Preservation
April 24, 2008
Preservation Award for Brownstoner
Gabby included this in yesterday links but we didn't see the article until later in the day...The Eagle reported that four Brooklyn groups, including Brownstoner.com, had been honored by the Historic Districts Council for their preservation work last year. The 227 Duffield Street Coalition, the Dumbo Neighborhood Association and Develop Don't Destroy were all winners of the Grassroots Preservation Awards while Brownstoner received the Friend from the Media award. There is an awards party on May 15 at 6 p.m.
4 Bklyn Groups to Receive Preservation Awards [Eagle]
March 5, 2008
'The Nature of New York Is Change,' Dissected
Lost City's well-reasoned and highly entertaining take on preservation is always a treat to read, as with a post a few days ago, an inspired takedown of the lazy, hackneyed phrase so often used to defend the tear-em-down, build-em-up mentality: "The Nature of New York Is Change." We were particularly struck by these paragraphs:
I've long suspected that when people trot out this retort, the word "change" is used only as a euphemism for "money." For most of the changes that occur in the City and are argued in the press and on the sidewalks are motivated by money. Developments that will make the builders money. New chain store branches that will make their corporations money. Landlords who jack up the rent, forcing out valuable businesses, so they can make more money. And people don't like it when you get in the way of their cash flow, whether you be an individual, a neighborhood, a community board, an activist, a mayor or a mere blogger. "You object to my new development? Why, you dunderhead, don't you know that the Nature of New York is Money, er, Change?"This phrase needs to be retired for good. The statement does not confer an air of wisdom on the speaker. It is a gigantic and insulting shrug that shows you don't care a whit for the City, and aren't willing to lift a finger on its behalf. You've got a proposal to change some part of New York? Fine. Change is welcome here. We're all about change. But tell us why your change is good, why it will profit the City (and not just you). Don't just tell us it is good because it is change.
"The Nature of New York Is Change" [Lost City]
Photo by the c-side.
Pratties Develop Alternative Plans for Admiral's Row
Finally, an article in the mainstream media about Admiral's Row that considers the possibility that the decision over the future of the site isn't an all-or-nothing one, something that the blogs have been saying for some time now. Per this morning's Brooklyn Eagle:
The debate pits more well-off residents of Fort Greene and Clinton Hill, who support preserving the houses, against the 12,000 residents of nearby public housing, who want a place to buy fresh food as well as the jobs that a supermarket could provide. But the controversy is not so simple, and many preservationists believe that both sides can have what they want.
A team of architecture and city planning professors and students at Pratt have come up with alternative designs for the site (one of which, from Prof. Brent Porter is shown above) that include the preservation of the 10 navy officer mansions (complete with green bells and whistles like solar panels and the construction of big-box retail). At least one of the proposals involves using the dilapidated houses for small businesses like a daycare center and a bookstore. The Navy Yard Development Corporation, however, says that ideas to preserve the houses simply aren't feasible, citing independent studies that show it would cost between $30 and $50 million. (A study released by the National Guard in January pegged preservation costs at $18 million.) “It’s just not economically viable, period,” said Andrew Kimball, president and CEO of the corporation. “It would basically involve rebuilding them from the ground up. These things are soaked and rotted.”
Pratt Profs Seek To Reconcile Competing Plans for ‘Admirals’ Row’ [Brooklyn Eagle]
FGA Pushes Preservation Plus Market for Admirals' Row [Brownstoner]
Admirals’ Row: Debate Still Framed as Either/Or Decision [Brownstoner]
Officers’ Row Supermarket Not Happening Anytime Soon [Brownstoner]
February 26, 2008
FGA Pushes Preservation Plus Market for Admirals' Row
The Fort Greene Association spent much of its monthly meeting last night promoting the position (which we share) that Admirals' Row is a "valuable historic asset" that can and should be preserved without having to forego the creation of a supermarket for the area. Howard Pitsch, former chair of the FGA, made the argument that the market plan put forth by the BNYDC was unneccesarily large. Rather devoting six acres of land to the market and providing parking for 300 cars, a more modest market on a scale of the Park Slope Key Food (which has about 80 parking spaces) could easily be built on four acres while saving the existing Admiral's Row houses on the remaining two acres. Pitsch also pointed out that the Army Corps of Engineers is obliged under Federal law to entertain all reasonable proposals in addition to the one already put forth by the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation; the FGA is currently reaching out to developers and supermarket companies in an effort to drum up alternative proposals. Pratt prof Brent Porter followed up with more drawings and studies of how the officers' houses could be adaptively reused for shops and community purposes while building a new green supermarket and creating space for a weekend greenmarket. The phrase "Have Your Cake and Eat It Too" was used more than once.
Admirals’ Row: Debate Still Framed as Either/Or Decision [Brownstoner]
Officers' Row: Let's Have Our Cake and Eat It Too [Brownstoner]
Fort Greene Association [FGA Homepage]
Continue reading "FGA Pushes Preservation Plus Market for Admirals' Row"
February 25, 2008
Admirals’ Row: Debate Still Framed as Either/Or Decision
Yesterday’s Times article on redevelopment plans for Admirals' Row more or less presented the issue at hand in the same old black-and-white terms: Either the 10 dilapidated 19th century rowhouses behind the Farragut Houses get demolished and a supermarket gets built, or the houses are preserved and no supermarket is built. The story notes that people living in the nearby projects are mostly in favor of the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation’s plan to demolish the structures (“Those buildings are disintegrating, and nobody’s ever done anything with them, so put in a supermarket,” says a resident of the Walt Whitman Houses). What isn’t examined in the article, however, is whether it’s possible to build a supermarket and save the houses, an idea that’s likely to be discussed at a Fort Greene Association meeting tonight, where Brent Porter of the Pratt Institute will present “alternate plans to save these historic homes and provide needed community services.” Meanwhile, the National Guard, which owns the properties, is taking a long look at whether it should require whoever buys the houses to preserve them.
Amid Weeds and Rust, a Ruin Seeks a Second Act [NY Times]
Officers' Row: Let's Have Our Cake and Eat It Too [Brownstoner]
Fort Greene Association [FGA Homepage]
January 24, 2008
Looking Forward to Preservation
Per Queens Crap, a new initiative called “Preservation Vision: Planning for the Future of Preservation in New York City” has been launched. The project—which is being administered by the nonprofit Minerva Partners and has a steering committee with reps from the Pratt Center, World Monuments Fund, and the New York State Council on the Arts—“is a call to interested citizens and preservation practitioners to think about the future of historic preservation” in the city, particularly in light of Mayor Bloomberg’s plaNYC goals for 2030. Preservation Vision will run in three phases, the first of which involves an online survey (take it here) meant to gather opinions about preservation in the city. Further phases of the project will involve a conference on preservation and a report that includes recommendations culled from the conference and survey.
Preservation Vision: NYC [Preservation Vision]
Preservation Vision: NYC Has Been Launched [Queens Crap]
January 18, 2008
Officers’ Row Supermarket Not Happening Anytime Soon
The controversial plan to demolish ten 19th century houses owned by the federal government in order to build a supermarket at the Navy Yard has been "delayed indefinitely," according to an article in this week’s Brooklyn Paper. Federal officials say they need to determine if the Officers’ Row buildings can be preserved and hold a series of meetings about the buildings with the city and neighborhood residents. Those meetings wouldn’t begin until March, according to Kristin Leahy, the manager of the National Guard Bureau Cultural Resources Program, who said it was impossible to estimate how long the review process would take. The potentially lengthy review isn’t being greeted favorably by politicians who have been pushing for the feds to hand the properties over to the city so they can be torn down to build a supermarket that would serve residents of the nearby housing projects. “I’m disappointed,” said Councilwoman Letita James. “We’re trying to expedite the process.”
Navy Yard Supermarket on Hold as Feds Consider ‘Row’ [Brooklyn Paper]
Federal Goverment Not Rushing Admiral's Row Decision [GL]
Admiral's Row: Feds Must 'Consider' Preservation [Brownstoner]
Admiral's Row: "Extremely High Level of Historic Integrity" [Brownstoner]
Officers' Row: Let's Have Our Cake and Eat It Too [Brownstoner]
Officers' Row Preservation Coming to a Contentious Head [Brownstoner]
For Officer's Row, Supermarket All But Certain [Brownstoner]
Photo by j. vasco.
December 20, 2007
Amidst Lingering Controversy, BBP Construction to Begin
Construction on Brooklyn Bridge Park is likely to begin next month, according to an article in today’s Daily News, and the first phase of the project will involve the demolition of the landmark Department of Purchase building. "It's further evidence that the [ESDC] cares so little about what the community thinks," said Judi Francis, president of the Brooklyn Bridge Park Defense Fund. "All parties, for and against the project, have wanted to preserve it because it's a landmark." Others, however, have argued the building needed to come down because it would interrupt the park’s continuity, and the LPC approved its demolition last year. Meanwhile, some neighborhood watchdogs are concerned about other aspects of the project as it gets off the ground: "I'm happy that the process is moving forward, but I hope there is a comprehensive plan for financing the park," said BBP critic Roy Sloane.
New Waterfront Park Coming Soon [NY Daily News]
Brooklyn Bridge Park Meeting: The Morning After [Brownstoner]
Brooklyn Bridge Park: Your Input, Please [Brownstoner]
December 13, 2007
Admiral's Row: "Extremely High Level of Historic Integrity"
A tipster who must have a day job as a stenographer passed along some highlights from the "Assessment of Admiral's Row" report that was prepared by Beardsley Design Associates and Crawford & Stearns for the National Guard and was made briefly available for public viewing on Tuesday night. One of the main aspects that the consultants were charged with evaluating was the "historic integrity" of the site as a whole and the buildings individually. Bottom line: If the results were a report card, Admiral's Row would have Straight A's.
After application of the aspects of historic integrity to the collective Admiral's Row district with due consideration of existing deterioration, it is apparent that all seven aspects of historic integrity are strongly present. The Admiral's Row district retains an extremely high level of historic integrity to the historical significance of the BNY...After application of the aspects of historic integrity to the individual buildings, with due consideration of existing deterioration, it is apparent that all seven spects of historic integrity are strongly present in nine of the ten Quarters.
The report goes on to say that Quarters B and D are "exceptional and retain an extremely high level of historic integrity" while H, K, L and I retain a "high level" of historic integrity. Only Quarter C doesn't make the grade with the consultants. And what kind of shape are the buildings in structurally? "In general, the structural integrity for the original 19th Century portions of the buildings' superstructure appear to be sound, level and plumb."
p.s. Readers may be interested in checking out Gowanus Lounge's take on the situation this morning.
Officers' Row: Let's Have Our Cake and Eat It Too [Brownstoner]
Officers' Row Preservation Coming to a Contentious Head [Brownstoner]
For Officer's Row, Supermarket All But Certain [Brownstoner]
Admiral's Row Fixup to Cost $20M [NY Daily News]
Real Estate Round-Up [Brooklyn Eagle]
Photo from Officersrow.org
October 8, 2007
City Reevaluating Duffield St. Eminent Domain Plan
The city says it will withdraw its eminent domain findings and hold a new hearing for the Duffield Street houses that are supposed to be seized in order to build a park and underground parking lot. The announcement comes after Downtown Brooklyn residents and activists filed an Eminent Domain Procedure Law Petition challenging the city’s plans. The decision does not signal that the city is going to reconsider the historic preservation of the Duffield Street properties, some of which are believed to have ties to the Underground Railroad, but that the how’s and why’s of the eminent domain plan are going to be reassessed. According to Duffield St. Underground, “it gives Duffield advocates a chance to use political pressure to change the footprint of properties threatened with governmental confiscation.”
City Withdrawing ED Findings [Duffield St. Underground]
HPD OK’s Seizure of Duffield St. Homes [Brownstoner]
Abolition Panel a Salve for Duffield Street Concerns? [Brownstoner]
Duffield Preservationists Fight Back with Lawsuit [Brownstoner]