Restoring Downtown Brooklyn to Its Former Grandeur

Lisa;

Ah yes, another article on looking back to the Brooklyn's grand old days. Recently it's been a look back at the industrial glory days. In that case, the whipping boys are developers and China. Now it's a look back at the "glory" that was downtown Brooklyn before this monstrosity known as Cadman Plaza was built. For this ocassion, let's bring out another reliable whipping boy,Robert Moses.

Yes, this is truly a despicable piece of work, building a pedestrian plaza in the heart of downtown, surrounded by civic structures. The irony is that if he had not done this, the same folks would be lamenting the lack of a European-style piazza in our cities.

Please stop this madness. While Cadman Plaza could certainly use some improvement, it is a far more pedestrian-friendly place than Grand Army Plaza. Yes, Robert Moses, that great friend of the automobile, built a pedestrian plaza.

I almost fell out of my seat when I read your last statement (sermon?) that hopefully we will never repeat such a mistake again. Well, I don't think you have to worry about that. With the mindset that you and others promote, NOTHING in the way of great public works goes on in this town anymore. You and the other navel-gazers will be content with looking at photos of Brooklyn in the past, because it seems that this is where your mind is at

Posted by: benson at August 27, 2008 10:15 AM

Montrose;

Please spare me the lectures. I am not arguing against those who wish to study the past. I happen to have an interest in history too, and that includes architecture.

We already HAVE a great historical society, which has published several fine books of photos of old Brooklyn, much of it centered on downtown. If folks have an interest in this topic, I would heartily recommend that they join the Brooklyn Historical Society and purchase their books, as I have done.

My issue with this particular story and effort is that of perspective and the sermonizing. This mindset, which can also be found the "Forgotten NY" web-site and others, goes to the opposite extreme. They see NOTHING of worth in new projects, and focus incessantly on the mistakes Moses and his kind made. They lose sight of the fact that in any great endeavor, mistakes will be made. They have developed an anti-progessive mindset.

Once again, I refer you to Lisa's last statement/sermon. It is simply ridiculous. When will these people be satisfied - when we declare every decrepit factory and building in the borough a landmark, that cannot be touched? They are losing perspective, to our detriment. Say what you want about Moses, but the fact is this: since he was pushed out of the scene, NY has not built one great public works project, except for the water tunnel. Well, who needs that - let's launch another effort to look at the past, even though we already have a great historical society. Ridiculous.

Posted by: benson at August 27, 2008 10:57 AM

Bxgrl;

After you finish laughing, I refer you to zqori's post at 10.53 AM,in which he or she expresses their like for Cadman Plaza. I guess the 20 year streak is over.

I will continue to speak out against a mindset that is holding back progress in this city.

Posted by: benson at August 27, 2008 11:32 AM

East River;

You're a reasonable person,so I'll respond in kind.

If Brownsotner and Lisa stuck to stories about brownstones and architecture, I wouldn't go on the attack. Where I have a problem is when she often ventures into lectures on how our city and society should be ordered, and it reveals a mindset that I find quite objectionable, because it is holding back progress in this town. If she uses this platform to speak out, I will provide the critical analysis it needs.

As I keep mentioning, what I find lacking in so much of this discussion is the lack of any economic or historical perspective. People seriously propose putting ship repair facilities in the east river, without doing just a cursory check of the economic feasiablity of such an idea. Lisa touts a report from an advocacy group that shows that development and rezoning led to the loss of 32,000 manufacturing jobs during the Bloomberg years, when a cursory check of the facts shows that NYC has lost HUNDREDS of thousands of manufacturing jobs during the past 50 years, due to the larger macroeconomic trends afoot. Bxgrl tells us that Moses should have poured money into mass transit, which is a statement just completely lacking in any kind of perspective. How exactly are trucks supposed to move goods into and out of this town: by riding on subway tracks? Moreover, she makes this statement without even knowing the history of that era, when funding for mass transit was not to be had.

Here's an example for folks to consider. In the 1920's and 30's, the city of Cincinati spent a fortune building a subway system. You know what happened to it? It never opened. By the time it was ready, the city fathers considered such a form of transportation obsolete, and decided not to sink another penny into it. They diverted all future funding to highways. THIS is the era in which Moses operated, and he worked within these constraints to get things done. I admit he made mistakes, but I'll tip my hat to him any day as opposed to these Monday-morning quarterbacks who are trying to institute an anti-progressive mindset in this city, a city that once prided itself on the need to build, build, and build some more, to move to the future.

Posted by: benson at August 27, 2008 11:51 AM

Bxgrl;

I am refering to the funds that were used to build the arterial highway system, such as the Gowanus. These highways were built precisely because trucks WERE using the streets, to no one's satisfaction. The residens didn't like the quality of life issues, and the manufacturers and truckers didn't like the economic impact of the time it took to deliver anything. Think about how long it would take a truck to deliver goods from Jersey to, say, Bushwick. That lost time would translate right in to the cost of the produce.

The drive to build arterial highways was necessary and unstoppable at that time. As long as folks are stating that they want to look into the past, I suggest that they look at photos of what the west side of Manhattan looked like before the Miller Highway viaduct was built - total paralysis due to the gridlock between the port traffic and the north-south trafic.

Posted by: benson at August 27, 2008 12:55 PM

Montrose;

I'm not trying to be argumentative (really!), but I have to disagree with some of what you say. In fact, your arguments go to the essence of why I think we are getting no where in this city.

No one doubts that the destruction of the old Penn Station was a trgedy, especially when one looks at the POS that replaced. Likewise, I agree that some of Moses' proposals were off-base, and we are better off that he lost those issues (the expressways through Manhattan, for example). These were seminal cases in the life of this city, and spurred the preservationist movement. My point is that this movement has now over-reached, and is now blocking progress in this city, whether they realize it or not, and this Cadman Plaza case is a perfect example.

I believe that Moses executed a huge public improvement by making way for Cadman Plaza. The early America city planners had no use for pedestrian plazas in the middle of the city, that make European cities walkable and charming. We should praise him for having the fortitude and moxie to do this despite having to raze an already-developed area. If one or two buildings of secondary architectural merit had to be knocked down to make way for this imporvement, well, progress is rarely free.

You may not like the civic buildings that ring around this Plaza, but these can be replaced over time, for further improvement. That is not difficult to do. It is worth remembering that the buildings around St. Mark's square in Venice were built over a 500 year span. Hopefully the same will happen with this plaza. What Moses did, however, was the most difficult and fundamental point: building a public, pedestrian plaza.

You may think that "build, build, build" is not a good thing, but I'll take it any day over "preserve, preserve, preserve". Venice is no longer a living city because they took this attitude.

Posted by: benson at August 27, 2008 2:37 PM

Montrose;

Good post, as usual. I think we can agree that some balance is necessary. However, when we have a situation whereby the city has not undertaken one major public improvement in 50 years (except for the warter tunnel), I would say that we do NOT have a balance.

Here's a thought experiment for you. Take any of the large public works undertaken in NY, and try to imagine if they could be done today. Imagine the city trying to widen Houston St in Manhattan today, as it did when the "F" line was built. Imagine the city building another Flatbush Ave extension, which connected the Manhattan bridge to Flatbush Ave at the Atlantic Terminal area. Mr. Walsh and his cohorts at Forgotten NY would go ape, running story after story with photos of "What We're Losing". You know, I used to like Forgotten NY when he used to focus on historical trivia and such. But read his more recent stories, and they become increasinly strident in the rants about development.

Carol Gardens: the point I was trying to make was that Venice used to be one of the most dynamic cities on earth, artistically, commercially and miltarily. During this time, it continued to evolve, allowing development in Saint Mark's over a period of 500 years. If you look at the buildings in this square, you will see that they are from a range of eras. Now the city just focuses on preservation, and it is no longer a living city. It is just a museum. A magnificent one at that, but nevertheless, a museum.

Posted by: benson at August 27, 2008 10:30 PM

Bxgrl (and East River);

Bxgrl: one of the reasons I don't like to debate with you, as opposed to worthwhile opponents like East River and Montrose, is that you argue for argument's sake, and make dramatic statements that are completely lacking in context. You treat my statement that "Venice is a dying city" as if it were some wild new thought out of left field. Yet this problem is widely acknowledged by all, including Venetians themselves. Google the phrase "Venice is a dying city", and see how many hits you get. Here's just one:

http://durham21.co.uk/archive.asp?ID=3541

More important than any statement I can make about this topic is this fact: Venetians are voting with their feet, and leaving. The population of Venice has declined by about SEVENTY FIVE percent over the past 30 years, and, as the article I cited shows, it is projected that Venice will be completely depopulated in 30 years. You call this the city far more alive than New York? Please spare me the breathless prose that you write just to argue.

Now, moving onto the substantive points. You (and East River) are incorrect about Robert Moses. He never controlled the purse strings concerning mass transit. This is an objective fact that not even Robert Caro disputes. I challenge you to show evidence that he controlled the funding of mass transit, and in that capacity moved funds away from it and towards highways. The Triborough bridge authority NEVER controlled the funding for the mass transit system when Moses ran it. Rather, it was only when the MTA came into being that there was a single agency to oversee funding of all forms of transit, and it was precisely when the MTA was created that Moses was pushed out. We can all see how well the MTA has done since that time. Moreover, I believe you exaggerate his influence. Look though the historical record and see if he was behind the legislation that created the highway program (like the Interstate highway system) and the Title 1 housing programs. What Moses was, and how he thought of himslef, was a very effective implementer.

Posted by: benson at August 28, 2008 10:02 AM