Most people would agree that the brownstones and small apartment buildings nestled in the southwest corner of Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, are for the most part drop-dead gorgeous. The 800 largely intact residential buildings, representing Italianate, Queen Anne, Romanesque Revival and Renaissance Revival styles, are executed in rich rusts, browns and terra cottas, and adorned with gracious bowed windows, generously proportioned stoops and adorable little turrets. The result, in the opinion of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission, is “an extraordinary well-preserved late-19th-century streets cape.”
Prosperous black families began buying these houses, many of which were designed by prominent architects, in the early 1900s. Despite being battered by crime, drugs, poverty and neglect in the ‘60s, ‘70s and ‘80s, Bed-Stuy has for two thirds of a century endured as one of the nation’s largest and most storied concentrations of African-Americans and, more recently, Caribbean-Americans.
For these reasons, the landmarks commission has proposed designating a 16-block area bounded by Gates Avenue, Fulton Street, Bedford Avenue and Tompkins Avenue as the
Bedford Historic District. The area sits just blocks from the Stuyvesant Heights Historic District, which was approved in 1971, and its extension, which was approved last year.
As is invariably the case when the city seeks to create a historic district, the proposal has prompted strong responses both pro and con.
Many were aired at a
public hearing in January 2013, when more than three dozen people testified before the commission, largely in favor of the proposal. In addition, 355 people submitted form letters in support of designation, and 220 people submitted letters seeking additional information, saying they knew too little about the proposal to make an informed decision. (According to the commission, only 37 of the letters were from property owners within the district).
Exuberant railings at 74 Halsey Street.
SASHA MASLOV FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
Supporters contend that a designation would preserve an architecturally and historically significant part of the city while also rewarding residents who had stuck with the neighborhood during tough times, in part by increasing the value of their homes and preventing unwelcome new development.
Opponents predict that a designation would bring heftier renovation costs and a tangle of regulations for homeowners seeking to improve their properties, along with higher rents and sale prices that would force out the largely low-income minority residents who form the area’s core.
Opponents also argue that most Bed-Stuy residents weren’t adequately informed about the proposal. The wheels of historic designation grind exceedingly slowly, and no vote on the proposal has been scheduled. But as the city awaits the appointment of a new commission chairman, both sides continue to marshal their arguments.
The Proponents
Hancock Street
SASHA MASLOV FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
If beauty were the sole criteria for designation as a historic district, proponents say the neighborhood would win hands down. Its smart-looking townhouses and small apartment buildings were designed by some of the city’s most celebrated 19th-century architects, and preservation groups have been vocal in praising their charms.
The
Victorian Society New York described Bed-Stuy as home to “a wide array of exciting and important Victorian architecture.”
The New York Landmarks Conservancy called the buildings “an extraordinary collection of architectural treasures with attractive streetscapes and a vivid sense of place” and praised their “dazzling array of the styles of the late 19th and early 20th century.”
The Historic Districts Council, which included the larger Bed-Stuy neighborhood in its first class of
“Six to Celebrate” — New York neighborhoods worthy of attention — took note of “the architectural splendor of this remarkable
Brooklyn neighborhood,” pronouncing it among the city’s “richest and most remarkable collections of 19th-century rowhouses.”
With Bed-Stuy second only to
Harlem as a destination for black New Yorkers, many people also regard these streets as representing a vital thread in the city’s development. As the New York Landmarks Conservancy summed up their importance, “The sense of place is heightened by the strong sense of community, including many families that have owned their homes for generations.”
The area’s architecture can also be dignified, as on Madison Street between Marcy and Nostrand Avenues.
SASHA MASLOV FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
Advocates of historic designation say it is precisely this sense of community that they yearn to preserve.
“My 7- and 8-year-old sons are growing up in a Bedford Village brownstone that their great-grandparents purchased to raise their grandmother and great-uncles and host countless Thanksgiving dinners,” Yoidette Erima said. “Neighbors have come to know each other’s families over generations. The retired men on our block are out and about, keeping watch daily.”
Advocates also say that a historic designation would prevent existing buildings from being torn down and replaced by less attractive speculative developments.
“I am concerned about the cheaply made, thoughtlessly designed new buildings developed in our area in the last decade,” said Onika Abraham, a resident of Hancock Street who described herself as a second-generation homeowner in the proposed district.
In Bed-Stuy, many a playful turret is to be found; this one is on Jefferson Avenue.
SASHA MASLOV FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
“I am hopeful,” added Ms. Abraham, who is in her late 30s and works as a communications director for a sustainable food network, “that the landmark designation would make developers consider the history, beauty and cohesion of our neighborhood when designing and constructing new buildings or renovations.”
Alicia and Steven Foxworth, Verona Place homeowners, are also not happy about such newcomers. “As residents that were born and raised in Bedford-Stuyvesant,” Ms. Foxworth told the landmarks commission, “myself a teacher, my husband an architect, we have watched closely as new development has changed the look and feel of our community. As such, we grieve the possibility that this trend will continue without the greatly desired protections of this landmarking process and we happily support the landmark designation.”
Some brokers endorse this position. Michelle Kadushin, an agent with Rutenberg Realty, who described herself as a “proud homeowner” in the proposed district, said: “I sell New York real estate and can see firsthand how preserving the original landscape of housing stock preserves our past. Every parcel has a story to tell, and we should preserve all of the chapters of the story.”
Many local civic groups and elected officials have supported the proposal, among them Community Board 3;the former borough president, Marty Markowitz; and Albert Vann, a former city councilman who represented the area for 40 years. They say that residents have been kept fully informed about the proposal and that any additional costs or red tape incurred would be worth it. “Yes, landmarking imposes some obligations on property owners,” Mr. Vann said, “but it gives more than it takes away.”
Also part of the tussle: houses on Monroe Street between Marcy and Nostrand Avenue.
EVAN SUNG FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES
Perhaps the most heartfelt argument in favor of historic designation is that it will reward those who have kept faith in the neighborhood over the years. According to
Claudette Brady, a founder of the
Bedford Stuyvesant Society for Historic Preservation, the majority of those who testified in favor of the proposal before the landmarks commission were African-Americans between the ages of 65 and 95, many of them third-, fourth- and even fifth-generation residents, who hope that a historical designation will protect their economic investment.
“Bedford-Stuyvesant is a hard-working community of proud people who, when the city and government failed them, took back the streets, one block at a time,” said Suzanne Spellen, a preservationist and one-time Bedford resident who blogs as
Montrose Morris on Brownstoner.com. “We swept our sidewalks, planted flowers in our yards and watched everyone else’s children as if they were our own.
“Landmarking is an affirmation of that struggle,” Ms. Spellen said, “a reward for holding on tight to something of great value, and that is this remarkable community of brick and mortar, tradition and pride, flesh and bone. It will protect what has been preserved for the last 150 years so that it can be handed down for those who will come after us, without the dangers of overdevelopment or arbitrary tear-downs and alterations.”
As for the specter of gentrification? “Gentrification and landmarking don’t necessarily go hand in hand,” Ms. Brady said. “Prices in the neighborhood, especially rentals, were already rising before landmarking was proposed.”
The Opponents
Opponents of the proposed Bedford Historic District agree that many of the buildings recommended for designation are exquisite. But, they wonder, are they all so handsome as to deserve being draped with an official mantle of protection?
The Real Estate Board of New York, an organization that has been vocal in identifying potential downsides of historic designation, has cited many structures in the proposed district that it considers decidedly mediocre.
“Looking at these inferior structures,” said Michael Slattery, the group’s senior vice president for research, “we ask ourselves: Are these buildings or the collection of buildings so special, so distinctive, that we want to preserve them forever?”
His association, which contends that only the most attractive structures were featured in the commission’s official description of the area, thinks not, and points to structures on Putnam Avenue, Madison Street and Monroe Street that, in the board’s opinion, do not measure up aesthetically.
The real estate group also questioned exactly how these homes reflect the area’s historic importance.
“It is impossible to establish a significant link between that history and this group of buildings,” Mr. Slattery said. Virtually every city neighborhood can claim an interesting history, he said. And he added, “What is it that elevates such history from interesting to important and that requires the preservation of these particular buildings forever?”
As is common in debates involving preservation, the loudest arguments have to do with money and red tape. Changes on the exteriors of buildings in a historic district must meet certain standards and must be approved in advance by the landmarks commission. Critics of the proposal contend that improvements could prove costly and time-consuming. And given that the average household income in the Bedford neighborhood is slightly over $50,000, according to census data, they say the burden will fall most heavily on longtime minority residents, many of whom are elderly and live on limited incomes.
“My family and I worked very hard for our property,” Kenneth Washington, a retired inspector for the city Department of Transportation, said in a statement to the commission. Citing the time and money that could be required to restore buildings within the district, he added, “We do not want to see this happen to our neighborhood.”
As for a city program that offers grants for facade restoration to eligible owners of buildings in historic districts, critics say the money available is too limited to do much good.
Opponents also worry that historic designation will lead to an unwelcome spike in property values that could force out working-class and middle-class residents who had survived the area’s difficult years and helped make the neighborhood what it is today. They say the costs of renovating designated buildings would be passed on to renters. The jury is out as to whether designation increases property values, Mr. Slattery said; however, the board’s analysis of historic districts in
Manhattan shows that the median income in designated areas is much higher than the city average.
At the hearing, Kirsten John Foy, the president of the
Brooklyn chapter of the
National Action Network, a civil-rights group, said that, as a result of foreclosures and other factors, “people are being forced out of their homes at still alarming rates. At a time when the community was beginning to reestablish itself,” Mr. Foy added, “why would we encourage gentrification, predatory lenders, buyers and racketeers? Making homeownership more costly for existing residents will accelerate normal market and business cycles, drive up evictions, and create more gentrification, more displacement.”
A common argument against historic designation is that it will hinder development. In this case, the real estate group contends that designation will choke off the production of affordable housing, a priority of the new de Blasio administration. Without designation, the real estate group said, developers would be able to build low-rise apartment houses that contain more units per structure than their neighbors.
For many residents, the issue simply boils down to information, or more accurately, what they see as the lack of it. Opponents of the plan criticized the scheduling of the commission’s hearing (in the middle of a workday) and its location (in Manhattan), on the grounds that it catered to what Mr. Foy described as “architectural elites.”
Even some who see merits in the proposal contend that the drawbacks outweigh the benefits.
“I am not opposed to protecting the historic and majestic neighborhood where I have worked and lived for over 20 years,” said the
Rev. Johnny Ray Youngblood, the senior pastor of
Mount Pisgah Baptist Church, which sits just outside the proposed district. “However, I am opposed to additional and unnecessary landmark designation that will place undue financial constraints and burdens on people who can barely afford to maintain what they have spent years building.”
Mr. Youngblood also took issue with the way the city was handling the issue, saying the commission was trying to “ramrod this designation down our throats.”
And Sehu Jeppe, 64, a longtime city health department administrator who now runs a nonprofit organization called
Black Wellness, told the commission: “What needs to be preserved are the people of Bedford-Stuyvesant.” Mr. Jeppe, a third-generation Bedford-Stuyvesant resident and a homeowner in the proposed district since 1987, added, “I’d hate to see us become a Harlem, where the jewel has been extracted.”
You can find the original contents of this article
Here
Image via Alamedainfo.com
