« Wednesday Events Greening of Myrtle Avenue Underway »
October 24, 2007
Ocean's 13: Landmarking Against a Ticking Time Bomb
Last night, the board members of Community Board 9 unanimously approved an effort to convince the Landmarks Preservation Commission to designate a row of 13 rowhouses on Ocean Avenue. The "Ocean on the Park" houses, as they are being called, consist of ten limestones designed by the well-known architect Axel Hedman (who designed the Courtroom at Brooklyn Borough Hall as well as numerous houses in the Park Slope, Crown Heights and Lefferts Manor historic districts) around 1910 and three brick houses from about 1920. As readers may remember, one of the brick houses, 185 Ocean Avenue, was sold for $1.2 million (33% above asking price) to a developer named Meir Zarchi last spring. The developer had his plans for an eight-story, 23,000-square-foot building disapproved by DOB in September (one person who's seen the plan called it "an awful looking mess"), but he did get approval yesterday to put up a construction fence, an almost certain precursor to demolition. The other 12 homeowners report being approached by numerous developers looking to follow suit. With the official community board backing, as well as support from several local politicians, the preservation-minded residents are looking for LPC to step up to the plate before it's too late.
Calender: 10/23/2007 Meeting [CB9] GMAP P*Shark
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/2675
Comments
There must be thousands of house in Brooklyn similar to these. I don't believe these houses are anything special and don't merit historical protection.
Posted by: Polemicist at October 24, 2007 9:09 AM
There must be thousands of houses in Brooklyn similar to these. I don't believe these houses are anything special and don't merit historical protection.
Posted by: Polemicist at October 24, 2007 9:09 AM
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 9:22 AM
Well, thank goodness you don't occupy a seat on the LPC!
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 9:28 AM
They are special, but they're not "manisons."
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 9:57 AM
Landmarking is fine for people who do not own the property. But, if the buildings are landmarked, the owners will lose thousands of dollars. You are taking away some of the value of their property and giving them nothing.
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 10:07 AM
There's one thing you can say about a raging California wildfire: It gets people's attention. But the inexorable march of the smoldering Brooklyn crapfire will consume our irreplaceable streetscapes one lot at a time, until we have nothing left but a few ultra-pristine historic enclaves surrounded by phalanxes of looming millenial crap, block after block of it, bloated condo cubes squatting into infinity. It is PRECISELY these "B-list" intact stretches of lovely and historical buildings that need to be preserved; they are the muscle and sinew of our streetscape and our way of life. GO GUYS GO...I want to be a fly on the wall when the Crapmeister who has already put up a "Dead House Walking" fence discovers he is "stuck" with an exquisite limestone townhouse in perpetuity. Zarchi-licious! If I were the next-door neighbors, I'd be wary that he doesn't try to blow it up in the night and blame it on a smoking vagrant. Greed...as powerful as the Santa Ana winds and a wall of flame.
Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at October 24, 2007 10:07 AM
Perfectly stated Brenda from Flatbush! :)
Posted by: bren at October 24, 2007 10:33 AM
Brenda, you should get a Pulitzer for that piece of prose. Well said, indeed.
10:07 - you have no idea what you are talking about.
I know some of the people in this organization, and was able to give them some advice, ala our experiences in CHN. Glad to see they have gone the extra distance so fast. These houses are very worthy for landmarking, given their architect, location and history. The interiors are beautiful, as well, and the owners are a great group of very dedicated preservationists who know very well what their properties are worth. They would rather have their homes, just the way they have always been.
Good luck to you, and way to go!
Posted by: Montrose Morris at October 24, 2007 10:44 AM
"I want to be a fly on the wall when the Crapmeister who has already put up a "Dead House Walking" fence discovers he is "stuck" with an exquisite limestone townhouse in perpetuity."
The crapmeister actually owns the more modest brick house at the end - the last one visible in the image.
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 10:48 AM
Well said, Brenda. Once again, you have my undivided admiration.
Posted by: Erin Joslyn at October 24, 2007 10:54 AM
Brenda, well put! Polemecist, there may be thousands of similar structures in Brooklyn, but what happens when it's down to hundreds? Then dozens? Of course these houses should be landmarked and protected. Once they're gone, they're gone!
Posted by: GHB at October 24, 2007 10:55 AM
Oh, yes, let's landmark every bland block of townhouses in Brooklyn because we hate developers. I didn't want my kids to be able to afford it here anyway.
Posted by: Zach at October 24, 2007 10:56 AM
10:07,
The Ocean Ave homeowners are well aware that they are loosing money by preserving their homes rather than selling them to a developer. Nevertheless, it was pointed out at the hearing last night that 11 of the 12 owners of those homes not already owned by a developer support the effort to obtain an historic district, This demonstrates their high level of committment. BTW the developer-owner of the 13th house didn't even bother to show up and testify.
Polemicist,
Actually there are only two other Axel Hedman buildings facing Prospect Park--they're on Prospect Park West in the Park Slope Historic District. Also, the 10 Hedman limestones on this block are rather more elaborite than the houses he designed on Maple and Midwood Streets in the existing Prospect-Lefferts Gardens Historic District. While Hedman was prolific he certainly didn't design THOUSANDS of houses [but then again The Fountainhead is hardly the last word on architectural criticism :-) ]
Posted by: Bob Marvin at October 24, 2007 11:02 AM
I guess that you missed the CB9 meeting last night.
The community board, which has the role of balancing interests of development and preservation, voted unanimously to support landmark designation. Both the chairperson & land use committee chairman made personal comments supporting the architectural significance of the houses. But what do they know? They have only been doing the balancing act since before you were born.
I guess to the untrained eye all limestones look the alike but these particular buildings actually contain features not found in any of those "thousands of house(sic) in Brooklyn".
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 11:44 AM
The idea that if we don't tear down all of four story Brooklyn there won't be anywhere for Zach's children to live is utterly idiotic. Do we really need to be worried about room to grow when *dozens& of high rise buildings are going up in Williamsburg and downtown Brooklyn? When miles of 4th Avenue is now zoned for 12 stories? When a 6500 unit complex is planned for Long Island City?
As Brenda said, it is Brooklyn's hundreds of blocks of intact housing stock from the late 19th and early 20th c. that makes this the most beautiful of boroughs. I'm disgusted by those who want to see it destroyed in the name of a quick buck and with the flagrantly absurd excuse of the need for more housing.
Zach, I'd be happy to take you on a tour of the dozen vacant lots within a few blocks of where I'm sitting right now. There used to be dozens more, but they've been filled in primarily with LOW DENSITY (two story/two family) housing. Why? Well, this is an undesirable neighborhood so there aren't any condo developers salivating to make a big buck. THIS is an area that needs government incentives to redevelop, but our politicians, in all their wisdom, have decided that Carlton and Dean is where the government really has to step in with the big bucks to make sure housing gets built.
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 11:57 AM
Polemicist,
As a real estate consultant you should really learn more about architecture. The limestones are the culmination of the Neo-Renaissance style. In a style that embraces detail work but never to the detriment of classical proportions, these homes are as quintessential examples as you will ever find. Encompassing both unifying themes such as a common cornice and low front wall, the design also embraces a diversity of rounded and straight walled bay windows with each home having its own motif theme (e.g. the lily house second from the left). The 3 brick houses made less than a decade later show the changing architectural preferences of the era. Aside from being beautiful buildings in their own right the 3 brick buildings provide context.
You say there “must be thousands” of houses like these in Brooklyn. I would defy you to find 100 or even 10. The row is almost as significant for setting as for its architecture. Not many homes in Brooklyn have a 30 foot deep garden between the property line an the porch. There just isn’t enough space on most streets. The hundred foot width of Ocean Avenue allows those walking the perimeter of Prospect Park a clear view. There aren’t many limestones in Brooklyn that afford you the space to enjoy them as thoroughly and as not only individual homes, but as an ensemble.
If you think that people who live in apartments inherently dislike the homes you obviously were not at the Community Board 9 meeting last night. In many ways (visual and otherwise) the row is an anchor for the block. The people who own the homes want land marking and the others in the neighborhood want the land marking. Outside profiteers bent on taking by hook or crock are the only ones with a real interest in preventing this.
Polemicist, if you really care about architecture and not just turning a quick buck, please come and enjoy the vista the camera cannot convey.
Posted by: QUEST at October 24, 2007 12:21 PM
Well, I'm having an angry morning. =)
However, landmarking is an extreme government action. I love a historic district as much as the next guy, but I think it should be reserved for truly exceptional cases, and these, in my mind at least, ain't it.
Now, I live in what is rapidly becoming a condo park (six skyscrapers going up within rock-throwing distance of my fire escape), but a few limited upzonings like 4th Avenue don't address a ground-up housing shortage. They just create local concentrations of luxury housing. There are plenty of places in the world where attractive new development replaces old stock. I agree NYC isn't one of them right now, but frankly, I'd rather encourage positive change than turn Brooklyn into an unaffordable museum of Victorian construction. And I love Victorian construction. But if there's no economic incentive to redevelop more of the vast low-rise swaths of Brooklyn, there's not going to be a ton of growth in inventory, either.
Posted by: Zach at October 24, 2007 12:27 PM
Zach,
Maybe I just didn't understand. But unaffordable museum of Victorian construction or local concentrations of luxury housing, how does either address the shortage of affordable housing. I'd rather see preservation through landmarking since the alternative doesn't solve the problem either.
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 12:40 PM
Zach, your post is a bundle of contradictions, as has just been pointed out to you. If you think that apartments directly across the street from Prospect Park is going to be affordable, you are stupider even than you originally appeared to be. Brooklyn is currently undergoing an unprecedented building boom, and yet, mirabile dictu, nobody is rushing in to build anything but luxury housing. I pointed out on another thread that the free market has never solved the problem of affordable housing, and it isn't about to. Once again, there's plenty of vacant space in Brooklyn for affordable housing, but without government incentives it isn't going to happen. Allowing someone to tear down precisely what's distinctive about Brooklyn, when there are still areas that are rubble crying out for new apartment buildings, is, once again, stupid.
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 1:12 PM
Where is written that the rights of all American's are Life, Liberty, and an apartment (in a high density cheaply built brick tower block in the a good nab, in one of the most expensive cities in the world)?
Historic buildings should be preserved and cherished for future generations, not destroyed in the name of housing future generations.
Zach, why are you trolling around a forum dedicated to Brownstones and other historic buildings if you are so anti historic buildings?
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 2:26 PM
Is the use of "mirabile dictu" really going to pass without comment? :-)
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 2:53 PM
Well Bob or 2:53 would you please enlighten the rest of us?
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 3:22 PM
As Bob said, it means "wonderful to relate" (essentially "I'm happy to say").
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 3:24 PM
Thank you.
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 4:45 PM
Brenda, may I please ask for your hand in marriage?
Posted by: guest at October 24, 2007 5:08 PM
If I accept, you have to renovate the Crazy Stable. Think twice, boyo (or girleen, wink).
Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at October 24, 2007 7:14 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.