ProHi Historic District Could Include Almost 800 Homes
Yesterday Atlantic Yards Report had a detailed post on the proposed Prospect Heights Historic District, which was the subject of a neighborhood meeting that representatives from the Landmarks Preservation Commission attended last week. According to the representatives, historic district designation could take up to two years. This is a neighborhood long of interest to the…
Yesterday Atlantic Yards Report had a detailed post on the proposed Prospect Heights Historic District, which was the subject of a neighborhood meeting that representatives from the Landmarks Preservation Commission attended last week. According to the representatives, historic district designation could take up to two years. This is a neighborhood long of interest to the commission, said Kate Daly, the LPC’s executive director, at the meeting. The boundaries of the proposed district (which are not yet set in stone) are shown above in a map the LPC sent us. It runs as far north as Pacific and Carlton, with a large section bordering Flatbush Ave and running approximately all the way down to Grand Army Plaza and almost as far east in one section as Washington Avenue. “So far the district would include approximately 776 buildings, and the next step is to get feedback from homeowners about the meeting we attended last week,” says LPC spokesperson Elisabeth de Bourbon. After that, the Commission will hold a public hearing on the designation that should happen before the end of the year.
The Prospect Heights Historic District Nudges Forward [AY Report]
I was at the meeting. There was a fantastic turn out — well over 200 people. As far as I could tell, feelings were much more pro than anti landmarking. Of the approx 20 people who asked questions, most were about practical concerns. That doesn’t mean all those folks were against the landmarking initiative. It just means they had questions about how the process works and what the requirements would be. A lot of people in PH are fed up with the number of fugly extensions (stucco shoeboxes) being stuck on the tops and backs of these fine old houses. They block light, sun and views. A neighbor across the street from me — who has lived in her house since 1958 — had to dig up up her rose garden after a rear extension cut out the sun! There are also instances of demolitions that have taken place on alteration permits — most famously a lovely free standing turn-of-the-last-century house on Park Place btw Vanderbilt and Underhill with a columned front porch. The neighborhood needs protection and it’s essentially a trade off involving some restrictions. The “don’t tread on me” and “keep out” comments seem out of order and not at all typical of the attitudes of most PH residents.
“The days of developers buying up blocks to build condos are over. the housing market is crashing. That threat is over and we don’t need another one.”
The threat is in no way over. You may see a lot less construction going on for a while, but as the market keeps declining, people will be quietly buying up buildings, waiting for the next boom. That’s what happened in in the late 80’s/ early 90’s, when small time investors were the only developers in Brooklyn.
The only difference between then and now is that Prospect Heights had very amenities, now Vanderbilt is thriving. When the construction boom comes back to Prospect Heights, it’ll come back fast.
“You are the same people who happily give up you civil rights believing the patriot act is making you safe.”
Wow. I have been accused of many things in my life, but being weak on civil rights is not one of them. I am one of the most strident civil libertarians you have ever met.
The current housing boom is over, but there will always be another wave of overdevelopment.
Methinks 5:13 protests too much. Really, me do. You’ve been fine there all on your own? Really? You and your imaginary neighbors need to get off the pipe and take a look around you.
Your right there isn’t much debate. There is consensus that it’s a bad idea. Maybe those around you were laughing at the LPC twits trying to justify their control in response to the objections.
I’ve talked to my neighbors. We don’t want it and don’t need it. The days of developers buying up blocks to build condos are over. the housing market is crashing. That threat is over and we don’t need another one.
You are the same people who happily give up you civil rights believing the patriot act is making you safe.
We don’t need another Big Brother telling us what to do. We’ve been fine here on our own.
2:28- It was my impression that there was wide consensus. There were a couple people who disagreed, and it sounds like you may have been one of them. I just know that the people around me were chuckling quietly when someone objected to the plan.
This was my interpretation of the event, and it was shared by those that I spoke with.
Here is the reaction on the Prospect Heights message board:
http://www.brooklynian.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=41745
The fact that there were only two responses to the initial post suggests taht there’s not much debate over landmarking.
“Mind your own business”. Awww 1:40, since you’ve been sooo nice, you got it. Good luck to the rest of Prospect Hts’ residents.
But, since the topic was posted on a public forum that you do not own, my opinion is just as valid as yours. Prospect Hts designation does affect me, right next door in Crown Heights, as does AY. If you had already been designated as an HD, it may have been harder for eminent domain to have been declared, and any legal suit would have had a sturdier leg to stand on. Ward’s Bakery could have more easily obtained individual status, and may have been saved. The entire AY situation may have been different. At best, designation in the next year or so could prevent another developer from cutting a swath through the neighborhood. If that swath happened to include your house, I wonder what you would think then.
2:41 – the same could be said for just about every single other disagreement on matters of social policy. if you have don’t have an opinion as to whether the end goal is a “good,” then you don’t have a dog in this fight. so what’s your point?
This whole debate just seems like a matter of competing selfishnesses: the self-interest of property owners who want to do whatever they want with their property (and screw the neighbors if they don’t like it), and the self-interest of property owners who want their surroundings preserved by force of law (and screw the neighbors if they don’t like it).
I don’t see how one side is morally superior to the other.