Building of the Day: 951 Prospect Place
The BOTD is a no-frills look at interesting structures of all types and from all neighborhoods. There will be old, new, important, forgotten, public, private, good and bad. Whatever strikes our fancy. We hope you enjoy. Address: 951 Prospect Place, corner of Brooklyn Avenue Name: Flats Building Neighborhood: Crown Heights North Year Built: 1906 Architectural…
The BOTD is a no-frills look at interesting structures of all types and from all neighborhoods. There will be old, new, important, forgotten, public, private, good and bad. Whatever strikes our fancy. We hope you enjoy.
Address: 951 Prospect Place, corner of Brooklyn Avenue
Name: Flats Building
Neighborhood: Crown Heights North
Year Built: 1906
Architectural Style: Renaissance Revival
Architect: Axel Hedman
Landmarked: Yes
Why chosen: Every neighborhood has that one building with an owner who just doesn’t give a damn. This one is Crown Heights North’s bane. Directly across from Brower Park and the Children’s Museum, this 8 unit flats building has been empty for over 30 years. The community board, HPD, Landmarks, community groups have all pleaded with the owner, an LLC, to either fix or sell, to no avail. Is it a case of demolition by neglect, warehousing, or what? It’s a landmark, designed by one of Bklyn’s best, and was once a gorgeous building, with a park view. Look at those dolphins, and the fine details. Hey, we need housing, and we need this building rehabbed. There is no excuse for this.
Generally I agree with DIBS and Montrose but I do think the issue of safety should be kept separate from aesthetics.
In other words, if it is a blight on the neighborhood and / or unsafe there should be some power to seize it. But the authorities should be no quicker or keener to seize good looking buildings than ugly ones.
People in the buildings on either side of this are also at risk should the building condition get worse. There are a lot of good reasons to take over this building from a neglectful owner. Just because they are paying taxes on it, doesn’t mean everyone else should have to pay for it.
The roof is out, and basically, it’s a shell, I don’t think much could be salvaged, especially on upper floors. Every once in a blue moon a piece of plywood is removed and you can see in, until they replace it. WBer is right on demo by neglect cases, they are expensive, time consuming, and even if you win, nothing seems to happen quickly. Again, as he said, see Windemere.
“but in reality it’s none of our business.” Wrong. It is our business. These buildings are a health and safety hazard. Rats and vermin thrive in empty buildings. Squatters can set the neighborhood on fire camping out inside, criminals can use the building for all kinds of reasons, and you can break your neck on the busted sidewalk, or be injured or killed from falling debris. Not to mention it being an eyesore in a neighborhood without a lot of derelict buildings, and across the street from our only major tourist attraction, the Brooklyn Children’s Museum. Not even the ghosts are too happy about all of that.
The point is not to let it get to the stage of “Neglect” to the point that it needs to be demolished.
Pursuing demolition by neglect is a big job for LPC in terms of time, money and staff (they are a very small agency) – go read up on the Windemere saga. Also, it is not clear from this photo what the condition of the building really is – it looks as though it is in fair (if very empty shape) except at the cornice where the tin looks as though it is rotting. Yes, it is an eyesore, but has it reached the level of demolition by neglect (again, I can’t tell from this photo).
Why do you think the Landmarks Commission hasn’t pursued Demolition by Neglect? Because it is a financial drain on them? Or because the owner has shown some “good faith” plans for the building?
im from the school of thought that says as long as the taxes are being paid on the property the owner has to right to keep it unoccupied if he wants to. how do you know ghosts dont live there? (im only partially joking with that question by the way, but it’s still valid). the owners arent a charity, they dont owe it to anyone to fill it up with people and merchandise. You do know there’s also a such thing as a property hoarders, right? they don’t care if the buildings are filled with people or not, that’s not the reason why they hoard them.
would it be better for the area if this building was filled with people and commerce? probably. but in reality it’s none of our business.
*rob*
Reminds me of the story with 205 Parkside. I don’t understand how people can afford to warehouse properties like that. Three commercial spaces and 15 apartments next to the Q and the park. And it just sits there rotting. Sad.
In the last ten years, the owners have presented a plan to renovate this property at least two times. And still it sits. Even HPD has said that as long as the taxes are paid, they can’t do anything.
Thankfully, this area is now landmarked maybe the owner can find a financial incentive to fix this or sell it to someone who will.