BREAKING: 227 Duffield Saved From Eminent Domain Death
This just in via press release: The lawsuit filed by South Brooklyn Legal Services on behalf of Joy Chatel, owner of 227 Duffield Street, has ended in a settlement with the city that will spare the brick building in Downtown Brooklyn from seizure and destruction through eminent domain. Since the city announced its intentions to…
This just in via press release: The lawsuit filed by South Brooklyn Legal Services on behalf of Joy Chatel, owner of 227 Duffield Street, has ended in a settlement with the city that will spare the brick building in Downtown Brooklyn from seizure and destruction through eminent domain. Since the city announced its intentions to build an underground garage on the site of the 1848 building back in 2004, it’s been the source of great controversy: The owner, as well as many politicians and historians, has argued that its connection to the Underground Railroad in the 19th Century. As part of the settlement, the city has agreed to redo its plans for this section of the Downtown Brooklyn development plan. Chatel plans to offer tours of the home upon request. There will be a press conference on Monday at noon at the house. Surprised at the outcome?
The Duffield Eminent Domain Battle Continues [Brownstoner]
City Reevaluating Duffield St. Eminent Domain Plan [Brownstoner]
HPD OK’s Seizure of Duffield St. Homes [Brownstoner]
Abolition Panel a Salve for Duffield Street Concerns? [Brownstoner]
Duffield Preservationists Fight Back with Lawsuit [Brownstoner]
Just go to Curbed.com and you will find that 227 Duffield Street is in the stages of being foreclosed. This Underground Railroad claim is a joke.
Something in BH would be great. I have nothing against that- it’s an interesting comparison. If you’re looking for comparisons, there is about as much evidence of escaped slaves on Duffield as at Plymouth Church, at least according to the New York Times a few weeks ago.
There are not that many basements owned by Abolitionists. The Duffield Street properties are some of the best documented Underground Railroad sites in New York, which shows how poorly the other possible sites have been documented.
I think we should listen to Dr. Cheryl Laroche. She’s the academic behind the discovery of slave quarters at George Washington’s presidential residence. She says that Duffield Street represents THE BEST site for Underground Railroad research in the country.
There may be other sites, but Duffield is really quite exciting.
commemoration of Brooklyn’s abolitionist history would be interesting and relevant, but not by using one of thousands of basements that may have been used as part of the UR.
A large part of the movement was based in Plymouth Church. Something in BH would be much more logical and relevant.
Many of the 34 comments to this point talk about how horrible NIMBYs are. Well, what about the YIMBYs? There are some people who WANT development in their backyards.
I’m talking literally here. Lew Greenstein, one of the primary Duffield Street owners, has said that he is glad to have people take his backyard, just so his property can be part of the future of Downtown Brooklyn. He would do anything to use his 1840s home as part of a new Brooklyn. He thinks that a museum would be the best use of his property.
The other owner, Joy Chatel, wants her home to be part of this new future as well. And I think she understands what’s coming to her neighborhood.
Currently, three hotels are planned for Duffield Street between Fulton and Willoughby, also known as Abolitionist Place. Two are across the street from 227 Duffield, and one is at 337 Duffield. There’s also a massive project going up at Fulton and Duffield. Oh, and there’s another development on Willoughby and Duffield, but that’s easy to miss- it’s only valued at $208 MILLION.
My point is simple. There are massive projects popping up all over Downtown Brooklyn, especially on Duffield Street. Letting a few owners keep their properties is not stopping this dramatic growth.
There can even be a parking lot and small park on Duffield, and Ms. Chatel can pursue her vision of a museum. I probably won’t convince “guest” (who posted at 1:02, 1:05, 1:20, 1:26, 1:29, et cetera), but this did convince the EDC. They realized that a commemoration of Brooklyn’s Abolitionist history is the best thing for all New York.
I applaud the EDC’s decision. It’s not worth our taxpayer dollars to fight a homeowner who wants use their property for a real public benefit. This is a great day for Brooklyn, and for New York.
Hey you guys, take a deep breath. Our United States and New York Governments do not really care a great deal about history or patrimony or historical landmarks. This is really the exceptiont to the rule.
Your tax dollars go mostly to building giant rockets and bomber planes and other macho warrior stuff.
The money to build one bomber would probably restore every public school in Brooklyn. So do not think that your precious tax dollar goes to preserve monuments or reminders of our shared history. It mostly goes to other more combatitve things. This modest little house (did you think the underground railroad operated from Grand Cenral terminal?) is a very important link to our forebears in Brooklyn, which was an adamantly abolitionist city. And get this, Duffield Street was like ground zero for abolitionist families for some reason. Of ocurse the famous preacher Henry Ward Beecher, whose sister Harriet wrote “uncle Tom’s cabin” railed against slavery in Brooklyn Heights’ Plymouth Church. This is a mojor, major aspect of our history, One has to be a Neanderthal not to apprehend that.
This little building is important for that reason not because of rentable square feet or FAR. This is all about being an evolved human being.
One way of looking at this a positive is that maybe this is a sign that the city is serious about expediting the development process. Instead of slugging it out in court for another year, they could settle…take three to six months to adjust their plans and get moving. I live in the area and its hard to imagine how they will build the park around the Duffield street houses…but hopefully they will figure out a way…I was really really looking forward to that park.
I’m thinking the owner and investor have beaten the city, good for them. They can continue to own this little place. Lots of little houses remain in Manhattan among the skyscrapers and no one is worse for it. On the other hand they would have been rewarded handsomely for “selling out”. As it is they are not being “exploited”. Joan Robinson said “Exploitation is a terrible thing, the only thing worse is not being exploited.”
After AY drives RE values skyward they could sell it to the highest bidder which may or may not be more than they could get right now, I don’t feel sorry for them and I don’t envy them, it is their place.
What this is about, folks, is Bloomberg’s national standing, and a possible run. He wised up and figured out that taking a possible UGRR site down is a loser, politically. He’ll use this to counterbalance the AY fiasco and Willett’s point, perhaps.
I’m a little sad about the park, too. That area could use some green.
By the way, what’s a NIMBY interloper? Isn’t that by definition an impossibility? Just askin’.
It would be great if the settlement required the dumpy commercial looking addition on the front to be removed and the building completely refurbished, at least from the outside, to its 19th century specifications, rather than the eyesore dump it is now.