Admiral's Row: Up Close and Personal

There is always something romantically wistful and melancholy about a ruin. Poets and composers have been inspired by them for centuries. These photos are among the best I've seen of the Row's interiors. Makes me really want to see them, and shoot them, myself. Preservation shouldn't even be a question.

I'm struck by a couple of things. First of all, damn, they could build back then. In spite of the damage from water and neglect, that ballroom is still mostly intact, and incredibly gorgeous. The plasterwork, the intricate corbels, the graciousness of the room remains intact. If I were restoring that building, after structural repairs and rebuilding, I'd leave the room as is, a monument to a bygone era, and a reminder of time's passage and man's ability to both create beauty, and let it rot.

I am also more determined to see that the best and most intact of these houses survive. My first thought in seeing a couple of these shots is that they look like a couple of the houses I've seen for sale here in Brooklyn, over the years. If they can be reclaimed, so can the best of these houses. It will cost a lot, and I know we have no money, but I still insist that at least part of the Row can be rebuilt and preserved, as a museum, repurposed for the common good in other ways, and still have room for necessary community growth. These are too good to lose.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 4, 2009 10:50 AM

Benson, I heartily agree with you on your examples of city public works mismanagement and dilly dallying. You forgot the 2nd Ave Subway, as well as countless roadwork projects.

Robert Moses was a visionary in many ways, and a complex creature, but I abhorred his high handedness, as well as his dismissal of the rights and property of "the little people", especially in the boroughs. The last thing we need is another one of him, if that someone feels they need to combine his vision with his negative qualities. Bloomberg's own highhandedness and arrogance is enough for one administration. Even he can't seem to cut through the entrenched red tape on your list.

But the Row is not insignificant. Surely you know the importance of the Navy Yard in the history of the city, as well in our nation's history. Maybe some of the houses are too far gone, but some of them could be saved. If we can be convinced that building ball parks and stadia for already wealthy sports teams and their owners, are for the public good, and deserve public funding, then preserving a piece of our unique history deserves the same.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 4, 2009 11:19 AM

Lead paint is the great boogyman used as an excuse for not doing something. Unless you sweep it onto your plate and eat it, it's not going to kill you. The water damage has peeled most of it off, using sensible precautions in protecting workers and the environment, it can be cleaned up and properly disposed of. What remains on the walls will probably have to be removed with the walls, anything else can easily be removed or sealed in situ. Asbestos can also be safely removed.

Benson, this is not a liberal/conservative issue. Conservatives also care about preserving this nation's history. Reasonable plans need to be drafted, and then the search for funds from both the private and public sector needs to begin. Doing nothing, as you complained about in your first post, is the worst thing we can do.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 4, 2009 11:47 AM

Benson, maybe you don't need to stroll down historical sites, but I would wager the majority of kids, especially in this city, would benefit from some hands on, location strolling. Have you ever been a teacher? Do you remember the boring time you spent in history classes? I remember, and I actually had a couple of great history teachers, and I was a teacher for a very short time myself, and bringing your subject to life is damn hard. I would love to take a group of kids, some of whom may live in the projects across the street, to a restored Navy Yard, and show them all of the historic sites there, from the Civil War to WW2 and later. NOTHING beats seeing it yourself, touching the walls and old equipment, and being in the spaces and places that history happened in.

Today's kids know nothing beyond their hand held electronics and whatever happens to be in a popular movie. Instead of telling them about their great-grandmother's jobs as Rosie the Rivetor, take them to where it took place. Show them the site of the flag factory, let them see where 19th century medicine was practiced in the Surgery, let them see how and where the officers lived. If being a true, patriotic American is a conservative goal, and there is certainly enough flag waving on the conservative side of the spectrum to show that, then let's put our American money where our mouths are, and preserve our history.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 4, 2009 12:01 PM

PHeights and Benson, I'm just a middle-aged lady living in a "fringe" neighborhood, with cats. I'm on my way out to get some supplies, so I can come back home, and make some money. So here is my last rejoinder until I come back, at which time I will be more than happy to continue.

Re:lead paint removal. As a building owner, I know lead paint can be dangerous. But look at these places. Some walls are down to the studs, most ceilings are toast, and many, if not all, walls will have to be totally replastered in any renovation. Will cleaning up the lead paint, in the course of cleaning up everything else, really be more expensive than in any other gut renovation? It should be easier, the stuff is water logged, therefore not flying around as particulate. I defer to experts on this, but just saying.....

As to the rest, what do you mean by contradictory goals? And how are they inherently liberal or conservative? My broad goal, as stated in three years of posting on the Yard, has been a desire to preserve at least some of the Row. Open one or more of the buildings as a museum/exhibit space, repurpose the other saved buildings as non-profit spaces, retail, or office/business space. Build the supermarket and parking lot adjacent to the Row, using the land where the most damaged houses once stood, if feasible, but certainly allowing both commerce and history
to co-exist. I've been told countless times that this is impossible, I refuse to believe it. I am a very stubborn person.

I don't see any contradictions, here. This could have been done 10 years ago, 5 years ago, even 2 years ago. That we are in a fiscal circling of the bowl will no doubt, make it that much harder, and so I don't see anything at all happening. At the very least, at the most minimal costs possible, the houses that can be feasibly saved, and from these photos, the house with the ballroom, as well as several others could be, need to be identified. Then basic steps need to be taken to prevent further damage from occuring, in the form of boarding up windows and putting tarps over roofs before snow and rain damage them further.

Every year we chat about it and do nothing,is another year's worth of water damage, and soon enough, they will collapse under their weight. Then people will say, "See, we told you they were too far gone." Problem solved. That is not right. That should not be the fate of these houses. That is preventable.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 4, 2009 1:02 PM

Sam, I don't remember if you were around for other discussions on this, but there IS a plan, there are a couple of plans floating around. No one expects anyone to restore these buildings so they can stand around and look good. Last year, an architectural team from Pratt proposed a multipurpose usage of the space, incorporating the entire Row, as well as a supermarket. Other plans, perhaps less professionally rendered, have been put forth. I put forth an idea of function in my post above, there is no lack of ideas out there.

Using these buildings as housing has never been in the mix, and it doesn't make sense to do so, mostly because we're not talking about very much housing, so it's not worth it, and it's on gov't land, and not accessible to the general public.

Perhaps if these houses had been in the interior of the Yard, the general public would never have known about them, and they would have been bulldozed without a footnote. But they are there for all to see on Flushing Avenue, reminding us that we still have a long way to go in learning to preserve the best of our heritage. Let's save at least some of them. Because they are "historic". Because they can be repurposed and incorporated into something bigger and better for the entire city, and because if we don't, and they collapse upon themselves, we will have lost them forever. These houses may be country cousins to the grandeur of Penn Station, the original Madison Square Garden, and countless other buildings in this city, but they would all share the dubious distinction of being only a photograph and a memory.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 4, 2009 6:09 PM

I give up.

I guess I'm a 9 year old, Sam, because I see the possibility of saving at least the ones that aren't as far gone. I also see the viablility of adaptive reuse. Most preservationists are not going to quibble over having to have handicapped entrances, or being up to code. Projects far older than this are adapted for tourists and adaptive reuse all across Europe, Asia, the Middle East. If they can put a ramp on a frigging pyramid, or get a Norman castle up to code for tourists, I would think we could manage to fix up a couple of mid 19th century brick houses.

I also disagree on their visibility. From a car, or across the street, even in the middle of summer with all of the vines and vegetation, those houses are quite visible, like seeing ruins in a jungle. I can't think of a trip in a cab, or with friends where someone hasn't commented on the houses. They are too big to miss.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at February 5, 2009 12:23 AM