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…
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
Please Tear them down it is a waste of money to restore these.
Anon 12:58 – thanks for giving me your source. I have read that. My memory of that was that is said that up to 3 of the houses MAY have been designed by thomas u walter. Since this was never confirmed by any other research I’ve done, I always assumed that the writer of that report confused admirals row with the marines campus – which originally included 3 buildings by Walter. I have also done extensive research at the Thomas U. Walter archives at the excellent Atheneum in Philadelphia (if you are interested in historic architecture and preservation, I would recommend that you all go to check it out) and I have never seen anything that shows any link to Admirals Row from Walter. The only reference was the marines campus. Given that – I stand by my original assumption – the 1986 statement of significange is making a guess and they are wrong.
ANd as for all you taxpayers out there. We all pay taxes that go for things we don’t support (like maybe – the iraq war) but we don’t have the right to pick and choose do we? No we elect people and we tell them to pick and choose for us. That’s what’s going on here. You don’t like it – elect someone else next time.
-Ella
I stand by my comment on the scent of corruption in this process. Not naive – just suspicous. Why do they feel the need to coordinate – Why do they not want other options to be considered in public? All are rationale questions. Just because i’m not an insider….
This is a public project with public funds in the mix. The officials are elected by the public, paid with public funds and — by the way they do work for the public. Why are they championing a side before the public has been heard? I thought it was suppose to work the other way around.
We deserve much much better. Just because the Navy Yard wants it this way – doesn’t mean it is the appropriate course of action.
I’m a taxpayer.
I want the goverment to spend 25 million on this; rather than ‘investigating’ congestion pricing.
I want the cigarette tax increased to pay for it, if there isn’t enough money.
I want a tax on luxury condos to pay for it.
I would also accept a tax for people who flip apartments, to pay for it (a capital gains tax).
“I do, I pay over 60K in taxes each year, a chunck of which goes to HYS and NYC. I’d like some of that money to go to this project. Ok?”
No. Pony up out of your after-tax income if you care so much. Public funds should be spent on the basis of the greatest common interest, not the whims of society’s highest earners.
If you’re being taxed 60K a year, you can afford to give charitably to your pet passions.
I expect that since you asked my permission by asking “OK?,? and I answered in the negative, you will now do as I say.
Ella,
The attribution of Walters comes from the 1986 Statment of Significance from NYSHPO. There is some disagreement between the most recent report (2007) and earlier reports on the houses about their date of construction; most recent report puts the oldest much earlier than previous reports; seems that earlier reports took the mid-late 19th C enlargements as construction dates.
re: $ for preservation – I’m sorry, I’m a taxpayer as well and I do not approve of my tax dollars going to destroy the history of our country in order to build a parking lot.
Anon 10:24/11:54
I do, I pay over 60K in taxes each year, a chunck of which goes to HYS and NYC. I’d like some of that money to go to this project. Ok?
Jesus Freaking Christ! You want to talk “unwillingness to be forthright”? What about all the supporters of preservation who are unwilling to come out and say, “I want the government to spend $25 million on this, not on education, not on health care, so that I can have some more pretty old buildings to look at”?
I defy anyone here to come out and say that. Of course you won’t. I await the responses that say we can get the money by eliminating “waste” or ending the war in Iraq or something.
You people are as bad as any politicians–wanting to pretend there’s something to be had for nothing.
“Someone is coordinating this. We have a right to be suspicious.” Why is the Navy Yard’s coordinated rallying of support grounds for suspicion? What should they be doing? Crossing their fingers and hoping that elected officials support the project? They believe in the project and are taking steps to be successful. Are the people opposed to the project talking to each other? The accusations of corruption are just so stupendously, incredibly naive.