Lady of Loreto's Most Desperate Hour
The plight of the Lady of Loreto, the landmarking-worthy-but-not-yet-landmarked church in the formerly Italian but now primarily African American and Latino neighborhood of Brownsville, went to Defcon 1 last week, as workers for the Catholic Diocese began draping the 100-year-old church in netting in preparation for demolition. (We were unable to find any record of…
The plight of the Lady of Loreto, the landmarking-worthy-but-not-yet-landmarked church in the formerly Italian but now primarily African American and Latino neighborhood of Brownsville, went to Defcon 1 last week, as workers for the Catholic Diocese began draping the 100-year-old church in netting in preparation for demolition. (We were unable to find any record of a DOB application for demolition though.) The Diocese plans to replace the structure with 88 units of affordable housing. A group of Italian-Americans that has been waging a campaign to preserve the church has put forth an alternative plan that would create the housing while preserving the church as an arts and community center; the plan was put together in conjunction with several prominent members of the local African American community, including Jeffrey Dunston, CEO of the nonprofit Northeast Brooklyn Housing Development Corporation. “We have a real plan, which will make a real difference in this community,” Msgr. Kieran E. Harrington told The New York Times. “The other side has wishful thinking.
A Fight for a Church Is Evoking Introspection [NY Times]
Fight to Preserve Ocean Hill Church [Brownstoner]
Photo from the Bridge and Tunnel Club
Nobody: The NY SHPO found it eligible for listing on the National Register but, as you probably know, cannot prevent its demolition. The LPC has declined to study it. Local landmark status probably would prevent its demolition, but LPC basically won’t landmark Catholic churches unless the Diocese approves.
I would agree except, judging from the photos, someone has been taking care of this church. And it is so beautiful it’s a crime to just demolish it. Italian immigrants devoted so much time money and love to create this not only as an object of devotion, but as a thing of beauty. Let it stand; nothing approcahing it could be built to replace it.
Knock the thing down. If the former residents cared so much about the church or area, they wouldn’t have fled in the first place.
Have LPC and SHPO made a determination as to whether this church is eligible for NYC Landmark status or the National Register of Historic Places? If the developer is getting funding from state and city agencies, they need to go through environmental review which includes evaluating the historical significance of the building. In all the articles I’ve seen on this, it’s not clear if these agencies have weighed in. If SHPO and/or LPC is interested in the church, it will not be easily demolished.
I really think the coalition should be given time to get funding and present an alternative plan. A couple of months is not going to make a difference. It always amazes me that the holders of properties like this, that could be repurposed, always insist on instant demolition. I know it’s because they figure when the building is rubble, the issue is over, but it’s so frustratingly petty and mean spirited. Also, putting up a couple of statues in the new housing is the stupidest idea I’ve heard in a long time, and would satisfy absolutely no one. Not those trying to save the buildings, or even those moving into new housing. It’s insulting.
A brief lesson:
Most churches exist on three legs of financial support – their endowment; the tithes and offerings of members and visitors; and rental income from weddings, events, concerts, etc.
A church losing membership for whatever reason has a strategic planning task to take up if it wants to stay in operation. A church gaining membership also has a strategic planning task to take up, to ensure it’s growth is not spoiled or frittered away.
I’m not 100% convinced younger congregants feel as strongly about preservation as older ones. younger congregants see no reason for funds diverted to improving details when those funds could be sent abroad in the form of mission or outreach.