Preservationists Celebrate Bed-Stuy, Gowanus
Via the Brooklyn Eagle comes word that Bedford-Stuyvesant and Gowanus are the two Brooklyn neighborhoods named in a Historic Districts Council program called “Six to Celebrate.” According to the Council, the initiative identifies six areas in the city “that merit preservation as priorities for HDC’s advocacy and consultation over a yearlong period.” HDC notes the…
Via the Brooklyn Eagle comes word that Bedford-Stuyvesant and Gowanus are the two Brooklyn neighborhoods named in a Historic Districts Council program called “Six to Celebrate.” According to the Council, the initiative identifies six areas in the city “that merit preservation as priorities for HDC’s advocacy and consultation over a yearlong period.” HDC notes the following re: Bed-Stuy: “Although there are currently two designated historic districts in the area, the vast majority of Bedford Stuyvesant’s architectural splendor is unprotected. The recently-formed Bedford Stuyvesant Society for Historic Preservation, a coalition of concerned neighborhood block associations, and the landmarks committee of Brooklyn Community Board 3 are working to correct that.” And the citation about Gowanus, a slice of which is pictured above, says: “In recent years, plans for the canal have conflicted with the existing character of the neighborhood and some significant industrial structures have been demolished for out-of-scale, out of character, speculative development. However, with the canal’s recent designation as a federal Superfund site, there is now an opportunity to successfully advocate for the preservation of the industrial character of the area and retention of significant structures associated with this history.” Agree that these are two neighborhoods in Brooklyn that warrant some of the most attention from preservationists?
6 to Celebrate [HDC]
Bedford-Stuyvesant, Gowanus on 2010 List [BK Eagle]
Of course Bed-Stuy is overdue, given that it’s current district is pathetically small in comparison to far larger districts like Park Slope. So nobody can really complain there.
Gowanus I am still fickle over. There lots of old warehouses with historic charm that could be converted into new uses but I feel demolition and redevelopment will take precedent there. Perhaps not immediately but within the coming years. I still think Gowanus (as well as every NYC neighborhood) should have a designated district of sorts, even if it’s only a street or two.
Unfortunately, my only view of Gowanus has been limited to Pathmark, Lowe’s and Home Depot. I visited to Friends and Residents of Gowanus website hoping to see pictures of the proposed district, but the site is transition. http://frogg.us/. Recently LPC has expanded designation to commercial and industrial area. I will keep checking the Friends website for updates.
As a Gowanus resident, this makes me a little nervous. Sure, there are a couple of the old industrial buildings that might be worth saving, but for the most part, development would be a good thing. Why preserve the industrial character of the neighborhood when there is no longer a demand for the industrial spaces? And who cares if new residential buildings would be “out of character”? Everything here is out of character – Gowanus is a total hodgepodge.
I’m not saying I want to see Gowanus sanitized and turned into Park Slope – I like the different vibe here, but I would also like the area to have the chance to develop organically. I would much rather see the neighborhood continue to change and improve, and people continue to move in, than have the LPC “preserve” it as an industrial wasteland just because that’s what it’s been in the past. That’s crazy.
not sure exactly what they mean by ‘gowanus’. Not so much a neighborhood – as perhaps an industrial area. Development is what it needs – especially the canal-side itself….walkways, park land, etc. I don’t think Pathmark and Lowe’s and Home Depot warrant historic designation.
The Landmarks Preservation Commission completed a survey of Bedford Stuyvesant earlier this year and idenified thousands of landmark worthy buildings. Beyond an area being landmark worthy, LPC needs to know that the residents of the community are in favor of designation and will not move forward with designation until they believe that the major or homeowners are on board. Visit http://www.bedfordcornershistoricdistrict.org/ for more info.
Oops – meant to say “landmark-worthy area”
Clearly Bed-Stuy has a lot more “traditional” landmark-worth areas – lots of row houses, plenty of opportunity to expand/create historic districts.
Gowanus is very different (Rob is right – !!!). Which isn’t to say there isn’t anything landmark worthy there, just not in the more traditional sense. I’ve been involved in a couple of survey projects on Gowanus and Red Hook (along the canal), and there are a lot of wonderful and significant buildings.
It’s also a much harder area to get preservationists or the general public to understand. It probably isn’t a historic district, which raises the question as to which buildings rise to individual landmark status, and how to protect the buildings that fall just below that threshold.
I hear you, chris, and you are absolutely right that more staff needs to be assigned to the LPC, instead of cutting back. They need more people on both the research/landmarking end and on the regulatory/compliance end.
But I hope you are not advocating that everything be put on hold until they get better staffing. Places like Bed Stuy can’t wait while the wheels of beaurocracy slowly grind. And preservation is not on the mayor’s short list. I’ve been watching BS since 1983, and have seem some wonderful changes enacted by homeowners and concerned people, without city “help”, but I’ve also seen blocks of housing that could have been rehabbed, bulldozed for far inferior new housing stock, and historic buildings razed or allowed to be drastically altered because no one is paying attention, or has the power to stop it.
The sooner places like those being looked at in Bed Stuy are landmarked, the better, before more is lost.
so it’s like this two pronged approach going on in nyc when it comes to making more and more parts of it completely unaffordable.. either landmark all new areas or open up ridiculous overpriced establishments. those two approaches seem to work well.
tho i can understand the beautiful buildings in bed stuy getting landmarked… i guess.. gowanus tho? montrose is right, that’s prime development area. what are they preserving? tho some of the houses in that area are really cute. but that doesnt mean a place should be landmarked.
okay 3..2..1.. multiple people tell me to stfu and i have no clue what im talking about.
carry on
*rob*