Posted by: Eryximachus at March 7, 2007 10:20 AM

I actually think that this building would look nice if rehabbed, but as the above posters state, it's never going to happen. This is yet another example of people wasting their time on something that is bound to fail. But AY opponents should be accustomed to that by now.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 7, 2007 10:47 AM

that's right eryximachus....we need to tear all the buildings down so we can build YOU (supposedly a 20 something who makes 6 figures) an affordable place in brooklyn to live.

i forgot.

you have ZERO credibilty.

Posted by: anonymous at March 7, 2007 10:48 AM

I am not familiar with this building but if it is worth saving it seems to me that such efforts (and similar ones) should have been the focus of the opposition to AY in the beginning. Having stirred the pot with excessive hyperbole and "sky is falling" predictions any legitimate input toward saving historical buildings or improving various aspects of the projects will most likely be ignored at this late date.

Posted by: David at March 7, 2007 11:02 AM

I signed the petition, but wish someone had proofread it. Mistakes like "it's builder" diminish its (not it's!) credibility.

Posted by: wave at March 7, 2007 11:05 AM

eryximachus: "flunky Pratt professor?" you mean the internationally respected former city planning commissioner? disagree with his position if you wish but the name-calling only makes you look (more) the fool.

David, many more-pragmatic people testified during the environmental review in favor of adaptively reusing the former bakery.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 7, 2007 12:12 PM

I agree that this petition could have used a good proofread. "Again and again" - how about using the word "repeatedly" instead?

Also, the petition includes the inevitable attempts to scare others. Once and for all, Prospect Heights will not look like Norwoord, Ohio. Give it up. Scare tactics have not worked, so find another approach.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 7, 2007 12:35 PM

AY supporters quite trying to change the subject. No one gives a Rat's nipple about the proofreading and a petttion to save an old building is not a scare tactic.


Posted by: Anonymous at March 7, 2007 1:00 PM

Petition per se is not a scare tactic and I never said that it was. But the following phrases from the petition is most definitely a scare tactic intended to persuade people to sign:

Forest City Ratner is poised to demolish this building, even while their proposed project is still being litigated and may never materialize, leaving us with a wasteland of demolition sites.

Hence, YOU, not me, are trying to change the subject by ignoring the issue that I raised and accusing me of doing something that I did not do.

Either way, this petition will fail to save the building.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 7, 2007 1:27 PM

Ohhhhh that phrase? I took that as a truth tactic maybe I'm wierd.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 7, 2007 2:33 PM

What is so special about this bakery compared to the other buildings that will be demolished?

Posted by: Anoint at March 7, 2007 3:25 PM

Hats off to Ron Shiffman.

Some of the comments posted on the petition are very touching. I really hope Bloomberg reads them :-(

Posted by: Anonymous at March 7, 2007 4:55 PM

For the record, Ron Shiffman co-founded PICCED in 1964 and from 1990-96 was a commissioner on the NYC Planning Commission. He has over 40 years experience as a city planner at the highest level.

Surely it's self-evident that demolishing all the buildings on the block bounded by Carlton, Vanderbilt, Dean and Pacific (where the Ward Bakery stands -- and a very fine building it is) will create a disaster for the neighborhood. FCR plans to provide surface parking for construction workers there -- as if they couldn't use public transportation like every other Joe and Jane in the city. This parking lot is likely to exist for at least 10-15 years. It will create "instant blight" conditions. And, if AY does not go forward, or is radically changed, this wonderful old building will be just a memory.

Posted by: NeoGrec at March 7, 2007 6:30 PM

people like you give the anti-ay's a REALLY bad name.

Posted by: anonymous at March 7, 2007 6:33 PM

Why exactly?

Posted by: NeoGrec at March 7, 2007 7:20 PM

Josh,

You ask "And what's the plan with the building that currently houses the Maple Street School? Does anyone know?"

No plans that I know of. It's owned by the MTA (part of the Prospect Park subway station) leased on along-term basis to the MSS, and, I'd imagine, far too small to be of interest to any developer. BTW, this is a couple of miles south of AY, so I'm not sure where it's relevant to this thread.

Posted by: Bob Marvin at March 7, 2007 11:05 PM

And NeoGrec proves my point again by using the fear tactics. In this case, fear of parking lots and "disaster" (really, now) resulting from demolition. Hyperbole is sooo effective, ain't it?

Posted by: Anonymous at March 8, 2007 9:23 AM

only one man would fear those comments.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 8, 2007 12:37 PM

No fear tactics. No hyperbole. Just straight facts actually. If such a vast area is indeed used for surface parking and staging, it will indeed bring a huge number of problems with it. Already folks who live close to the footprint of the proposed development have suffered a half-day loss of water (including a laundry and tofu manufacturer -- which obviously both depend on water). They've also witnessed asbetos abatement work going on unsupervised. The FCR "community liason" office has proved itself incapable of acting on complaints and concerns. And the enviromental monitor -- required by the ESDC -- is nowhere in sight, ie. hasn't even been appointed yet as far as one can tell! But hey, we know you'd rather we just shut up and not worry our pretty little heads over the degradation of our enviroment and the enrichment through public subsidies of a billionaire developer!

Posted by: NeoGrec at March 8, 2007 2:37 PM

1. What problems will a parking lot bring? Please be specific.

2. How do you know that the asbestos removal was unsupervised?

3. How do you know the environmental monitor is nowhere in sight? If you aren't even sure if that person has been appointed, then how can you tell whether or not he or she is actually around?

4. What complaints and concerns has the liaison neglected to act on? Are the solutions to these concerns actually in that person's power?

5. When did I (anon 12:35, 1:27, and 9:23) ever say that I wanted you to shut up?

No facts in sight. Just vague suppositions intended to scare people into opposing a project that is inevitable.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 8, 2007 4:19 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions