SCA To Build New P.S. 133, Tear Down Old Building
Construction of a new public school in Park Slope could start as soon as this summer and end with the destruction of the century-old structure currently housing P.S. 133. Currently P.S. 133, which is located at 375 Butler Street at 4th Avenue, seats about 300 students; the new building would accommodate approximately 900. The School…
Construction of a new public school in Park Slope could start as soon as this summer and end with the destruction of the century-old structure currently housing P.S. 133. Currently P.S. 133, which is located at 375 Butler Street at 4th Avenue, seats about 300 students; the new building would accommodate approximately 900. The School Construction Authority plans to build the new structure on the footprint of the existing schoolyard and a community garden then tear down the turn-of-the-century Gothic-style building (currently being considered for the state’s list of historic places) upon completion. In a Courier Life article last January, SCA President Sharon Greenberger said that the new building would be marginally taller than the existing one. According to PropertyShark, the existing building is 46,000 square feet; according to the Courier, the new one would be 115,000 square feet. In a districting quirk, the old building technically lies in District 15, which covers Red Hook, Park Slope and Sunset Park, but the new building would be in District 13, which includes Fort Greene, Clinton Hill and Prospect Heights; District 15 funds would pay for the construction. We’re dying to see the renderings, but our initial reaction is that it’s disappointing and shows a total lack of creativity to have to tear down the beautiful existing structure. There’s a meeting at the Fifth Avenue Committee at 6:30 p.m. on March 18 and a CB6 Land Use hearing scheduled for March 26th at 6 p.m. at the 78th Precinct (6th Avenue between Dean and Bergen) at which the project will be discussed. Technically, since the SCA published a public notice in the back pages of a newspaper in January, the 90-day comment period expires on April 3rd, so don’t tarry.
Yes, people do gut rehabs all the time. Most of you on here say it costs 1 million dollars to renovate a brownstone, though.
We are talking about the City of New York now. They SHOULD be prudent with our tax dollars. And in this case, it’s probably WILDLY cheaper to start over and build a new school.
I love this building as much as the next person, but I’m not willing to pay 3 times the amount to renovate it vs. build a new school. If money were no object, sure.
Can you imagine what it would cost to retrofit just the central air conditioning for a building of this magnitude?
People do gut rehabs all the time. YOu wind up with a better quality building- you won’t be able to match the workmanship or the beauty of a building like this with a new one. With the right architect and designer, it can be done and within a budget. It means not taking the lazy way out.
I agree with you Mrs. De Dough.
As much as I love this building, I can only imagine the cost of retrofitting this as a school would be astronomical. We all know what money pits brownstones can be, then multiple that by 100’s and that’s probably what kind of maintenance a place like this would require.
Too bad it can’t be preserved and find another location for the school but education is the most important component to a prosperous new America and if that means sacrificing an old building for a new and technologically forward one, I say go for it.
Notice that the addition to the Berkeley Carroll School (while nice) is not in the 20th Century style. It is fully modern.
i am torn over this. i agree this is a lovely old building, it could be turned into great apartments, but as a school, i think it is probably dingy and depressing not to mention hot in the summer. i went to a school like this. it was depressing. better to give the kids a bright new school with air conditioning and a really nice gym and all the rest. In the perfect world we could have both, but in this one I opt for a new school.
The school is in district 13 now, not district 15. District 15 is supposedly paying for the renovation, and then sharing the school with district 13.
My elementary school was – and still is- a wonderful 19th. C. red brick fortress that looked like a castle. It also had- and I hope still has_ a set of WPA murals in the library and auditorium. So did my Jr. High and High Schools. I think they were by a famous artist- possibly NC Wyeth.
BrooklynSteve, just because there may be other schools similar in architectural style to this one, does not therefore make it unworthy of landmark protection. By that argument, we should only preserve one brownstone of every style, and let the rest go. I’m sure that may please certain people, but fortunately, more visionary souls prevail.
NOP, as usual, says it well. Why shouldn’t New York City be known for its system of well-built, architecturally beautiful schools? And he’s right about retrofitting older buildings with modern technology. It’s done everyday on campuses, hospitals, and in residential reuse. If they can transform a school into apartments, which is more of a conversion, surely adding needed componants is possible.
Besides which, there is that intangible feeling one gets walking into an old beauty like this school. I remember my grade school, which was not as old as this (1930’s) but still had that feeling of history to a little kid. You could almost see the generations of kids in the halls, the knowlege almost floating in the air from years of teaching. The light coming in through the old glass windows, the desks with the initials of kids who grew up to be the parents of my classmates. Even the classic schoolhouse light fixtures which now command big money as salvage. I’m not saying that there are not advantages to a shiny new building, but retrofitting an older structure is much more benefitting the neighborhood, and I dare say, the atmosphere of education.
Yes, Bxgrl. Montrose Morris told me once that the building that replaced my old school houses elders. That’s a positive. But the building is about as pedestrian as they get. (I’m surprised about that, too. I once interviewed the architect for a college term paper. He was a quite prominent and historic figure.)
And thanks for the welcome back. I haven’t been in NYC, that’s true, but I still post on Brownstoner.
NOP
NOP- welcome back! Was the building you are referring to the senior residence?