Piece of Historic Wallabout Threatened by Developers
The group of four large commercial properties that take up the entire western side of Hall Street (at left in the bottom photo) between Flushing and Park Avenues in Wallabout—two of which (30 Hall and 12 Hall, pictured at top) are of architectural and historic significance—quietly changed hands last December for $10 million. The new…
The group of four large commercial properties that take up the entire western side of Hall Street (at left in the bottom photo) between Flushing and Park Avenues in Wallabout—two of which (30 Hall and 12 Hall, pictured at top) are of architectural and historic significance—quietly changed hands last December for $10 million. The new buyers, the team behind HK Management that includes Harry Kotowitz, Howie Klaus and Jeffrey Sitt, have been taking pains to keep a low profile as they seek the city’s complicity in their plot to destroy a piece of Wallabout history.
Architectural historian and Columbia prof Andrew Dolkart discussed the buildings in his 2005 survey of the Wallabout area:
The buildings that survive on the west side of Hall Street were erected by two wholesale grocery businesses. E. Le Grand Beers, who also erected buildings on the east side of Washington Avenue, commissioned the large, seven-story, brick (later stuccoed over), cold storage warehouse at 30-38 Hall Street from George Chappell in 1898. This building was extended to the north (Nos. 24-28) in 1918. Charles Hutwelker commissioned two cold storage buildings to the north, both designed by C. E. Huntley & Co. Hutwelker was a meat packer who went into business in Brooklyn in 1884. The Hall Street warehouses were initially occupied by the Charles Hutwelker Beef Export Company. No. 14-16 was designed in 1909 and No. 18-22 in 1919. These buildings could be included within a Wallabout Industrial Historic District.
As some of you may be aware, earlier in the 20th century, the city’s biggest open market used to be held across Flushing Avenue from these buildings in what’s now the Navy Yard; as a result, the large buildings in the immediate area were home to many of the city’s biggest grocery companies. In addition, as was pointed out to us by one of the preservationists working on the Wallabout Historic District application, the large awning (photo on the jump) that runs along the entire front of 55 Washington and 30 Hall, is also significant. These two buildings also sit directly across the street from the complex of reinforced-concrete buildings built for the Mergenthaler Linotype company in the earlt part of the 20th century. According to Dolkart, “The entire complex should be designated as a New York City landmark as soon as possible in order to preserve the original features of this architecturally and historically significant complex.”
The ability of these buildings to be included in the Wallabout Historic District (which is still pushing to get in front of LPC) is now threatened by the recent assumption of ownership by HK Management, whose recent track record includes snubbing Dumbo preservationists and pulling the rug out from underneath buyers at 99 Gold Street. HK has already been taking the temperature of local politicians to see if they’d support an application to the BSA to tear down all the buildings to build new residential. What’s interesting is that the four properties (2, 12, 30 and 40 Hall Street) are already overbuilt: Collectively they have about 200,000 square feet of interior space on about 70,000 square feet of lot space, well in excess of the 2 FAR for the area.
If the city does ultimately consider granting a variance for residential in this case, we sincerely hope it will look to the current Domino Sugar Factory situation as a model and insist on the preservation and integration of the buildings at 12 and 30 Hall into any kind of a proposal by the developers. If you have any strong feelings about the future of these buildings or what kind of neighbors these developers are likely to make, we’d encourage you to drop an email to Council Member Letitia James at james@council.nyc.ny.us. Maybe the spectre of this destruction will be enough to get Tierney et al to focus a little harder on designating the Wallabout Historic District. We do hear that Tierney’s planning a tour of the area at some point this summer.
Wallabout Cultural Resource Survey [Myrtle Avenue] GMAP P*Shark DOB
So the mission of the Landmarks Commission is to “safeguard the city’s historic, aesthetic, and cultural heritage”, yet deserving Brooklyn neighborhoods such as Bay Ridge, Bed-Stuy, Kensington, Sunset Park, Victorian Flatbush and Windsor Terrace remain unprotected? This makes absolutely no sense at all. I just checked the LPC website and I was shocked that such neighborhoods were not represented among Brooklyn’s landmarked districts. However, the Commission and preservationists are exerting much effort to protect the nondescript warehouses on the blighted industrial waterfront from Redhook to Greenpoint. What gives?
Bedford wives- you’re right on target. I was speaking about this yesterday- I had thought Bed-Stuy was landmarked over a much bigger area and hadn’t realizied it’s not. You should contact Denise Brown of the Crown heights North Association- they have a web site-she can tell you how CHNA got the landmarking process to happen. I don’t really know the workings of the LPC but my impression is that CHNA did the pictures and initial surveys and such and presented it to the LPC. CHNA took pictures of practically every house and every block- all volunteers. My impression from speaking with Denise is that it is persistence, and putting the evidence right in front of them. I can’t imagine, like you said, how the LPC could spend thousands of hours on one neighborhood- they simply don’t have the manpower. I think they wait for someone to apply to them, they do not go out and pronounce. they do research and surveys, but it will be neighborhood people themselves who do the legwork.
Wow! So it’s about race, class and politics and not really about architecture? I’m not sure that is true since Crown Heights North (2006), which is a predominantly black community, recently received designation and Fort Greene (1978) and Clinton Hill (1981) received their designation when both neighborhoods were greater than 95% black and poor. Race and class didn’t matter then and it shouldn’t matter now.
Further, I think the LPC would only have to look at Stuyvesant Heights (1971) which was landmarked prior to Park Slope (1973) to understand the great importance that designation would have on Bedford-Stuyvesant and the surrounding neighborhood. Stuyvesant Heights is the bedrock of the community; the most stable and well kept section of the neighborhood and its greatest pride and joy. Resident of Stuyvesant Heights are extremely proud of the area’s landmark status; thus the reason why streets such as Bainbridge, MacDonough, Decatur and Stuyvesant routinely garners top honors in the Brooklyn Botanical Garden’s annual “Greenest Block” competition. The homeowners take great pride in their homes and their community.
“I think you will have a hard time because most folks in the community do not want that.” This statement is simply not true. The only people who have a voice in this decision are the homeowners of Bed-Stuy who pay real estate taxes and have spent their blood, sweat and tears in maintaining their homes through the decades when no one else cared for the area. Through all of my years in the neighborhood, I’ve never heard one person come out against landmark designation for the neighborhood. Everyone I know supports the expansion of the Stuyvesant Heights district and the inclusion of Bedford Heights as a new historic district.
For the most part, the homeowners of Bedford-Stuyvesant are comprised of solidly middle/working class families who (a) have shown to have the necessarey resources to maintain their homes; (b) understand the true value of their homes and (c) are very cognizant of the need to protect the value of their homes and community through landmark designation.
If the LPC is truly concerned with the preservation of significant architecture and they have done all of the requisite survey for most of Bed-Stuy because they understand and appreciate the areas architectural history and beauty then I don’t understand the reason for further delay in expanding the Stuyvesant Heights district and creating an additional district for Bedford Heights. What more do they want other then what they already have? There is so much development occurring in Bed-Stuy that I’m afraid that without sufficient protection most of this architecture will be lost overtime. Yes, the City of New York made a horrific mistake with Penn Station. Shouldn’t we be a little bit more proactive with Bed-Stuy before we lose another critical and significant part of our city’s history? Who’s going to protect the old Boys High, the churches and all of the fine apartment buildings along Nostrand Avenues if not the LPC? Who’s going to protect the blocks and blocks of fine Victorian row houses on Hancock, Jefferson, Macon, Halsey, Greene, Madison and Putnam if not the LPC?
The Landmarks Preservation Commission was established by the Landmarks Law in 1965 in order to:
* Safeguard the city’s historic, aesthetic, and cultural heritage.
* Help stabilize and improve property values in historic districts.
* Encourage civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past.
* Protect and enhance the city’s attractions for tourists.
* Strengthen the city’s economy.
* Promote the use of landmarks for the education, pleasure, and welfare of the people of New York City .
Why would the LPC spend thousand of hours on a survey of the largest brownstone community in the country and only landmark a small slither of the neighborhood and not fulfill their basic mission of protecting of our historical gems. It can’t be racism and I’m not going to believe that because racism did not prevent Fort Green, Clinton Hill and Crown Heights North and it shouldn’t prevent Bedford-Stuyvesant. I don’t think that there is some covert conspiracy to to keep Bedford-Stuyvesant and its resident down at the LPC. Is there?
Though not having seen the site in person, I can envision the preservation and conversion to residential… I think it would be beautiful. The facade would clean up famously — in this regard, the earlier comparisons to SoHo, TriBeCa and the Meatpacking districts are apt.
That said, someone mentioned rasing it all – which I heartily disagree with — except for two things. A subway line that ran from Verrazano to the Queensboro bridges would be lovely – there needs to be something to connect all the disparate lines in Brooklyn, to make it easier to traverse the borough.
Additionally, I think the projects aren’t particularly pretty, but my larger issue with them is the way they are self-contained and thus isolating — they, and their inhabitants, get cut off from the rest of the neighborhood. I’m all for low and middle income housing, but one of the points Jane Jacobs tried to make was that the greatest benefits exist in true communities, where people from all socioeconomic backgrounds are integrated in the same space — almost forced to interact.. there is demonstrated social gain from such scenarios.
Mixed-use, mixed-income, mixed-age of buildings. Progress and stasis, but always mixing the two together. That’s why the city is so amazing. It’s a giant mixing bowl.
If you want Dolkart to work on your designation report you need to call him and negotiate a price. he is not inexpensive.
But forget that, the LPC has already done major studies on Bed Stuy. They have mapped out and surveyed every block. They will not designate for political reasons. If you get your political ducks in a row, you will get your district but you will need wide support. They will deny it but the commission is wary of designating a huge African American district. After designation they will impose upper class WASP standards of taste on any proposed changes. that’s sensitive.
If you can convince them that the cmmunity at large wants white folks in Manhattan telling them how they can and can’t improve their homes, then they will designate, But I think you will have a hard time because most folks in the community do not want that. that is why larger areas of Bed Stuy have not been designated even though the area contains the finest collection of Victorian rowhouses in the US.
you anti-preservationists have a good ally in mayor Bloomberg, he hates preservation. Not to worry, these buildings will never be landmarked.
Unfortunately, other buildings that are really impressive and beautiful will never be landmarked either. The rumor I hear is that before his term is up the mayor will merge landmarks with City Planning, which is like sending the hens to live with the foxes. The planners who have always been wildly jealous of the influence of tiny LPC will make sure that it puts that “little agency” in its place.
You heard it here first.
How does one go about hiring architectural historian and Columbia prof Andrew Dolkart to do a survey of for a potential historic district in Bedford-Stuyvesant? His report is well presented, quite substantive and very presuasive. I throughly support preservation of the Wallabout District. How much would such a survey cost? Who did the survey for Crown Heights North, Sunnyside and Fiske Terrace? How long does it take?
I represent a group that is interested in getting the Bedford Heights section of Bedford-Stuyvesant landmarked but there is absolutely no way that we could pull together such a report/survey on our own. Any thoughts?
those buildings are istorical, beautiful, and deserve protection. bed-sty deserves protection more however. good point.
These buildings are exactly the same as the ones that make Tribeca, Dumbo and Soho so gorgeous. It scares me how stupid you people are. I guess you weren’t around when the industrial buildings of those now-super-exclusive nabes looked like hell. Oh well, your loss. Morons.