Costa Constantinides declined comment on the Dulcken House in a NY1 piece: "his spokesperson said the decision is out of his jurisdiction."
But...IN THE MINUTES OF the Community Board 1, Queens meeting dated Feb 21, 2017, page 2, "A constituent stated the some of the buildings in the district should be Landmarked.... The Councilman recommended the constituent ... contact his office."
Caliendo Gerald J AIA, who is trying to destroy the Dulcken House by another development project is the Land Use and Zoning Co-Chair of Community Board 1, Queens whose members are appointed by - Costa Constantinides. Gerry was appointed to Queens Community Board #1 in Astoria in 1977. He chaired the Land Use Committee for over 10 years and remains an active member of the Community Board to the present day, a period of over 35 years.
Mr. Caliendo is President of King Manor Museum whose mission statement reads "Our goal is to make history relevant and immediate, and to foster an awareness of the roots of the present and a deeper appreciation of history as an on-going process."
20 comments:
One of the key issues here is, that the acceptance or rejection of Landmarks Preservation Commission (despite the carefully written provisions that deny this) is its pretty much up to your councilman.
Now when the rejection letter comes in, it will state one of two things:
1. the building is altered (bullshit, as virtually every building that is Landmarked is altered in some form - walk around the Village or Carol Gardens or the West Side. And yes, buildings in far worse condition than this have been restored to original form).
2. the building does not rise to the level of historical importance (again, bullshit, as the building housed a member of the Dulcken clan, which is the First Family of Music, whose legacy goes back centuries, and Ferdinand Dulcken, the person that built this house, played a pivotal role in making NYC the cultural and intellectual capital of the world).
Its more than just a house with the bad fortune to be in a communty that has nothing but ignorant bile tossed at it on the topic of community preservation. The potential here is to shake up community preservation in NYC itself.
It has the potential as a significant test case on overturning the status quo of Landmarks Designation in NYC.
Its about time the Lanmdmarks Law is challenged.
Despite being a statue on the books that is funded by all whom pay taxes, its principles and standards are applied capriciously. Its discriminatory in that areas of the disadvantaged (that is of low income and of color) fail to enjoy its benefits to the same degree as communities of privilege.
It denies everyone equal justice.
If I was a developer and wanted that law off the books this is low hanging fruit. The inevitable rejection (sparked by the irresponsible actions of that local councilman) would open that door.
If a developer takes this up, champions this as a cause célèbre, they would find this as an excellent opportunity to open the door on the Landmark Law: by challenging the commissions's inevitable rejection, this case would arouse widespread controversy and heated public debate, and, in the final step, strike the law from the books.
I never trusted this politician either.
He failed to help with Steinway Mansion as well. Worthless.
Worthless? How about the community?
Squealing like little kids over participatory budgeting.
Hell, Costa stepped down from Mt. Olympus to be with them!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/65900513@N06/16976835857
This is over their heads.
He failed to help with Steinway Mansion as well. Worthless.
Its a bit like Jimmy and the Elks Building. Aside from getting drunk while bar hopping 'to raise money' the community did squat for Steinway so they get what they earned. They gave it to the developers.
Now if there was a craft beer event, a flea market, or a new Thai noddle place there would be 5400 views, 380 likes, and 130 shares on Facebook. That's where they're at.
Nuclear option on Landmarks? Long overdue. When you got nothing to lose you lose nothing.
i'm usually the first guy to grab a torch and pitchfork for preservation. i was in touch with bob and gahs when the steinway stuff was going on about a possible article 78 motion against LPC and/or ideas like brokering concessions with the developers such as an air rights transfer in exchange for preserving some grounds and views of the elevations from the street. i've worked with groups in manhattan and convinced dob to revoke permits on fishy jobs. i know from whence i speak.
but this?
give me a break. the bar for landmarking is not "a really old house" nor is it "was lived in by 'someone who appears primarily in textbooks and classical music compendiums'." there is nothing that's original or close to original on this house. the rooflines have changed. the second floor has been bumped out. the stoop is gone. the porch is significantly altered. none of the siding is in-tact. none of the details are either.
when it comes to the ideal of "landmark it and fix it up" there has to be a public or private benefit. no one is coming to this house if its a museum, and it's so badly dilapidated and removed from its original design there's no way you can convince someone to fix it privately. i don't care what the queens press says or better yet, ask the curators of some of the historic properties on staten island how those efforts are going with a $0 budget and no visitors.
this is not to say ignore preservation issues. quite the opposite. its important to preserve the fabric of our neighborhoods. but lets work on things that make more sense than something that's a pipe dream at best and paints us as a bunch of pearl-clutchers. lets work on areas of old astoria. or landmarking a couple blocks of well-preserved model flats and old two-family rowhouses. there are areas of astoria that are historic (across the span of 50+ years), are well preserved and aren't under an imminent threat. lets see some more advocacy for those.
-somethingstructural
I was in "who's who in 1978" does that make my home a landmark?
Seems like Something wants to landmark Tony Bennetts house and then maybe .. well ... the Powhatan and Taminent Clubs and of course, Riccardos ?
Look, the point is when people from Europe are contacting the historical society about Dulcken and are speechless that its a rooming house in Astoria .... maybe he doesn't know history or culture ....
or when scores of bombed out buildings around the city that are shells in far worse shape and of far less cultural value than this building are restored to beauty and usefulness .... maybe he doesn't understand communities ....
or we hear eye-rolling stories how people don't want old historic buildings that are built with quality but the rage is cheaply built crap .... maybe he doesn't understand real estate....
or the finest most expensive neighborhoods, from South Brooklyn to Soho, from Park Slope to Williamsburg were once filled with poverty and crime, and were 'improved' not with a bulldozen but used the old charm to vault them over places like Astoria with its dreary housing stock north of Grand Central .... one must question Structural credentials or agenda .....
Maybe he just does not know what he is talking about....
The problem here is not the Dulcken House but 'Vollonia Values' and the increasingly chaffing collar of a local set-up that is long on tooth -- and which benefits an increasing tiny aging minority to the detriment of us all.
For decades people know that you destroy communities with garbage like we see around the Steinway Mansion and save them by fighting for the Dulcken House. Get with the program our friend.
We followed the Steinway fiasco carefully and as we recalled, Structural provided musings but scarcely little of substance. Surprise.
NEXT!
paints us as a bunch of pearl-clutchers. lets work on areas of old astoria. or landmarking a couple blocks of well-preserved model flats and old two-family rowhouses
---------------------------
Don't know where this guy has been. Historical societies and community groups around Queens has a stack of rejections of this stuff.
I agree with the above. Its your politicians and their Community Board appointees that are the determining factor.
And frankly, I would take the pearl-clutchers over the local bottle bar set any day of the week. You don't need to take a shower after you have been with them for a few.
give me a break. the bar for landmarking is not "a really old house" nor is it "was lived in by 'someone who appears primarily in textbooks and classical music compendiums'." there is nothing that's original or close to original on this house. the rooflines have changed. the second floor has been bumped out. the stoop is gone. the porch is significantly altered. none of the siding is in-tact. none of the details are either
say this to the 31,000 views this got on Facebook when the news broke.
bob -
i'm a bit shocked by your attitude toward me. nothing i said is a dig at GAHS or at yourself personally. indeed i've gone to bat for you and GAHS in the past, both during the steinway issue and to those who think your efforts are frivolous and ineffective. i've said since day 1 that i've had nothing but respect for your work and have never attacked you or your organization so viciously.
so let me be sure this is clear between us:
i did the steinway research - digging through BIS filings and LPC approvals and surveys and boundary line proposals and dedicated dozens of hours to doing this research for YOU and YOUR benefit - pro bono. that was on MY time and MY dollar. i'm disgusted that this is how i'm repaid.
i told you from a technical and LPC filing perspective it appeared to be above board. those were the facts, but you did not want to hear that. i gave you suggestions on how to do more than attempt to stall their progress. you did not want to hear those either, apparently, as your next suggestion was implying i should just go walk down to landmarks and ask them to rescind an application they already approved. i deal with DOB and LPC every day and can tell you this: that's not how it works.
i gave you advocacy groups to turn to, suggestions to work on with the developer and community board, notes on the technical findings and on the code. ways to stall if that's what you wanted to do. there was plenty of substance and it was solely your choice to take that advice or not. i had to follow up with GAHS at every turn. and for all that work here's how i'm rewarded:
"We followed the Steinway fiasco carefully and as we recalled, Structural provided musings but scarcely little of substance. Surprise."
this hurt bob, it really did.
good luck
-somethingstructural
I was in "who's who in 1978" does that make my home a landmark?
Perhaps if your name is Koch and you lived in Gracie Mansion. Next question.
We followed the Steinway fiasco carefully and as we recalled, Structural provided musings but scarcely little of substance. Surprise."
------
Our friend you mentioned had nothing to do with that.
It was actually the comments of a registered architect that made a career of building restoration, but unlike Queens, has the good fortune to be in community with good political leadership. She actually sat down with the LPC Chair to discuss the mansion. Take your comments up with her - one of those "pearl-clutchers" that you sneered at.
i've consistently identified myself in my replies. you are apparently unwilling to do that (and are talking about yourself in the 3rd person, apparently) so i have no idea who i'm talking to, but i'll try this one more time:
i didn't sneer at anyone. why would i? i spent more than half of what i said talking about how preservation is important and how it's something i personally get involved in on different projects on a rolling basis.
i explained the perception of preservationists from the "tony bennett house" crowd you actually sneer at - and they outnumber us a hundred to one. the public-facing role of a preservationist is to convince THEM, and talking about how a bunch of europeans think the family who owned this house is important does not seem to me like it's going to make that case. putting up side-by-side pictures of this house and what it used to be does not seem like it's going to do that either. there is nothing to get emotionally invested in here - that's my opinion, you're entitled to your own - and having a call to action to force LPC's hand is going to require people who aren't in preservation on a daily basis to form a connection with the cause in order to be effective. i won't say that's a fact, but based on those 31,000 page views getting thrown around that converted to 300 signatures, it certainly seems evident.
not for nothing, you are dealing with the landmark PRESERVATION committee, not landmark restoration. that's the other half of my argument. it is a great ideal to have that every house deserves restoration. that's a great way to make a career as you no doubt know.
i still don't get what this is about. you have your opinion, i have mine. we should be finding causes to work together on. that's what i'm saying. elks lodge. steinway. RKO keiths. the astoria diving area. old astoria. districts. we should find things that need - not restoration - preservation to ensure we leave something for the next generation.
but if my dissent from one cause means my preservationist card is revoked then apparently my opinion is meaningless. it seems ridiculous to me to turn this into a personal land war over who's "the most biggest preservationist" but that's your call, not mine. so great, you won. good for you! i'll leave you with this, nowhere does preservation need a bigger advocate than queens, and nowhere else - that i've ever encountered - are those efforts are so thankless they are outright attacked.
-somethingstructural
Yes, it would be more so restorative than preservative BUT wtf do we find out about the historical import many times AT THE LAST MINUTE!?!? I never even knew WHO Dulcken was until lately. Where was the historical signage advertising the house's import over the DECADES? Where's the historical signage advertising the import of buildings all over Queens? E.g. drive by Northern Boulevard at Woodside Avenue. You know that was the trolley barn there?
Jack Eichenbaum, Queens "historian" where are you? You going to "weigh-in" on Dulcken? Or is that "historian" moniker just a pile of bullshit?
Quit wasting people's time 'structural' and diverting this tread from the real issue, which is your real purpose. If you think what you have to say is important ask Crappy to post a topic. Now back to the real world
This thread is a bombshell.
The politicians are misleading (lying some would say) turning over their communities to developers. Are they venal? no lazy and stupid. Its a place where a seminar on over-development has a speaker that makes as much sense as a discussion on equality chaired by a member of the Sons of the Confederacy. Hell they don't even try anymore to sugar coat their bullshit.
Here is a time that they were caught with their pants down. Smirking Caliendo has to be stopped - what he is doing as a public official is embarrassing our community and our borough. He has to come off that board - yesterday - and as for the Chamber in giving him that award, be forewarned that little stunt will be tossed into their faces with glee and abandon time and again.
That his assistant at Rufus King was once involved with Historic Districts Council (and its ok that she works for a person like this to them) makes a mockery of that group leading people to accuse it as Manhattan-centric and thumbing its nose at Queens. It makes a mockery of Rufus King too, - why is there - to keep tabs on development in Jamaica?
The point of the matter is that everyone in NYC is starting to pull ahead of Astoria, once of NNYC secrets a few decades agon, is now a community that has lost its soul - trashed in a mad rush to squeeze money out of its dirt - the only think of value to the knuckle draggers that have pushed everyone else out of power.
All around NYC communities are starting to work together -to build neighborhoods. To save buildings like this. To build communities! More and more neighborhoods are moving ahead of Astoria, a place that owes its position to hype but in reality is a hell-whole of the uncouth and grasping.
Astoria? LLCs for a merry-go-round of eateries that make funding sources and purposes deeply suspect, along with a roster of off-brand banks to complete the picture.
The community is being swallowed up in the ugly cheaply made housing - and buildings that could have been touchstones, are torn down or re-purposed by people that have a profound lack of taste.
The Dulcken Building, no matter its fate, has the potential to blow the lid of the 'Sleaze of Astoria.'
-a vallonia observer.
Yes, it would be more so restorative than preservative BUT wtf do we find out about the historical import many times AT THE LAST MINUTE!?!? I never even knew WHO Dulcken was until lately. Where was the historical signage advertising the house's import over the DECADES? Where's the historical signage advertising the import of buildings all over Queens? E.g. drive by Northern Boulevard at Woodside Avenue. You know that was the trolley barn there?
Jack Eichenbaum, Queens "historian" where are you? You going to "weigh-in" on Dulcken? Or is that "historian" moniker just a pile of bullshit?
------------
Eichenbaum? let it go already. 50 years of immigrant history is the only thing he cares about.
The point is that, unlike the other boroughs, in Queens the powers that be do not care about history, only things that build their party or help their donors (read developers).
The official record on the borough states this building was built in 1931. That is scandalous.
And yes, if you look at the Facebook, the history as well as the danger this building was in was publicized in 2014, three years ago. What the hell do you need, people, a brass band?
And why do people in Europe know about him when all the leadership in Queens cares about that we worship naming places after their fellow hacks (what did RFK have to do with that bridge named after him?), heartwarming stories of the new Americans (read future Democrats) and the 'plight' of illegal immigrants.
What DO they teach the kids in school about their communities?
Yes, it would be more so restorative than preservative BUT wtf do we find out about the historical import many times AT THE LAST MINUTE!?!? I never even knew WHO Dulcken was until lately. Where was the historical signage advertising the house's import over the DECADES? Where's the historical signage advertising the import of buildings all over Queens? E.g. drive by Northern Boulevard at Woodside Avenue. You know that was the trolley barn there?
-----
Historical societies and groups that advocate local history are starved for funds - do not blame them for this. There is a reason they are being starved.
It is a planned agenda of the borough's leadership (read Democratic Party) to destroy communities by removing places like this and any real mention of heritage or the things that make them special (Niers? St Saviours? Simonssons (another Caliendo project) ?
Remember the original meaning of multiculturalism (before it became a Democratic Party membership drive) You take away a community' past (African and Native Americans) they have no future. That, my friends, is what the Democratic Party is doing to Queens!
While we all agree that Dulcken needs saving, I'm afraid Bob and some members of GAHS have done more harm then good, including censoring alternative points of view in saving the Dulcken House. When suggestions were made in open discussion Bob's intolerance lead to posts being taken down on Facebook. That's not a good omen. We need to get behind the petition by GAHS, not behind Bob's censorship practices. He is only hurting the cause.
Post a Comment