presented with only a slight bias for emphasis, but unedited.

Admiral’s Row: The Smackdown

From the Brooklyn Papers

Houses along the historic Admiral’s Row at the Brooklyn Navy Yard have been decaying for years. Navy Yard officials want to tear them down, but preservationists are rallying to save them.

The debate over whether to tear down a row of historic, but severely dilapidated, homes inside the Brooklyn Navy Yard along Flushing Avenue has pit residents of the nearby public housing projects, who want a long-promised supermarket on the site, against historic preservationists, who say the homes can be saved and reused.

Both camps rallied at Borough Hall last week at a public hearing over the fate of the so-called “Admirals Row” houses. To further that debate, The Brooklyn Paper presents this smackdown between a supporter of the Navy Yard’s supermarket plan and an opponent.

Pro

Downtown Brooklyn is undergoing one of the most significant development projects in the country if not the world. However, the Public Housing Developments of Ingersoll, Walt Whitman and Faragutt are being isolated and cut off from the opportunities now available in the community.

Our government has the duty to protect its people. We have not been protected or respected by anyone to date. This is an opportunity for the government step in and to rectify this wrong being inflicted on our residents by allowing the removal of the Admirals Row homes now and use its influence to speed up process of building the supermarket.

Ed Brown, president, Ingersoll Tenants Association

Con

The Admirals Row Houses allow us to imagine what Brooklyn was, and what it can become. When Congress voted to offer to sell the property to New York City in 1988, the houses, although already vacant for years, were an extraordinarily intact row of mid- to late-19th century residential architecture, including superb examples of Second Empire, Italianate and Queen Anne styles.

Constructed between 1850 and 1900 the buildings were a dignified ensemble of homes for the officers of the Navy and their families, a role they continued to serve from before the Civil War until after the Vietnam conflict. These were solid, handsome buildings that housed people with the important job of protecting our country.

Just like bank buildings of the era were advertisements of importance and solidity of their finances, these buildings symbolized the strength of our nation and the importance of Brooklyn to our country. The symbolism and promise of these buildings remains intact.

It is a profound failure of imagination to insist that this row must be demolished for a parking lot instead reusing them for needed community amenities. There is plenty of room on the six-acre property for a supermarket and industrial uses behind the buildings, especially if the necessary parking is incorporated into the new buildings.

With regard to financing the buildings’ reuse, this site has the potential to be enormously profitable for any supermarket developer; Home Depot, Lowe’s and Target all have their highest earning stores in New York. In return for what is sure to be a wildly successful venture, the developer should be required to give back to the local community and the city by making good on the promise of Admirals Row and returning these buildings back to Brooklyn.

Simeon Bankoff, executive director of the Historic Districts Council

©2008 The Brooklyn Paper

This comes to us from one of our neighborhood constituents.  It seems that presumptive Republican presidential candidate Arizona Senator John McCain has a personal connection with Brooklyn; his parents lived there.

Margaret Skinner, 85, lives in the individually-landmarked Joseph Steele House on the southeast corner of Vanderbilt and Lafayette Avenues. Steele by the way was the founder of Brooklyn Union Gas and the house has its original boiler, the second boiler, etc. and all the interior and exterior detail.  Margaret was visiting recently with Senator John McCain’s 96 year old mother, Roberta at the Republican Club at the corner of Fifth Avenue and W. 44th Street. After Margaret expressed her concern for the fate of Admiral’s Row, Mrs. McCain exclaimed, “Oh, I know all about Admiral’s Row.  My husband and I lived there!.”

Hmm, while Sentor McCain has not, to our knowledge, been particularly active in preservation issues, over 9,000 people in Brooklyn did vote for him. If this isn’t a tall tale, perhaps he’ll feel the need to say something about this issue.

More to the point, this story - true or not (although we have no reason to doubt the person who told us this) - illustrates the rich history that these houses possess. Generations of military men and their families lived there from before the Civil War until after the Viet Nam conflict. They should not be demolished for a parking lot.

Well, HDC went to the Public Meeting and the Press Conference this evening about the Admiral’s Row Section 106 process - and we were shocked at the misinformation that’s being propagated by the “Tear These Buildings Down!” crowd.  Here are a few real facts about the process and the site to counter the misinformation:

 - of the 11 historic buildings, 9 are structurally stable. The Beardsley Report (December 2007) states quite clearly that of all the buildings, buildings C and H have severe structural problems. The rest are in OK shape, the photos from the Beardsley Report support this, as evidence of historic floating staircases and the like are still standing and visibly stable.

 - restoration was estimated at $19 million for all 11 buildings. $19 million is a lot of money, but it is not hundreds of millions or billions as alleged at the press conference. That figure also assumes FULL restoration and of all 11 buildings, including the 2 with structural failure.

 - the supermarket is not going to be built “green”. The complex will include a 356 car surface parking lot. How is that “green”?  Let’s not talk about the century-old tree cover that will be lost because of this.

- it is against Federal Law to require that employees come from a certain Zip Code, to say nothing of assuring that all the jobs created will come from the nearby public housing projects.

- Asking the Federal Government to ignore national environmental laws is a foolish thing to do, so let’s  ascribe that to mere rhetoric and playing to the crowd. Still, it is inappropriate for lawyers and elected officials to do.

-  the Federal Government passed a law in 1988 to sell the propery to New York City, and then dropped the ball with regard to maintenance. The City sat on its hands for the last 20 years to take control of the property. There is plenty of blame to go around for the current condition of the buildings. Frankly, no one should be pointing fingers or throwing stones.