LPC Puts Another Nail in Purchase Bldg's Coffin
We just got word that the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted 7 to 2 in favor of demolishing the 1936 Purchase Building, which sits beneath the Brooklyn Bridge. A combination of late-deco and early modernist design, the building will be cleared to create “open space” underneath the bridge. The LPC’s ruling only upholds an earlier recommendation…
We just got word that the Landmarks Preservation Commission voted 7 to 2 in favor of demolishing the 1936 Purchase Building, which sits beneath the Brooklyn Bridge. A combination of late-deco and early modernist design, the building will be cleared to create “open space” underneath the bridge. The LPC’s ruling only upholds an earlier recommendation by the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation which gave the building a thumbs down last Summer in its Environmental Impact Statement. Our reaction? That sucks.
Purchase Bldg Slated for Demo [Brownstoner]
I guess beauty is in the eye and art is subjective, but IMO there is nothing unique or architecturally significant about this building. Bring on the park and the open space!
From what I understand, it is not so much a view of the bridge per se that they want to open up by knocking down the Purchase. It is the view corridor from Old Fulton Pier area up to where the Empire-Fulton Ferry Park is; it is a way to visually connect the two legs of the proposed Brooklyn Bridge Park. Personally, I don’t think we would get much view from knocking it down, and even saving a portion of the building would be nice. Like a previous poster said, it does look like a little bit of “Bauhaus in Brooklyn.”
Live in the neighborhood. Hate the building. Happy to see it go.
since when did a building have to be pretty to be preserved? the purchase building is a unique example of art deco architecture in new york city. true, the bridge is more majestic and monunmental, but it’s not like you can’t see the bottom of the bridge from nearby.
as the historic districts council notes on their website (http://www.hdc.org/purchase.htm), quoting from the designation report (’77): “in terms of long-range planning, the New York City Department of Purchase buildings directly under the Bridge, although still in use by the City, are being considered for use as an art school or for other educational purposes when the buildings are vacated.†it definitely could be reused.
saying it shouldn’t be preserved because it’s “ugly” is a continuation of a precedent that seems to be set (or being set) by new york city as a whole. while the LPC designated the austin nichols warehouse, many council members (not just yassky) said (in effect) “that’s not a landmark. it’s not pretty.” see also the argument over 2 columbus circle or the jamaica savings bank.
now i’m not saying we should preserve EVERYTHING, but a building can have merits that need a little explantation. we also don’t want to look back in ten or fifteen years and think “hey, that building was pretty cool. too bad it wasn’t saved.”
I thought the NYC Office of Emergency Mgmt (OEM) was in the building…did they leave?
I thought the NYC Office of Emergency Mgmt (OEM) was in the building…did they leave?
Hey, unfair slap at the Landmarks Preservation Commission. We got them to thumbs up saving the Austin Nichols Warehouse in Williamsburg designed by Cass Gilbert. It was David Yassky that led the charge to override that decision for the developers.
Please! This building blocks the view of the most beautiful bridge in the world, or at least NYC! It so has to go!
These days, The Landmarks Preservation Commission is just a rubber stamp comittee for developers anyway. This is a beautiful building that with just a bit of creativity could be adapted for something special.