Stay of Execution on MacDonough Street
The second hearing about the future of 329 and 331 MacDonough Street, the two Stuyvesant Heights brownstones threatened with demolition after the collapse of a party wall last week, was held yesterday afternoon at 360 Adams Street. Here’s a report we received from a resident of the block: The Judge called in the lawyers and…
The second hearing about the future of 329 and 331 MacDonough Street, the two Stuyvesant Heights brownstones threatened with demolition after the collapse of a party wall last week, was held yesterday afternoon at 360 Adams Street. Here’s a report we received from a resident of the block:
The Judge called in the lawyers and engineers leaving the public in the hall to wonder what was happening. After an hour the public was allowed in and told that the engineers would have until Wednesday Jan. 27th to present a plan to save the properties. Mrs. Prince, the owner of 331 MacDonough St., has retained a lawyer and engineer in the hopes of saving her property. The Judge has told the public that he is aware of their concerns but, the issue will be resolved by the engineers and our presence in court on the 27th will not be necessary.
Meanwhile, we also contact the Landmarks Preservation Commission to get a better sense of their position and ability to act as advocates for preservation in this case. Here’s the response we got:
Members of our staff have visited the site, and are communicating extensively with the Department of Buildings about these important buildings. Under the Landmarks Law, no Landmarks approval is needed for measures the Department of Buildings must take to address public safety issues. We are advocating for saving as much of the buildings as is safely possible, while deferring to the Department’s engineering knowledge and experience in public safety matters. Landmarks and Buildings have a long history of working together to save historic buildings, and this case is no exception.
We’re also curious to hear how active a role (if any) Councilman Al Vann, who owns a house on the historic block, has taken in the situation. Can anyone tell us?
MacDonough Street Update 1/25/10 [Brownstoner]
Wall Collapse, Vacate Order, Maybe Demo on MacDonough [Brownstoner]
“Why do people always act like helping someone is coming directly out of their pocket? Someday you, or someone you care about may need access to funds for a similar reason.”
Because it is – and if the reason I need assistance is because I hire a terrible contractor/engineer and undermine my own building then I dont deserve government “help” – and the Gov’t shouldnt give me the “help” unless doing so helps a much larger public good – and helping me is incidental…..
Public funds is a scarce resource and its use should be prioritized with that in mind…..There are plenty of other historical landmarks that could use preservation where the bulk of the benefit wouldnt soley go to individual landowners and whose imminent loss is not due to the incompetence of the same landowner.
“And WHO is to say if the situation is not dangerous? That is precisely my point. Al Vann? Montrose? DIBS? Some hired hand?”
Yes.
Hired hand = Engineers
I think MM and bxrl have this whole situation more well thought out and benson’s just trying to get a rise out of everyone.
The speed at which the DOB came in, assessed and pronounced was just ridiculous. On top of that were the, apparently experinced comments about the DOB inspector in question here.
Damn, it’s all fucked up (justified to left)! But I think you get the gist.
***Bid half off peak comps***
Thanks for the visual, BHO.
Benson, hold the baloney for your sandwich at lunch. No one is saying that safety concerns should be ignored just to save historic buildings. The fact that a DOB flak rolls in and in a five minute “inspection” of the damage says “tear em down” does not make too many people believe that he is doing anything other than what is easiest to do – demolish.
If the homeowners hire three other engineers and they all concur, after spending a lot more time in the buildings, that they could be saved, then I’m more likely to believe them. Why would three independent engineers risk their livelihoods and reputations to by giving a thumbs up, if they did not believe it to be so? After all, one or more of them may be hired, and would be putting their own safety, and that of their men, in jeopardy by getting the job. That makes no sense.
And fsrg, I never said taxpayers should directly pay for this. However we pay for a lot of stuff less worthy now. We have no idea where our dollars go when Uncle Sam gets them. If some of it trickles into a preservation program, and that gets translated into a low interest loan, or a grant for homeowners in an emergency like this, that’s fine with me. Better that than research for chemical weapons, or tons of other gov’t funded programs I’d rather not support. Why do people always act like helping someone is coming directly out of their pocket? Someday you, or someone you care about may need access to funds for a similar reason. That’s what gov’t is supposed to be there for, to help its citizenry.
Easily solved. Temporary beams and columns on each side of damaged party wall. Repair or remove/replace party wall around joists.
331 329
ROOF LEVEL
————————–
Beam O * * O Beam
I * * I
I * * I
Col I Party I Col
I Wall I
I * * I
I * * I
I * * I ITERMEDIATE FLOORS
———–* *————
Beam O * * O Beam
I * * I
I * * I
Col I Party I Col
I Wall I
I * * I
I * * I
I * * I FOUNDATION
————————–
DANGER: Do not try this on home prices. The damage there is beyond repair and must result in collapse.
***Bid half off peak comps***
“if the homeowners, contractors (and/or their ins companies) are willing to pay for the outside experts and the maintenance of temp safety provisions, and the delay is not dangerous”
And WHO is to say if the situation is not dangerous? That is precisely my point. Al Vann? Montrose? DIBS? Some hired hand?
To me, it is yet another sign that the preservationist community has lost its grip when they would try to politicize that question. I once again refer to my fire scenario above.
Selfish??? I’m advocating that money be spent for someone else’s benefit.
Luckily at $2,000 for a 2,500 sq ft brownstone, I don’t pay my fair share of taxes anyway!!!!