Neir’s Tavern has 186 years of history inside it — and now Councilwoman Elizabeth Crowley (D-Glendale) is endorsing a proposal to have the city officially recognize its significance by making it a city landmark.
The Woodhaven bar, located at 87-48 78 St., is the oldest bar in the city to continually operate in the same location.
Opened in 1829, it first served patrons who were on their way to watch horse races at the Union Course ractrack, formerly located a few blocks away.
Loycent Gordon, the owner of Neir’s, said he is only seeking to have the interior landmarked — but added he’d like to have the exterior done as well.
“Eventually we’d like to do the exterior,” Gordon said.
Crowley, too, would like to see the whole building preserved.
“It’s not just any other building. It’s historic and it should be kept that way,” the councilwoman said. “By landmarking it, it will stay for the enjoyment of generations to come.”
Once a structure has been designated a landmark by the city, the owner of the building must obtain the approval of the Landmarks Preservation Commission to make any changes to it.
21 comments:
It has lasted 200 years without landmarking. Leave it alone . The city only wants to do it to make money!
Then it has earned the right to continue to last. Landmarking will guarantee that.
Please explain how the city makes money off of this landmarking, you dope!
Imagine Queens having a bar older than Manhattan's fabled Mc Sorleys.
Imagine Liz Crowley supporting interior landmark status.
Brava to her. Maybe she's seeing the light about Queens' need to preserve its historic sites.
'“It’s not just any other building. It’s historic and it should be kept that way,” the councilwoman said. “By landmarking it, it will stay for the enjoyment of generations to come.”'
Just because it is old does not make it historic.
Let some private group preserve it if it is so important.
This is a prime example of what a waste of taxpayer money the city council is. Why do we need another layer of do nothing politicians feeding off the public teat? Is the assembly not enough?
I saw a feature on TV about them. They use a special cold filtering system for their draft brews.
I think it involved tubing through ice. I'm dropping in for one of those ice cold brewskies, for sure!
Gage and Tolner in Brooklyn Heights had interior landmark status.
When it closed a Mc Donald's replaced it...keeping the old look...of course.
At least it did not get gutted.
If enough dummies do not support a bar, it closes and gets used for a new Victoria's Secret location.
"Imagine Liz Crowley supporting interior landmark status."
Just imagine Liz Crowley.
Uh, no thanks.
It has lasted 200 years without landmarking. Leave it alone . The city only wants to do it to make money!
Sounds like a Vallone supporter or something you get from Crowleys office asking for a letter of support.
Excellent idea!
It has lasted 200 years without landmarking. Leave it alone . The city only wants to do it to make money!
AND
Just because it is old does not make it historic.
Let some private group preserve it if it is so important.
This is a prime example of what a waste of taxpayer money the city council is. Why do we need another layer of do nothing politicians feeding off the public teat? Is the assembly not enough?
Are the two of you posters really that dumb?? The OWNER wants it landmarked, not the city. So, the city should do what the owner wants: landmark it, for crissakes!
Why does the OWNER want it landmarked? Why doesn't he just keep it the way it is? Why does the city have to have anything to do with it? Is is just a ploy to keep it in his hands when he can't afford the taxes?
Again, being old doesn't make it historic. If you want it preserved open your wallet and pay for it.
Why do you NOT want to see it landmarked if the owner does?
It's not really your business.. Is it? You must be a developer's shill.
Uh, and it is not 200 years old. Can you read you dumb cluck?
It's 186 years old. Go back to smoking whatever drug you've been packing your pipe with.
Crowley throws the preservationists a bone.
This is a safe bet for her.
Where was she with St. Saviour's? Giving some developer something under the table?
Go to the "head" of the class, Liz.
This is a prime example of what a waste of taxpayer money the city council is. Why do we need another layer of do nothing politicians feeding off the public teat? Is the assembly not enough?
I am confused. Are we talking about our councilman siding [for once] for the community and encouraging [for once] community pride over the bulldozers through landmarking,
or subsidizing developers [by tax subsidizes and letting them take over city agencies to do their bidding] on our time and our dime thus furthering their careers by displacing us?
Crowley throws the preservationists a bone.
Why go after Crowley on St Saviours and not Costa, Vallone and Van Bramer on Steinway?
Because Dizzy Lizzy Crowley is an anti preservation c--t!
Why not go after GAHS for not pulling out all the stops...years in advance...when it could have meant something....to save Steinway?
Just wait until it is too late and then get out the crying towel.
Historical societies are useless for anything but collecting and cataloging paper and building up their illusions of grandeur.
If Steinway were the Stonewall Inn , Van Bramer would have come all out to save the site.
Are historical societies really supposed to be activist groups? Aren't tea and crumpets really what they're for?
Right on about tea and crumpets!
Queens Historical Society has held enough Victorian tea parties to make me pee for days.
Substitute espresso and let us all really express ourselves about vanishing historic sites.
Lost New York....Forgotten New York....Queens Then and Now...Blah, blah, blah!
Publish mountains of paper but not a shred of time spent on saving Queens real historic fabric....its buildings and sites.
"Is no my job" bleat the various hysterical societies. Well, who the fuck should be carrying the baton of leadership here, if it isn't the historical societies?
If you are going to be an org of polite putz pullers, then say so. Cut their damn funding ....these lazy phonies.
The libraries have plenty of info on history. We do not need historical societies to duplicate their function and suck up tax money.
But, of course, if a politician funds one of these societies they can claim that they support preservation.
The only thing that you can count on for support is a bra or jock strap.
They need to save it incase they need to film Goodfella's part 2 in there.
Post a Comment