Public Hearing on Future of Admirals Row Tonight
Tonight the long-awaited follow-up to last December’s public hearing on the future of Admirals Row takes place at Borough Hall. All we can say in advance of the meeting is that we hope that the spirit of creativity and compromise can win the day. At this point, there appears to be strong political support for…
Tonight the long-awaited follow-up to last December’s public hearing on the future of Admirals Row takes place at Borough Hall. All we can say in advance of the meeting is that we hope that the spirit of creativity and compromise can win the day. At this point, there appears to be strong political support for including a supermarket on the site to address to current lack of options currently available to the residents of the nearby Farrugut, Ingersoll and Whitman Houses. There is also a large group of people who feel strongly that the Admirals Row houses deserve to be preserved, and a recent study commissioned by the National Guard gave weight to this view. (The report stated that the structures have a “high level of historic integrity.”) So what’s the answer? Find a way to create a supermarket while preserving most, if not all, of the houses. One such proposal has already been put forth by a team from Pratt. The one stakeholder that would be unhappy with that scenario would most likely be the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation, which wants to squeeze a new industrial building onto the site along with a massive parking lot for the market; the BNYDC has also said it does not want to assume control of Admiral’s Row from the National Guard if it comes with preservation strings attached. As with most thing, the real rub comes down to dollars and cents. It should be an interesting evening. The meeting takes place at 7 p.m. tonight at Borough Hall.
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]
Compass and Morris nailed it. There’s absolutely no reason that a supermarket can’t coexist with the AR buildings; what might need to be sacrificed is:
1) The other industrial building (which doesn’t serve the residents of public housing)
2) The overly large parking apportionment (which LOCAL residents don’t need, since they live right there!)
Meanwhile, we can make sure that these historic treasures are preserved for future generations, whilst creatively repurposing them for present ones – I like Morris’s suggestion about using them for architects / photographers / etc studios, and having been through all the AR houses myself, they’re certainly perfectly designed for it – the ballroom in Quarters B could even function as a sort of community events center, and Quarters B itself would be an ideal place for a historical center.
There are tons and tons and tons of possibilities that Kimball & Co. have not addressed in their rush to bulldoze, and those options MUST be considered before New York is robbed of still more of its architectural heritage.
In case you didn’t get one of the leaflets:
http://www.brooklynsothermuseumofbrooklyn.com/admrow.html
Bigger is not always better. The Pratt proposal shows one possiblilty, and there are probably others out there. There is room for preservation and commerce. I doesn’t have to be one or the other.
Why does a parking lot have to accommodate every car in Bklyn? As at Pathmark, Costco, etc, people without cars use livery cabs as one alternative. Along with a smaller parking lot, why not an underground lot under the supermarket? Or a roof lot, like the Sunset Park Home Depot? Let’s have some creative thought here.
I still think the Row makes for an interesting part of a Navy Yard tourist attraction. Any buildings not incorporated in the museum/tourist operation could be rented out as office space for professions such as architects, restorers, showrooms for designers, graphic or print artists, photographers, gallery spaces. Why not?
problem with salvage is now way to pay for them…. can’t legally be used as housing on Navy Yard premises, no big money for museum large supermarket and lot needed to finance deal and buildngs
It’s hardly a done deal and there are a lot of people who speak for the low-income people. Tish James for one. It doesn’t have to be either or. Pratt’s plan shows one possible solution.
What I don’t think anyone seems to understand is the preservationists balk at the idea of a gigantic parking lot taking the place of the majority of the buildings, not the idea of a grocery store allowing the neighborhood more options. Have you also seen the proposed square footage of said grocery store? FAR larger than necessary to accomodate the neighborhood. I like Pratt’s intentions, and while price tag will be called into question, if Ratner and Co can get that much funding for ‘subsidized housing’ that will never come to fruition… why we can’t preserve what little remains of the Navy Yard before another hospital becomes another empty, unused asphalt lot across the street (off Flatbush- seen it? Great use of space, anti-preservationists.)
And for those questioning the structural integrity of the majority of the buildings, other than some of the later wood additions in the back of some which are collapsing, they’re sound and salvageable.
http://sympathetic-compass.blogspot.com/search/label/Admiral%27s%20Row
A couple dozen preservationist vs hundreds if not thousands of low income housing residents. I wonder who wins?
Too bad the low income residents don’t have a slick website and college professors to make their case.
I bet the preservationists would settle for 3 or 4.
oops. meant that to go on the propertyshark post.