Parts of Cobble Hill and Carroll Gardens Vulnerable
Evidently there’s a new neighborhood name out there—BECOSMI, as in Between Court and Smith. What’s notable about the area, points out Casa Cara, is that it’s not protected by landmarks law. More specifically, there are a number of notable structures on the blocks between State and Butler that could, at any time, be torn down…
Evidently there’s a new neighborhood name out there—BECOSMI, as in Between Court and Smith. What’s notable about the area, points out Casa Cara, is that it’s not protected by landmarks law. More specifically, there are a number of notable structures on the blocks between State and Butler that could, at any time, be torn down by a developer. Some residents are currently working to landmark the “orphaned blocks.”
My husband and I have been calling the Union St. corridor betweeen Smith St. and Fifth Ave. “Smi-Fi” (rhymes with Wi Fi).
BOCARATON, Anyone?!
By the way, the photo above is of one of the three houses on Sackett between Court and Smith that have a New Orleans look. One of them has a recently constructed rooftop addition.
My impression is that Carroll Gardens residents did not pursue landmarking when their Cobble Hill neighbors did because they did not want anyone telling them what to do with their property (or, at least, that was the sentiment from most.) The mood has changed. But you still can’t just “landmark the entire neighborhood”. That would really mess up the chance to convince the Landmarks Preservation Commission to take you seriously. The buildings can’t be just old, they have to have some architectural significance. Overreaching and including too big an area could backfire.
Downzoning is a different story.
True what Sam says about Carroll Gardens — only a couple of blocks have landmark protection. Shocking, isn’t it? You’d think the whole neighborhood would easily qualify.
I think individual buildings can be landmarked (if they are very important architecturally), but Historic Districts have to be contiguous, which is why some of them are so oddly shaped – they can’t be marred by anything un-historic. Carroll Gardens was named in the 1960s, yes, for real-estate purposes. Before that it was called South Brooklyn or even Red Hook.
Montrose, thanks for your kind words about my old-house blog, http://casacara.wordpress.com. My orbit is Brooklyn/Philadelphia/Hudson Valley/North Fork, but my base is Brooklyn. I lived in Cobble Hill for 20 years and now live in Boerum Hill, so there will always be a huge dose of Brooklyn content.
Time to landmark the whole area. Let’s keep What we have left intact.
cobblehiller,
Yes, I did go to PS 29. I went to JHS 142 for middle school, at the end of Henry St. Back then it was grades 7-9, now it’s a bunch of different schools with an elementary school in it.
As for landmarking, I agree, LICH doesn’t need to be landmarked I just think it’s tough to do block by block when many neighborhoods have multiple blocks that are worthy. And I think if you were to say the entire neighborhood was landmarked, if someone wanted to tear down LICH they would then have to put something up that fits with the landmarking.
That’s sort of where I’m at, landmark whole neighborhoods to prevent crass development and to ensure that future development will revert back to the style of the neighborhood as a whole.
My comment is assuming that you’re talking about the ‘original’ CH, and not the ‘orphaned’ blocks. My vote is that the block of Degraw with those cool little verandas on the front should definitely be landmarked.
chris: I’m not so sure that I’d want the newer parts of LICH landmarked. I may be wrong, but I think the old Nursing School is landmarked. I should check that.
Did you go to PS 29?
cobbhiller, like I said “all” of it should be landmarked 😉
(I was referencing Carroll Gardens mostly, Cobble Hill got mentioned as a tangent from my general rant on BoCoCa)
christopher: 90% of Cobble Hill is landmarked. It’s only the area around the LICH that isn’t.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/downloads/pdf/maps/cobble_hill.pdf