Slope HD Extension: In 3 Parts, Over 10+ Years?
The Post had an article yesterday with details about the push to extend the Park Slope Historic District so that it includes 4,000 more buildings. Right now, the Park Slope Civic Council is proposing an extension that would happen in three phases: “the first 1,350 buildings [are] bordered by Flatbush, Prospect Park West, Seventh Avenue,…
The Post had an article yesterday with details about the push to extend the Park Slope Historic District so that it includes 4,000 more buildings. Right now, the Park Slope Civic Council is proposing an extension that would happen in three phases: “the first 1,350 buildings [are] bordered by Flatbush, Prospect Park West, Seventh Avenue, 15th Street, and parts of Union Street and Fifth Avenue. The second phase includes 2,000 buildings east of Fifth Avenue, and the third, east of Fourth Avenue between Flatbush and 15th Street.” A trustee of the civic council estimates that it will take 3 years to get landmark status for the first section and that there would be 5 year gaps between the landmarking of the other two portions. The Slope’s Historic District currently includes 1,975 buildings. Update: Blog Save the Slope takes issue with some parts of The Post article.
City Aims to Expand Slope District [NY Post]
Photo from Save the Slope.
fsrg- that is exactly what happened on my street- and some of the buildings left off were quite surprising. The map may still be on CHNA’s webiste- crownheightsnorth.org.
“And LPC does not issue blanket landmarking. My block has sets of buildings left out of the designation and this is true for other landmarked districts.”
I do not know if this is entirely correct…but if it is then I have no major issue with truly histroical buildings within the outlined zones being preserved – but again, I am not sure that this is how it works.
I’ll also be very disappointed if the Novo and Elan are somehow left off!
fsrg- I don’t mean people should live in the past and there is no fight to preserve every turn of the century building. But in areas where the architecture is relatively untouched, still being lived in, and not falling apart, why fix it if it ain’t broke? There is plenty of contemporary history being preserved all over the city and only time will tell if it is a worthy of preservation as brownstones are.
And LPC does not issue blanket landmarking. My block has sets of buildings left out of the designation and this is true for other landmarked districts.
The other point- which both you and benson promote but are inaccurate about, is that the LPC landmarks the exteriors. All of those walk ups you both disdain can be gutted and reconfigured. New construction is no guarantee of a better layout- or even an elevator. And truthfully, stairs ain’t a bad thing. Good for the heart -if you have one 😉
1st – I dont think anyone said that no part of PS should be included in a new historical district (unless I misread Benson and tybur6)
The issue is how much should be “preserved.” and the boundaries being talked about include TONS of buildings and blocks that are not historical in ANY sense and tons more that while old, are certainly not unique in any sense that they are worthy of “preservation” (if the term is to mean to prevent “history” from being lost).
Also this is NOT an issue of density, (i.e. where will people live) since the density question has been answered already – i.e. no more than currently – the issue is what is worth preserving….and on this point I think benson has a terrific point regarding who is benefiting….lets be honest a vast number of the apartment buildings in the proposed zones are lousy walkup apartments with limited light and impractical (for modern people) layouts [member the whole no closets in the BR discussion) – so the idea here is to force tens of thousands to live in old impractical housing for eternity, rather then allow somemodernization to gradually occur?
Finally, Bxgrl says “History is people”…. now I’d agree with this (of course taken to its logical conclusion, this would mean preserving any buildings is stupid…but I wont go there) but if history is people – what about the history of the people today and tomorrow – is our history not worthy of at least some creation/preservation, what is so godamn wonderful about turn-of-the-century buildings that as a city we should be forced to preserve all of it?
tyburg- was responding to benson’s hyperbolic rewrite of what I said. I agree in principle with the reason a developer would tear down a house in bad shape. the problem is, without protection most developers seem to view an old building as not cost effective. Here in Crown Heights and in Bed-Stuy, we’ve lost beautiful old buildings to cheap-ass developers who were not putting up nice new buildings that expanded housing stock. They put up really crap places that are both fugly and poorly built. Then they go after poor or first time home buyers and tell them what a bargain new construction is. They used the cheapest materials, and fastest construction methods- buildings are not necessarily up to code, nor well put together- all to maximize profit at everyone else’s expense.
On the other hand, in CHN, there are several brownstone blocks that have had buildings town down and really nice new co-ops and condos put up. I like the way they look- they do not emulate brownstones but are very modern looking. We have such a development on my block.
Without landmarking there is nothing to stop developers from doing whatever they want. Somehow there has to be a happy medium but we haven’t found it yet.
Ou812:
You can always move to the suburbs, where the Homeowner’s Association will not only tell you that you can’t change the color of your aluminum siding, but that you aren’t allowed to put up a basketball hoop or a light fixture not from Home Depot.
Nice. I will need to ask permission to alter my own house. Not from the DOB to make sure it meets proper code, but from some group concerned with astetics who will make sure I don’t replace my arched windows with square ones, dam the cost. And for sure, the rat patrol will make sure you abide by and live in a manner of which they approve. “Private Property” is dead here comrades. What’s next? Don’t stop there.
Buildings are being torn down on the edges of park slope, although that has slowed down. 16th St. and 15th St., 6th Ave in the 20’s. Do you think any of the wood frame buildings would be included in the new areas?
Ty;
See my comments in the “under a million” thread. Sums it up.