New York State to Vote on the Creation of the Gowanus Canal Historic District Thursday
As we reported last summer, the Friends of Greater Gowanus (FROGG) has been urging the New York State Board for Historic Preservation, a division of the the State’s Office of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation (OPRHP), to create a historic district around the Gowanus Canal for some time now. In the past, FROGG has also…
As we reported last summer, the Friends of Greater Gowanus (FROGG) has been urging the New York State Board for Historic Preservation, a division of the the State’s Office of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation (OPRHP), to create a historic district around the Gowanus Canal for some time now. In the past, FROGG has also advocated for the canal’s designation as a Superfund site and successfully got the area included on last year’s Historic Districts Council list of Six to Celebrate. (The idea of protecting the area goes back even further: In 2008 we wrote about the Gowanus Canal Conservancy’s efforts to get the waterway itself declared a national monument.)
There was a community meeting at the Can Factory last month to discuss the creation of the New York State Historic District but we hadn’t realized how imminent the vote was (it’s Thursday) or how large the footprint is (it extends from Baltic Street to the end of Smith Street) until a reader sent along information, including the above map, yesterday.
As part of its decision process leading up to Thursday’s vote, the State must weigh the community group’s interest in preservation against any “adverse effect” on property owners that the designation might have. More specifically, in a document forwarded to us, the State describes how “maintenance, renovations and restorations that involve federal or state approval can become significantly more complicated and expensive, while simultaneously depriving the owner and local government of their discretion in the event a property is subject to OPRHP consultation.” The same document notes that, “While New York City’s listing process is separate from OPRHP’s, the proposed listing of the Gowanus Canal Historic District could make a LPC designation more likely.”
What do you think? Is this area deserving of Historic District designation? Letters seeking input were sent out to owners of the more than 400 properties in the 53 blocks of the proposed area asking just that question. Notarized owner objection letters along with general comments from the public are due by mail to the Historic Preservation Board by the end of the day tomorrow to be considered for Thursday’s meeting. Mailing instructions are included below.
By Regular Mail
Ruth L. Pierpont
Division for Historic Preservation
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
P.O. Box 189
Waterford, New York 12188-0189
By FedEx or DHL
Daniel McEneny
New York State Historic Preservation Office
One Delaware Avenue, North
Cohoes, NY 12047
(518) 237-8643 x. 3257
The district includes the 1980s vintage nursing home on Carroll St? No credibility.
There is no nursing home on Carroll Street. But if you mean St. Mary Star of the Sea on 1st, it is NOT included.
Brownstoner didn’t state that the document forwarded to themclaiming “significantly more complicated and expensive,” for property owners was WRITTEN by the Law Firm working for the Lightstone Development. That document totally distorts and miss-leads to create panic around their distorted statements.
The Historic Designation is a tax-incentive program, like the state brownfield program Lightstone is now using. Both programs are entirely voluntary. If a property owner want help from state and federal tax payers to cover the cost of a renovation, then they will have to apply for funds and follow some rules which some owners may find complicated. Any owner who doesn’t want any such complications, should not voluntarily apply to these program. And while the may be some requirement to use a certain brick mortar in your work that extra expense is what is covered by the tax credit. The program more than helps owners cover any additional expense.
Lightstone, under their Brownfield application is subject to state permitting and over site; which may include review of historic issues. Lightstone shouldn’t ask for taxpayer help to fund their work if they don’t want to meet the requirements of the greater community which come along with the financial help.
The biggest problem with the Gow-anus community is that it is afraid of change. It wants to preserve the integrity of the neighborhood but what integrity – a contaminated canal that is literally a human toilet, a constant dumping area of industrial chemicals, rotting buildings that are dotted with graffiti and falling apart, trashy streets and sidewalks, weeds that grow knee-high? Maybe it’s the quaintness of crime: muggings, homes being broken into, cars being stolen, etc.
And now with the superfund Gowanusians want Gowanus to be designated as a historic district? Where was the community for the last 20 years while it was slowly falling into disrepair? Hmmmm?
First, if it weren’t for the Gowanus community it is likely that the canal would remain a “human toilet” and dumping ground. It was developers and people warehousing properties in the hopes of future big pay day that were opposed to the superfund designation. Notice that Toll Brothers pulled out AFTER the canal’s listing on the National Priorities List. They didn’t seem to care about building next to an open sewer before the designation.
Second, the historic designation has been in the works since 2004 so it’s been a decade in the making. It hasn’t been a secret. Furthermore, property owners who have properties in the district can opt out of the designation.
Seems to me that both entities (developers and property owners) welcomed the superfund with open arms. Right now is a window of opportunity for both; land is reasonably priced for developers, given the circumstances surrounding the canal. For example, the building between Hoyt and Bond has recently sold to a developer, Lighthouse bought two buildings they are now erecting their new sites on, and the building on the corner of Bond and third has been for sale long before the cleanup was approved. And then there is WholeFoods.
As for Toll Brothers, they opted not to build based on too many unknowns, e.g., the possibility of ensuing years of remediation and possible litigation. They weren’t willing to gamble the risk of investing millions of dollars in construction along a polluted canal that was in the hands of the EPA, for obvious reasons.
Any credit that’s due the Gowanus community for helping to get the superfund ironically not only served to lay the groundwork for future development but could quite possibly lesson the chances of certain areas being designated as part of a historic district. Brooklyn proper needs the taxes generated by development. There is a shortage of housing in Brooklyn and while a historic district is a romantic notion, it doesn’t pay the bills.
Thanks!
As was posted on Browhstoner:
elizabeth March 2, 2008 at 6:35 pm
http://bstoner.wpengine.com/blog/2008/02/gowanus-as-a-na/
National register status does not landmark the canal, freezing the landscape in time. Nor does it guarantee that it will be preserved AS IS. It’s a useful tool to allow funding for rehabilitation projects on the canal or alongside it. I think it’s a great idea! What’s not to like?
This is not a NYC Landmarking. This is about listing the neighborhood on the State and National Registry of Historic Places as an urban industrial site.
The Registry listing creates development opportunities for business owners through tax incentive programs that would pay 40% to Industrial Business owners renovating their buildings. Whole Foods would be entitled to hundreds of thousands of dollars for their restoration of the Coignet building should the listing be finalized in time for their work.
And any property with a residential zoning would be entitled to 70% tax credits if their renovation was for affordable housing.
There is nothing dumb about supporting renovation in the Gowanus community. It is the people, who only see 12-story steel and glass buildings as the future of the canal, that can’t see the very positive impact of this listing.