Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Why the revisionist history?


Who in the heck is Save St. Saviour's, Inc.? This is the first I've heard of them. And how could they have saved the church in May 2008 when they weren't formed until the following October? I thought the Juniper Park Civic Association and Newtown Historical Society saved* the church. Apparently, others were also under that impression.

As for SSSI, Inc., as Jerry Seinfeld would say, "Who are these people?" (Click on the photo to see the document this came from.)

And since the historic land has not been developed as was expected, what is SSSI, Inc. doing to save that site as a park as was originally the goal?

* The term "saved" is a stretch since, according to architectural sketches, maybe 25% of the original church will be incorporated into the new building.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

Looks like yet another Queens preservation story that has turned into a complete joke. Taxpayer money wasted to dismantle the church only to throw most of it away. Even more taxpayer money will be wasted to rebuild it and pretend it is some kind of preservation "victory". Sadly, this isn't the first time something like this has happened and likely won't be the last.

Anonymous said...

Passed by the old site the other day. New realtor signs on it advertising it's for sale. City better jump on this now. It won't sit unsold forever.

Anonymous said...

SSSI, Inc. is in Manhattan?

Anonymous said...

Like finding 19th century landfill and calling it 'Arbitration Rock,' Queens history is a plaything in the hands of amateurs who do not let historical facts stand in the way of politcal or personal agendas.

Anonymous said...

This was a fantastic opportunity to challenge - and overturn - that Landmarks Law.

No guts or backbone.

So we suffer for a few more years.

Christina Wilkinson said...

It is true. When the siding was taken off the building, most of the original structure was there, I would say at least 75%. But there were issues such as termite damage and rotten wood and I know the preservation specialist said they definitely would not use the floorboards. Since I was not there when they packed the wood in the trailers, I didn't see what they kept and what they threw away. However, when they said the church fit in 2 trailers, I knew they must have thrown quite a bit of it away. The sketches prove that they did.

I left the project when those involved said they no longer wanted to push for the land and wanted to concentrate on rebuilding the church elsewhere. I felt like we were abandoning the people we promised to help. This new group was likely formed so that money could be funneled to them from the city through the Landmarks Conservancy which will act as a conduit to build the amphitheater. Some are saying that I am "jealous" of this. I don't see why someone would think I would be jealous of a project that is coming about mainly through my efforts. I put my heart and soul into this for 3 years and I am not giving up on getting the land like others have. There is the easy thing to do and the right thing to do.

Anonymous said...

Hey girl your doing the right thing. Remember the stories of bodies buried on the property and revolutionary war artifacts, etc? God knows what else is there. Keep fighting! Step #1 DUMP BLOOMBERG!!

Anonymous said...

Same on Landmarks Conservency and Shame on Sacred Sites Program.

This is not the first time they turned their backs on a community.

We have long memories. We are smart people. You will rue the day that you do things like this.

Anonymous said...

Mr Koo, I understand that something between $100,000 and,$200,00 was spent to tear down the chruch with day laborers in a few days.

Please explain how a professional deconstrcution can spend that money, do its task in that short time, and save so little.

Landmarks Conservency?

Sacred Sites?

Anyone out there?

Anonymous said...

As I recall, this was originally about preserving open space and preventing overdevelopment as well as preserving a neighborhood landmark and its history. What happened?

Anonymous said...

Middle Village will get a recreation of Maspeth's historic church. And Maspeth will get...?

Anonymous said...

Hopefully a park.

Christina Wilkinson said...

I've suggested recreating Niederstein's or the Morrell House at the All Faiths site. Both were a stone's throw away from there, would honor the history of Middle Village and be a source of community pride. Either would make more sense than a Maspeth church.

Anonymous said...

Because the winners write history and the losers whine on blogs.

Anonymous said...

No, winners make history. They don't write it. Although in this borough, if you repeat something often enough, it becomes fact. (Witness Queen Catherine.)

Anonymous said...

Interesting analysis.

So who lost? Sounds like Maspeth did.

Who won? No one.

Anonymous said...

If the property and the church is saved, then EVERYONE wins.

Sad that grownups don't understand this and are more preoccupied with making a "victory" out of something that has become a complete joke.

Anonymous said...

they call themselves save st saviours inc then they rename the building something else?

ROFLMAO!!

Anonymous said...

FYI...
The "Sacred Sites Program" secured badly needed funds to help repair the 17th century Old Quaker Meeting House in Flushing at least two times that I'm aware of.

Hate to interfere with your negative generalizations about the Landmarks Conservancy.

Anonymous said...

Not to worry Christina...you're Joan of Arc in my book!

You are firmly standing your ground in the face of criticism and unfounded accusations by some jealous unbelievers!

They're the heretics!

Might a certain element at JPCA be quislings who are willing to take the easier route?

Thats That! said...

FYI...
The "Sacred Sites Program" secured badly needed funds to help repair the 17th century Old Quaker Meeting House in Flushing at least two times that I'm aware of.

Hate to interfere with your negative generalizations about the Landmarks Conservancy.

---

oh ... ok ... and Rockefeller used to give dimes to kids so that made him a philanthropist?!?!?

The point here is that the Program will do a few projects for a handful of high profile locations, primarily in Manhattan.

There is suspicion, deep suspicion, that they are willing to write off the rest of the city and they let the developers know it.

What happened to St Saviours, and the gushing hose of money that will undoubtedly total more for a questionable relocation and a questionable reconstruction will total a lot more in monies, than if they saved it and restored it in location.

The benefit? To save a landmarks law that is a farce? To establish a principle that no land is sacred (especially in Queens) when a developer wants it?

In many minds this is a brewing scandal, and more than one person thinks it should be looked at closely.

So there.

Anonymous said...

Church In A Box. Just add $$$Money$$$ and watch the crap continue.