Admirals Row House Collapses from Water Damage
[nggallery id=”33365″ template=galleryview] One of the ten former officers residences along Flushing Avenue known as Admirals Row began collapsing from water damage yesterday, and the fire department was brought in for safety reasons to finish the job. Luckily for those concerned with preserving the group of historic structures, the house affected was Building C, which…
[nggallery id=”33365″ template=galleryview]
One of the ten former officers residences along Flushing Avenue known as Admirals Row began collapsing from water damage yesterday, and the fire department was brought in for safety reasons to finish the job. Luckily for those concerned with preserving the group of historic structures, the house affected was Building C, which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recently reported “does not appear to retain historic integrity to the historic significance of the BNY.” (You can see a pre-collapse photo of Building C here—it’s the one on the right.) Here’s what happened: A pedestrian walking down Flushing Avenue in the late afternoon called the Brooklyn Navy Yard headquarters saying that is looked like pieces of Building C had fallen. BNYDC called the Feds, DOB and FDNY. When they got down there they discovered that almost the entire building had detached from the facade and collapsed; DOB determined that the remaining facade itself did not pose enough of a safety risk to take it down. FDNY also determined that there had not been any homeless people in the structure at the time of collapse. The collapse is certainly a reminder that, however many buildings ultimately get slated for preservation, it’s time to get some resolution.
It’s Curtains for Most of Admiral’s Row [Brownstoner]
Ugly Politics May Trump Reason in Admiral’s Row Saga [Brownstoner]
Admiral’s Row: Up Close and Personal [Brownstoner]
MAS Floats Plans to Preserve Admiral’s Row & Build Market [Brownstoner]
Public Hearing on Admiral’s Row Held Last Night [Brownstoner]
Pratties Have ‘Cake-and-Eat-It’ Design for Admiral’s Row [Brownstoner]
Guard Starts Talks ‘To Come Up With Alternatives’ For Row [Brownstoner]
James Opens Door to (Partial) Admiral’s Row Preservation [Brownstoner]
Officers’ Row Supermarket Not Happening Anytime Soon [Brownstoner]
Admiral’s Row: Feds Must ‘Consider’ Preservation [Brownstoner]
Admiral’s Row: “Extremely High Level of Historic Integrity” [Brownstoner]
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]
Wow did anyone care when the main fabrication building burned to the ground or care when the crains were allowed to deteriorate to the point where they were scraped? These two events put the last nail in the coffin of shipbuilding in the greatest naval shipyard in U.S. History. The entire yard was filled with history. Anyone remember the shipways, they are long gone any tears? Anyone remember the last Shipbuilders of Brooklyn? Hint Seatrain Shipbuilding! I shed a tear every time something disappears from the once great Brooklyn Navy Yard! Is anyone thankfull the B.N.Y is finially going to have a well deserved museum on the history of the Yard? I am and I am doing my part to preserve a part of the Yard’s History!
Brooklyn Shipbuilder
Now I guess we have to tear down everything on Myrtle Ave too, right?
http://bstoner.wpengine.com/brownstoner/archives/2009/06/fourstory_build.php
It’s hilarious that people here insinuate that the collapse of this building posed any danger at all to people on the street… You did notice they left the front face of the building standing, right?
Preserve Admirals Row. In 30 years you can have something beautiful, or you can have a retail nightmare.
“The tree growing through the roof may be holding up the building.”
Posted by: sam
This made me laugh so much I will have to wait until tomorrow to read the rest of the arguments (or should I say the differing points of view?).
Has anyone noticed that the words, “arguments” and “agreements” sound a little bit alike?
agree with all of that MMHTPH. Thanks for clarifying.
I think the problem you’re having with that quote is that you are assuming that I meant that, in general, preservationists don’t concern themselves with financial feasibility. That’s not what I meant. I know many preservationists personally who deal with those issues all the time. That quote was about this specific debate. If you look back and see all that has been written about this debate, whether in the postings or the comments, the preservationists are talking about the layout, and the knock-it-down folks are talking about financial feasiblity. The two sides are talking past each other. It wasn’t a general assumption, it was an observation of the history of this one argument.
Have a nice weekend to all.
I’ve always had great respect for you too gman and I know you’re right- this battle was over long ago. ANd if i want to be realistic (not often mind you!) I would have to say preservationists shouldn’t win every battle. (And there goes my preservationist creds). Sometimes losing the battle in the short run pays off in the long? Sometimes preservationists are like PETA- outrageous, but they get attention. But who wants to be associated with a group that assails the President for a fly execution? I’ll go wtih the Humane Society or other more moderate group.
I think there are more of us who begin to understand the importance of preservation but we do temper it with practicality. (Of course in the interest of a lively discussion, you never heard me say that!)
My only point about the quote from MMHTPH was that it posits all preservationists are a monolithic, impractical group( and yes-maybe and unfortunately the most vocal of us seem to say preservation at any cost). But as rabid as I can be on the subject, I do see myself as less-than-foaming-at-the-mouth rabid 🙂
bxgrl, we have always had a cordial relationship and I am happy that has been the case. However, my repeated quoting of MMHTPH is based on observation. The Municipal Art Society, Historic Districts Council, Brent Porter (whoever he represents), Pratt Institute planning department, and perhaps others presented lay-out plans without any pro forma for how to re-coup the cost of the restoration. That is why I think that one sentence sums it up best. Their argument was, ‘these buildings are charming and unique (and they are) and therefore should be preserved because we have figured out a way to fit the supermarket on the site without tearing any of them down.’ Not enough; that’s just not enough.
I am a big preservationist. I have probably done more actual preservation work than many of the people who are wearing their hearts on their sleeves on this issue. To have a “realitic” understanding of the dynamics of this particular situation is not to be anti-preservation. This fight was probably over a decade ago when, unfortunately, there was no organized opposition to the Department of the Army allowing the buildings to fall apart.
MMHTPH- I have had dealings with the National Guard and never meant there was evil intent. I’m not even sure it was incompetence so much as Admirals Row was a non-priority. And all things considered, I actually can hardly blame them for that either.
“When we first started getting into this I listened to your ideas and patiently tried to point out to you why those ideas were not realistic. Rather then describe how you could turn those ideas into reality you decided to tell me that i had no imagination.”
Wasn’t it Pratt that came up with an alternative plan? It’s a little unfair, don’t you think to expect soemone to come with a full blown, all details worked out plan in the course of a blog discussion? I can only go on presentations and plans I’ve read in the past, and ideas that have worked for other groups. I don’t dismiss anything with “I’m sure it can be figured out” because I don’t conduct business on faith.
I remember our fist discussion very well- the thread was about the plans for Admirals row and people were tossing out general ideas. At that point it was still fairly generalized and I mentioned some ideas that I thought could work, having seen them work in other places. the first thing you did was dismiss me as a lunatic (something along those lines) and there is nothing guaranteed to piss me off more than that and make me dig my heels in. If I said you had no imagination, believe me it was in response to that because obviously you come up with solutions to difficult projects. It’s just not in my nature to shut out ideas – I call it healthy skepticism, those who seem to know and love me best call it “stubborn.” 🙂
as far as the salvageability of Admirals Row (whether all or some), I have friends who are architects who seem to think at least some of the buildings are salvageable – since they are far more expert than I, I can’t dismiss their opinion.
I realize you are in a far better position to have access to information about Admiral’s Row, and I do know that financial feasibilty is crucial. But over the years I have heard so many experts tell us something only to be proven wrong, or professionals who have shut down any concepts or ideas based purely on finances, only to shut out creative approaches that may not be so obvious. SO in fact, I do take financial feasibility into account- only a truly stupid plan doesn’t and if you can’t sustain your preservation effort, there’s no point in doing it at all. I do understand that. But insisting I produce a detailed plan in the course of a blog thread is asking bit much.
Anyway, the whole discussion seems sadly a moot point now. I look forward to the next battle–er–discussion with you though. 🙂
why are people on this site who are anti-preservation? what possible satisfaction is there for them in a blog dedicated to the century old houses of Brooklyn? I don’t get it.