Results from Skyscraper District Hearing
We knew the proposed landmarking of the Skyscraper District in Downtown Brooklyn was controversial, and it looks like that played out in today’s public hearing on the proposal. Of all who testified at LPC, nine opposed the district altogether, eight supported, and four urged the exclusion of 75 Livingston. There is no date set yet…
We knew the proposed landmarking of the Skyscraper District in Downtown Brooklyn was controversial, and it looks like that played out in today’s public hearing on the proposal. Of all who testified at LPC, nine opposed the district altogether, eight supported, and four urged the exclusion of 75 Livingston. There is no date set yet for the vote.
I agree with Montrose’s points. The Commission needs to do a better job at public relations.
I really wish the LPC was better at explaining what landmarking really means. People are so mis-informed, and ready to believe the worst. Landmarking will help 75 Livingston in the long run, and does not force them to make changes or repairs that they didn’t need to make in the first place. And if the building was doing it right, so as to best utilize their funds for the long term, chances are they are using materials and proceedures that Landmarks will approve of.
As for the rest of the district, to say that landmarking will prevent growth in downtown Brooklyn is absolutely ridiculous. Buildings are shooting up all over. Let’s preserve the great ones that are there. The interiors can always be repurposed, if they don’t suite today’s business or other needs. Why waste perfectly good, well built skyscrapers? Anything new and shiny will be a waste of building materials, won’t be a good, architecturally, and won’t serve their purposes any better than what is there now.
74, 75, whatever it takes.