« Fort Greene Mansion: Watcha Got? Open House Picks »

April 8, 2005

A View to be Killed

view
Preservationists and neighbors of Green-Wood Cemetary are up in arms over a developer's proposal to build a 70-foot-tall condominium that would obscure the views of one of the cemetary's most important residents. Located on Battle Hill, the cemetary's high point, the bronze statue of Minerva, the Roman goddess of wisdom, has had a clear view to the Statue of Liberty since 1920, when she was commissioned by a local history buff to commemorate the Revolutionary War Battle of Long Island. The Green-Wood neighborhood to the south has recently started to attract the attention real estate developers looking for more hospitable zoning than neighboring Park Slope offers. Last month, Community Board 7 unanimously passed a resolution supporting the preservation of the cemetery's historic views. The City Planning Department is conducting a rezoning study that could be ready by the end of the summer, but the Times reports that it might take an additional six months or longer to win ultimate approval from the City Council.
Notice: At 1 pm, Sunday, April 10, the South South Slope Community Group, joined by Concerned Citizens of Greenwood Heights, will march from 15th Street and 7th Avenue to Battle Hill in Green-Wood Cemetery. Marchers will enter the cemetery at 25th Street and Fifth Avenue. The march will end atop Battle Hill.
Raise a Hand if You Like the View [NY Times]




Posted by Brownstoner at 9:18 AM | Comments (16)
Categories: Neighborhoods

Comments

How can people demand affordable housing in one breath, and in the next one decry the "ugly homes" that United Homes builds, and the loss of views FOR A FREAKING STATUE!!!!!

I mean, try to be consistent, either you prefer people owning or living in affordable, if not pretty homes, or would you rather slow down the development growth, and restrict the supply, thereby driving up prices for housing and land, and then get mad at developers who build low-quality housing, and condo towers to meet the demand, since people have been outpriced by your asinine whining!

Posted by: iceberg at April 8, 2005 10:23 AM

um, it's more about obstructing the views for the city's most important burial grounds...not the statue. It's about preserving the historical beauty of our city's momuments.

Posted by: smitty at April 8, 2005 11:05 AM

isn't it a condo and not affordable housing? it's about responsible construction.

Posted by: bo at April 8, 2005 11:08 AM

Whats the hell is "responsible construction"?

Who the hell are you to dictate to others how they should deal with their own property? It just so happens that the developers' greed coincide with the demands of the public, not some ivory-tower knee-jerk anti-development AUTHORITARIANS, who want to promote vague notions of "responsible construction", and deny to millions of people the possibilty of ever owning a home or condo for that matter.

YES, prove me how your "responsible construction" makes sure that there is an ample supply of homes that people can afford, and not just another condo tower, which because of excessive land, construction & legal costs is going to marketed to the upper classes, just so the deal is profitable?

Posted by: iceberg at April 8, 2005 12:18 PM

In the words of Steven Greenhut at http://www.lewrockwell.com/ocregister/city-planning.html - "City planning by Those Who Know Best"

"The New Urbanists claim to want to give our lives meaning by creating superior urban forms of living, yet they miss the most meaningful things in life because they emphasize architecture over people. Like all totalitarians, they assume that what they prefer is so good and noble that they have the moral right to impose it on everybody else."

Posted by: iceberg at April 8, 2005 1:15 PM

If anyone's interested in reading more about the anti-condo efforts -- or ranting against them -- there's a website at

http://www.southsouthslope.com/

altho I might suggest that if you want to keep out the condo towers, you might want to start by not referring to your neighborhood as "South South Slope." It implies that the neighborhood is part of Park Slope, when most of it is outside even the most generous definition. I mean, don't you think that the condo developer is going to use exactly that kind of misleading, real-estate-ese name to sell its condos to people?

Posted by: linusvanpelt at April 8, 2005 1:51 PM

Dead people don't appreciate views.
I've spent some time at the cemetary and was stunned by the natural beauty of the place. I never noticed the views out to New York Harbor, I was too busy looking at the achitecture and necrolithology of the monuments in the beautiful parklike setting.

Posted by: whitbo at April 8, 2005 2:54 PM

We have been looking for an apartment for over a year and half and have recently found a place in a new condo in Greenwood Heights. Although, I agree with keeping a neighbourhood to it's roots, New York, Brooklyn included, has a SPACE problem... there simply is not enough. There are a plethora of run-down and ill-used spaces in Greenwood Heights and developers buying them up to create affordable (and I speak from experience here) housing is completely ok in my book.

I can guarentee that if the people involved in the anti-housing effort were looking for a home in todays markets they would be on the other side of the fence saying build more, build more. Selfish bastards!

Posted by: brookyln-hunt at April 9, 2005 12:00 AM

RE: NY Times links

Not sure if you know this, but the Times has several RSS feeds (there's a link to them all at the bottom of the homepage). The value of linking to their articles using their RSS feed links is that once the articles go into the archives (about a week) you can still use the RSS-based link for free (even registered users would have to pay otherwise). This means that the value of your archives is enhanced.

I'm not promising that everything will be in their RSS feeds, but I know this article was, because I bookmarked the RSS-based link for a bit, thinking I would blog about it.

When you go to the article through the feed, just bookmark it. Then you've got the perpetual link for later use.

Just a suggestion!

Posted by: Frank at April 9, 2005 10:36 AM

Couldn't agree more. My dad is buried in Greenwood Cemetery, and losing out that view is not the end of the world to me. Keep in mind, you have so many other distractions of urban blight around the cemetery, first and foremost being the Jackie Gleason Bus Depot.

Posted by: bksqueeze at April 11, 2005 10:08 AM

Glad to see so much good (and bad) dialogue over our specific issue and the greater one as a whole. As a promoter of "responsible construction," or a better term "contextual development," I, my wife and neighbors, who are lucky enough to live below Minerva's view from Battle Hill (in Green-Wood), are not anti-development...we are pro-responsible and pro-contextual development. Purchasing properties, destroying livable (while some needing renovation, like ours was) circa 1900 frame houses to build 5-9 story, out of context buildings, does not help a community or the greater good. New York, and Brooklyn most specifically (I am being biased here) is about diversity. Plowing down homes to build multi-family homes does provide more (expensive, looking at $500-750K condos here folks, not "affordable" by my definition) housing, yes. But when it is at the expense of a community, whether it be a block or an entire area, or historic sight lines, buildings, etc., the new development does benefit nor out weight the damage that is caused, regardless of the need. History is as important as our future...While we have rallied and marched for "contextual and responsible new development," we are also battling for a mixed & diverse community as a whole: one made up of home owners, condo owners, renters and hell, developers! Keep it contextual, do it without destroying a community. Do what is right. Enough said...

Posted by: lostinbrooklyn at April 11, 2005 8:34 PM

FUCK YOU! You fucking dick!!! Stop reposting your stupid post on every fucking blog that is related to this article. Your a pathetic excuse for a web designer!!! Anyone can hit APPLE C, APPLE V. Selfish dickhead.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 16, 2005 1:07 AM

Was checking back at some of the older blogs after the most recent entry on our "battle for the view" and contextual/responsible development.

Just had to say to "Anonymous" from April 16...

Glad you have found a good outlet to let out all that pent up anger.

Next time try to engage me (or anyone) in a intelligent, civil dialog,...even if I am a crappy web designer (though 12 yrs in biz does mean something). And have enough guts to leave your name...

My suggestion, deep breath, out...1...2...3.

Posted by: lostinbrooklyn at August 2, 2005 7:53 PM

AS ALWAYS THE LAST WORD IS THE BUILDING WILL BE BUILT AND THE VIEWS WILL BE MAINTAINED.

EVERYONE WINS.

ROBERT SCARANO

Posted by: ROBERT SCARANO at November 5, 2005 6:57 PM

sildenafil citrate http://beam.to/sildenafil-citrate/ buy citrate sildenafil http://beam.to/buy-citrate-sildenafil/ citrate generic sildenafil http://beam.to/citrate-generic-sildenafil/ citrate sildenafil tablet http://beam.to/citrate-sildenafil-tablet/ Sildenafil citrate http://sildenafil.myfreeforum.org/

Posted by: sildenafil citrate at June 29, 2006 6:17 PM

spironolactone side effects http://spironolactone-side-effects.blogspot.com/

Posted by: spironolactone at June 29, 2006 6:56 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions