CB2 (Barely) Backs Skyscraper District
Community Board 2 voted to back the creation of the Skyscraper Historic District in Downtown Brooklyn but the level of support was underwhelming. As The Post reports, the Board voted just 16-10 (with two abstentions) in favor of the designation. Those against the plan, which included the co-op board at 75 Livingston which is trying…
Community Board 2 voted to back the creation of the Skyscraper Historic District in Downtown Brooklyn but the level of support was underwhelming. As The Post reports, the Board voted just 16-10 (with two abstentions) in favor of the designation. Those against the plan, which included the co-op board at 75 Livingston which is trying to get its building removed from the footprint, say the new district would mean higher rents as well as higher costs of maintenance. (For more details on the proposed district, check out this post we did last week.) The Landmarks Preservation Commission will review the plan at its weekly public hearing on December 14; in addition to LPC, the designation still needs to be approved by the City Planning Commission and the City Council.
75 Livingston Street is not a landmark yet?
It is the coolest building in the Boro.
What are they waiting for?
The LPC does add some review to people wanting to make changes. The two properties that wanted out were a Brooklyn Law School dorm and 75 Livingston Street. 75 Livingstone street stated that they already maintain the Terra cotta building lovingly and to a high standard. they just objected to having someone review what they do-because of the costs. It seems to me that because it is such a worthwhile building it should be subject to review and not a co-ops whim and caprice.
As for the Law School dorm, Brooklyn Law school already has many buildings subject to Landmarks review. The specious argument that it will increase tuition is just not sufficient and it probably won’t anyway.
The other argument that it would increase rents because of the increased costs is just another scare tactic by real estate interests. The Woolworth building in Manhattan is land marked and has lots of tenants.
yes it does has a slightly increased cost- I own and live in a land marked building and its not that a great burden.
Chris is not a “Tea Pary type;” he’s a commercial broker who does a lot of work for the new owners of 16 Court Street.
seems logical to include this piece of Brooklyn heights in an historic district. The buildings are really significant. I don’t think designating another dozen buildings amounts to an “unfunded mandate”. Honestly, the Tea Party types on this blog go off the wall sometimes.
before you add to their work loads
the city of new york complains about unfunded mandates, this is an unfunded laid on property owners
Give the staff some more staff so they can handle all the new product they are being given first. Remove single decision makers on aesthetic decisions, have an appeals process and streamline the process of individual homeowners without architect/specialists. Before you all districts.
Sorry to interrupt, but…
PARTY IS TONIGHT FOLKS! HOPE TO SEE YOU ALL THERE!!!
Remember, bring unwrapped gifts for the RHCC and a wrapped dollar store gift for the grab-bag 🙂