The MacDonough Street Houses In Context
Photo from Brownstoner.com
In case you missed it, this past weekend, New York Times columnist Christopher Gray wrote an architectural survey of MacDonough Street in Brooklyn’s Stuyvesant Heights Historic District. Mr. Gray even led a special walking tour of the area which has been described to us by a tour-goer as “a treasure trove of brownstone houses”. Our correspondent went on to say “there was a big turnout for the walk, with a strong representation of local residents whom Christopher had met in researching his article. The locals know the history of their own houses and the area and are very proud of them. It makes saving the two brownstones much more meaningful”.
As regular readers might remember, on Wednesday, January 20th, the Department of Buildings issued emergency vacate orders for two brownstone rowhouses at 329 and 331 MacDonough Street in the Stuyvesant Heights Historic District after construction work on the basement of 329 resulted in the partial collapse of the party wall. DOB then proposed an emergency demolition on the two buildings, which was opposed with a legal injunction by 329’s owner. Negotiations were undertaken between the owner and the city and numerous engineers and specialists were brought in to consult. We are extremely pleased to report that as of February 22nd, there is now a new concrete pier in the basement about 4 feet by 3 feet by 9 ft high that contains about 15 tons of concrete supporting the building. By all accounts, the crisis is past and now only the hard work of financing and overseeing the repairs remains.
The Buildings’ Saviors
These buildings would not have been saved without the concerted effort of a broad group of organizations and individuals. Without the Landmarks Preservation Commission’s early and frequent outreach to the community (including HDC) and accessibility during discussions and negotiations, this crisis might have passed unnoticed. Special thanks go to LPC Deputy Counsel John Weiss, who has been on the frontlines of all the recent demolition cases and has remained consistently accessible and responsive to community concerns, and LPC Executive Director Kate Daly, who fortuitously was temporarily placed at DOB at exactly the right time through Mayor Bloomberg’s recent “First Deputy Exchange”. Although he strongly advocated demolition of the buildings at first, it should be noted that DOB’s Chief Forensic Engineer Timothy Lynch remained open to discussion with other experts, allowed substantial access to the site and kept an open mind about alternatives. Judge Bert Bunyan of the Kings County Supreme Court played a pivotal role in allowing advocates and the property owners time to make a convincing assessment of the buildings to Mr. Lynch and City Council members Letitia James and Al Vann were very helpful in representing the public’s concern about these buildings to the administration.
On the civic side, major kudos and thanks to The New York Landmarks Conservancy, especially Technical Director Alex Herrera. Mr. Herrera, a trained architect, made himself instantly available for court hearings, made numerous onsite inspections and arranged for preservation engineers and shoring specialists to assess the situation. The work that The Conservancy did on this project can not be overstated; these buildings would have probably been lost without their assistance and advocacy. Neighbors of the houses were also incredibly helpful in raising awareness of the situation, offering assistance to displaced families and showing unified public support for preserving these buildings. Finally, the owners and residents of 329 and 331 MacDonough Street were not only stalwart in the face of forced evacuation and weeks of dislocation but steadfast in their defense of their homes.
Looking To The Future
Now that the buildings are hopefully safe, we would like to take a moment to look at this situation and see what steps could possibly be taken to avoid such things in the future. The principal problem, from a preservation perspective, was the Department of Building’s initial ruling that these landmark buildings needed to be demolished because of public-safety concerns. This effectively removed the LPC from the decision-making process and put the buildings’ advocates in the position of having to first fight for the concept of preserving these buildings before even addressing the practicality of how one could stabilize them safely. Although DOB serves as the city’s structural engineering expertise, the agency’s mission is to “ensure the safe and lawful use of buildings and properties by enforcing the Building Code and the Zoning Resolution.” While this is an incredibly desirable and necessary mission, it can potentially lead to conflict with the LPC’s stated mission to “safeguard the city’s historic, aesthetic, and cultural heritage”, particularly in a crisis situation which is exactly when unified action is most desirable. Furthermore, combating DOB in these instances requires precious time and resources from private advocates which would be better spent on saving the buildings in question.
Looking at the MacDonough Street situation as a case study, we would suggest that if there were an interagency structure in place to allow LPC and DOB to triage emergency situations with added preservation resources – such as a preservation engineer kept on retainer – then preservation-friendly solutions might be more easily arrived at. Furthermore, such an interagency task force might be able to suggest and promulgate guidelines and rules for both agencies which might be able to institute practices that could prevent some structural emergencies (such as a more in-depth engineering review of renovation plans). Some DOB guidelines already exist to regulate excavations next to historic buildings and applications for work on calendared properties, so there is precedent to creating guidelines for a framework for the agencies to work in tandem. In the past, LPC has worked collaboratively with DOT to create guidelines about sidewalks and street furniture in historic districts, so that is another precedent.
It is HDC’s understanding that the agencies already regularly communicate and the suggestion of an interagency taskforce should supplement and enhance any existing partnership. An official structure would only serve to make the city’s oversight and regulation of historic properties with structural concerns that much more robust and transparent to New Yorkers who care about our city’s built heritage. On MacDonough Street, a coalition of forces came together to make the best out of a very unfortunate situation and managed to save two historic homes. Let’s try to institutionalize that response so that when it happens again (and unfortunately, undoubtedly it will), the outcome isn’t in nearly as much doubt.