Another Old Burg Beaut Biting the Dust
As we’ve long feared, Con Edison is demolishing the beautiful old power plant on Kent and Division that was built in 1905. Echoing a post put up last month on I’m Not Saying, I’m Just Saying, this morning AM New York has a story on the demolition, which sure isn’t sitting well with preservationists. The…
As we’ve long feared, Con Edison is demolishing the beautiful old power plant on Kent and Division that was built in 1905. Echoing a post put up last month on I’m Not Saying, I’m Just Saying, this morning AM New York has a story on the demolition, which sure isn’t sitting well with preservationists. The sprawling industrial building once helped power the BRT, and Con Ed bought it in 1950 and kept it running until 1999. The utility company wouldn’t comment on what it has planned for the site. The LPC rejected a push to landmark the structure last year. Preservationists argue that the demolition will result in the loss of a crucial piece of the area’s—and Brooklyn’s—history. “Large buildings like that are great adaptive reuse projects,” says Lisa Kersavage, director of advocacy for the Municipal Art Society. “The industry on the waterfront is really what saved Brooklyn, and that is going to be forgotten.” The most disappointing quote in the article comes from Evan Thies, a CB1 member who is campaigning to replace David Yassky. “Right now it’s an eyesore that’s way out of context for the neighborhood,” says Thies. “This is the 100-year-old problem of New York, that we don’t have access to the waterfront. … We can move industry and utilities to other parts of the city and the borough that are much less desirable.”
Historic Kent Ave Power Plant: Are Renovations Prelude to Demolition? [INSIJS]
Community Shocked as Plug Pulled on Historic Power Plant [AM New York]
Proactive on Kent Avenue? [Brownstoner] GMAP
Photo by i’m just sayin
Rear view
I would rather conserve it than watch Con Ed put another electrical plant there. Why expect they will put something recreational or appealing?
Thies was instrumental in Yassky’s efforts to de-designate 184 Kent. I guess he just doesn’t get it (maybe he doesnt need the brownstone Brooklyn vote).
And given what has been constructed nearby, he also has a pretty warped view of what constitutes an “eyesore”. (Not that a bunch of beaux arts decoration makes for a beutiful building, but between the other old buildings and the new buildings in this area, the bar is pretty low.)
The sad part isnt that this building isnt being preserved – given our severe lack of production facilities electricity is way too expensive in NYC and therefore the sad part is that Con Ed isnt replacing this facility with a new electric plant.
I’m not disapointed, I think it takes a hell of a lot of courage to stand up the Brooklyn-industrial-preservation-complex. I would offer that just about anywhere in brooklyn is a better place to site a huge industrial building than on the water, obstructing views and preventing recreation. This idea that because something is old means it is sacred is a fetish. The city should serve the people who live in it and not merely serve as an homage to those who came before. If you want to preserve the industrial past, why don’t you do it on the cheap in one of the rust belt cities?
9:11 – Actually, the community was making noise about this 15 years ago. This building was called out specifically in the Williamsburg 197-a plan for designation and preservation. Just about everything else the community asked for in that 197-a plan was ignored, so its not surprising this being ignored too.
Check out a photo of the building back in the day here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/imjustsayin/2324998039/in/photostream/
“We can move industry and utilities to other parts of the city and the borough that are much less desirable.”
I will immediately give the maximum legal campaign contribution to Thies if he has the guts to name specifically which “much less desirable” parts of the borough he has in mind.
there was a copy of the original news article reporting the opening of this place in the edwardian era on some website …but i can’t remember which one….
God, this could be an incredible museum. It’s getting cliched to keep citing this, but, hello, Tate?