329 MacDonough's Long Road to Salvation
The plight of 329 MacDonough Street (shown above last month) received a lot of ink here and elsewhere in the aftermath of a construction incident that threatened the structural integrity of the brownstone and its neighbor. When contractors dug a trench in the cellar that destabilized the party wall, the DOB was quick to call…
The plight of 329 MacDonough Street (shown above last month) received a lot of ink here and elsewhere in the aftermath of a construction incident that threatened the structural integrity of the brownstone and its neighbor. When contractors dug a trench in the cellar that destabilized the party wall, the DOB was quick to call for the two buildings’ demolition. Our concern was public safety. said Tim Lynch, the Buildings inspector who made the initial call. You cannot endanger workers. As a NY Times article this morning explores, Mr. Lynch is not a cold-hearted philistine–he had spent fourteen years of his career working for an engineering company that specializes in preservation. In the wake of his initial call, though. Mr. Lynch received praise for keeping an open mind as the owner and other preservationists worked with other engineers to come up with a proposal to save the buildings. The plan was a long shot, thought Lynch, but he decided to give it a try. It was one of the most complicated engineering plans I’ve worked on, said Mr. Lynch. The stabilization effort ended up taking 42 days, using 36 tons of concrete and more than half a mile of lumber in the process. And the homeowner, who is also likely to receive fines along with the contractor for the illegal work that caused the initial problems, is out an extra several hundred thousand dollars.
After Fight, a Brooklyn Brownstone’s Costly Rescue [NY Times]
Learning from the MacDonough Street Crisis [Brownstoner]
MacDonough St. Houses Report [Brownstoner]
Update on MacDonough Street [Brownstoner]
Salvation on MacDonough Street? [Brownstoner]
Stay of Execution on MacDonough Street [Brownstoner]
MacDonough Street Update 1/25/10 [Brownstoner]
Wall Collapse, Vacate Order, Maybe Demo on MacDonough [Brownstoner]
In the end, the original decision by the DOB proved to be wrong. These are the facts.
benson, you’re right. The preservation community should have just shrugged its shoulders and allowed three or maybe four well-preserved brownstones housing a dozen families and all their possessions to be torn down at a moment’s notice because it just wasn’t worth questioning the DOB.
Bxgrl;
Really, people were not trying to say that they knew more than the DOB? People were not trying to demonize Mr. Lynch? Well, let me refresh your memory with just one of many comments that were made on the subject (this one from Montrose):
“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 you think the outcome of this situation vindicates the preservationists, then you need a reality check. Most people don’t have a couple of hundred thousand lying around to shore up a foundation.
gman- we’re not trying to say we know more than the DOB engineer. I think what you’re seeing is the frustration most of us have with government that seems unresponsive and uncaring. McDonough really complicates the issue- had the community not spoken out, and the homeowners resisted, there would be a hole in the ground right now. They were right. But we all know there are times when the DOB is right on target, and must act swiftly. Now if we could only figure out some way to communicate better.
G_man;
Well said. I would invite all to click on the old links and look at the invective that was thrown at the DOB and Mr. Lynch in particular. Will any of these folks admit that they were wrong? Don’t hold your breath.
Another example of the “good versus evil” mentality of the preservationist crowd.
Montrose, please write a letter to the NYT, I am, and I hope some other preservationists who read brownstoner will do so as well.
The story made the owner seem like a victim when in reality, he was doing illegal excavation work and it was only through the efforts of many in the community and elsewhere that his house was saved. Pouring a new concrete bearing wall in the cellar is expensive but it saved his house and the adjacent house and probably the house on the other side as well. How expensive would it have been to rehouse all the people that would have been made homeless and to build new houses on the site?
It was a brainless piece of journalism IMO.
Agreed, ML. The owner of 329 probably managed to lessen his liability by saving his house.
It’s interesting to know he cashed his retirement savings to shore up the foundation. It’s a pretty clear admission of guilt, and he’s a lawyer!
Montrose, your first comment hit the nail on the head. Obviously this guy didn’t want to invest the upfront time in hiring qualified contractors, developing engineering plans, and securing the necessary permits and approvals. The result? He’s going to spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours to pay for his initial laziness. Serves him right, in my opinion.
I found it interesting the owner said he spent his retirement fund to do the emergency repairs. It’s a pretty clear admission of guilt, considering he is a lawyer.