Do you think it's possible that the greater a community's wealth, the more landmarks get designated within it? QC believes there is a heavy correlation.
The darker the brown, the darker the blue. Is this merely a coincidence or is institutionalized racism, classism and regionalism acceptable in our city government?
There is far too much of a coincidence for it to be a mere coincidence! You can't have money in a neighborhood without also having power! That means political power and connections that fan out into other areas. I know that if I had the financial means, I would be living in a neighborhood which has Landmark Status, but I don't, therefore I don't live in such a well protectet area. Why would I choose to live in one, because these privileged neighborhoods get the best that NYC can offer. Better schools, fire and police protection etc. and a higher degree of re-sale value on the properties contained within its perimeter. The rest of the "less wealthy" New Yorkers get the "dreggs" of what's left over from the city budget! Remember, the neighborhoods that are Landmarked don't get exploited or destroyed by over speculation and remain stable. Poorer areas are often targeted for ill planned projects that further destroy their viability as good places to raise a family. In the process, people are displaced and pushed out. Does this all constitute institutionalized racism and pandering to the upper classes? Absolutely and positively yes! The LPC is used as an agency to administer to the rich and take from the poor! That's why (as the maps clearly show) there are more Landmarks in the areas that have the most money. This strong correlation is impossible to ignore!
Is that the Maspeth/Middle Village area that's "redlined" on the map? If so, it doesn't surprise me. I wonder where their (ha, ha, ha) "representative" Dennis Gallagher is going to move, after he's made enough money screwing that neighborhood?
This picture is a bit misleading.
The Community Board 1 tint is slightly darker than it really should be because safe cemeteries and civic structures are landmarked (with almost no input on these from the community itself), while Old Astoria, the most important neighborhood in NYC without a shred of protection, is being destroyed.
Last year alone they lost five buildings more than 150 years old. Would make a nice stomach churning study for the ol’ Crapper.
Maybe the first step would be for our friends in the city-wide preservation community to care enough to notice and put it on everyone's radar.
Or am I dreaming because it's every man for himself in preservation?
I think that most of the people in the lighter colored areas know little if nothing of preservation.
You cannot campaign for something if your people are in the dark.
How can you improve outreach?
There is undoubtedly discrimination by the LPC. And what would you expect given the attitude of our Queens representatives? We all know what a development whore Gallagher is. Worse yet is Melinda Katz, who's blatantly anti-landmarking and anti-preservation and seems to be proud of it. I've heard that she often refuses to even write letters of support to the LPC. What about John Liu? Has he ever supported a single landmarking effort other than a signpost which now has his name slapped under it? Maybe he'd save a victorian house or two if we paved over the yard with bricks bearing his name.
The scariest thing about the blue map is that the highest category on the legend is 50-165 individual landmarks within a single community board (Manhattan) while the lowest is 0-3 (most of Queens).
Maybe it's time that some serious thought is given to a "discrimination lawsuit" to be filed against the LPC! We seem to have been 'pussy-footing" around the subject long enough now! De-facto segregation is, after all, what we've got! The deliberate manipulation of real estate to create "havens" for the "haves" and "ghettos" for the "have nots"! Are there any of you out there interested? We need some more people like Michael Adams, who has heroically fought for years to get LPC off their lazy asses and get some landmarking fo his Harlem neighborhood! When that "nasty wuss", Mark Silberman who's legal counsel for LPC, gets a "good wiff" that they're being sued he'll soil his pants! A BLOODY LAWSUIT IS WHAT IS NEEDED! Anything else is just HORSESHIT!
Good point. If you live in the Uppa East Siiide why would you want to share a distinction with the 'great unwashed' across the river: heavens forbid.
You would lose cache.
Dear "Old Astoria" friend, in preservation (may I modify you comment) it's every neighborhood for itself! NIMBY strikes again!
If those "grand dames" at the Municipal Arts Society would cast their snooty countenaces towards Queens, perhaps they might consider (at least) putting up a photo-display of all those beautiful homes in Old Astoria Village that are being pillaged daily! Forget it pal! In their posh Mannhattan galeries on Madison Ave. in Midtown, posting pictures of "provincial" Queens would amout to "slumming"!
A lawsuit against LPC will not work because it will not have the support, and indeed be undermined by the rest of the preservation community in NYC. Across the board, every citywide preservation organization and program, should be called to task to outline the breakdown of their programs borough by borough, neighborhood by neighborhood, with special attention to taking a close look at their support for grass roots efforts in working class and immigrant communities.
If this were Brooklyn, Old Astoria Village would be considered sacred like Brooklyn Heights instead of being viewed as a dumping ground for horrendous development! Oh, I forget, the structures here "have been too altered" to meet LPC's "current criteria"!
Funny about those points you raise on Community Board 1.
The same thing is going on elsewhere in Queens: in College Point, civic buildings are getting landmarked (boosts numbers and they are unbuildable) and (as along the waterfront) outsiders from Manhattan control the agenda of what is being discussed.
Well I think the problem is a little more than the usual suspects: LPC and Queens politicians.
Does anyone think they thrive in an environment that lets their behavior run unchecked?
Look at it this way: why should people in areas already protected share this privilege with others, or let them know about this?
When the dinner gong rings, and you are accustomed to eating your share, and Queens' share too, why let her know?
Hey you know what the 2 big landmarks are in CB5? A lamppost (featured on this blog previously) and the Onderdonk house which burned down to the ground and was completely rebuilt from scratch!
I'm not talking about getting support from the rest of the, so called, " preservation community"or them filing the lawsuit fella! This is a civil right's issue! Get it! God Bless Rosa Parks! And all the rest of you out there who have the courage to do something besides complain, or offer suggestions why something can't be done, let's hear from you! As the saying goes, "If you say it can't be done, you're right you can't do it!" Maybe there are some of you out there who are just "plain lazy" (as that old "Granny" that's always posting nothing but excuses)! We need some new blood! C,mon, let's get going!
Yes! There are those out there who DO !....... and those who do little more than KEY-STROKE their computers!
So, are you insulted enough yet "Old Astoria Boy" (I think) to do something constructive besides whine! Why don't you log- out and go put in a good hard day's work fighting for what you believe in. If you think I'm getting personal, you're absolutely correct!
What a great idea! Damn!
No wonder we are knocking our heads against the wall!
I have no idea which comment the last poster was refering to, nor could I fathom his reply. Please make your points clear!
Hey leave those guys alone!
Simply because words slip easily off the tongue does not make them true.
There are real preservationists here in Queens, people that never get awards or are quoted in the paper, never have received a penny in compensation with efforts that have stretched over decades.
Some of them average 100s hours a week in volunteer work, and work hard a programs that are never covered by the papers.
Some of their outreach has an audience (in various forms) in the six figures per month.
And when we see those who get all the gravy and honor and attention, well, yes, life can be unfair.
We know who those good groups are and we salute them and their work.
This is one of the most "spirited" topics to appear on this site! It certainly seems to be opening up a can of worms! That's good! We need to hear some "out-of-the-box" solutions or suggestions regarding how to deal with the covert (maybe overt) "racism" contained within the confines of the LPC! (particularly with the way that the Landmark Statutes are being applied in an unequal manner)!
Hey you, "leave those guys alone"......When I see results, I'll give kudos for those 100+ hours you all put in! Meanwhile, I've put in as much and more (real work too)! I don't go around and publicly brag about my time sheet or lack of pay either folks! Enough said! 10-4! I won't engage you further! Point made! Let's get back to work! Lunch break's over!
Sounds like one of those Manhattan types putting us rude boys in Queens 'in our place.'
the problems stem from a lot more than the LPC, brother.
They are rooted as part of a larger culture that, unless it is changed radically, any partial efforts at reform are doomed to failure.
Last post. Definitely not one of "your" Manhattan boys! I'm from Queens! Proud of it, son!
Landmarking is not an unmitigated good. Landmarking drives up the cost of property ownership tremendously and makes it difficult to own and maintain a landmarked property (you can't so much as paint a railing without LPC approval.) Landmarking should be saved for buildings/districts with genuine historical significance. Not every building is important just because it's old. Face it: the city's housing stock is old and new buildings should be built, albeit with respect for the scale of neighborhoods.
Last poster: you seem to be knowledable on this issue. Do you live in a community that is landmarked, and if so, does this reflect the majority of your neighbors, and if so, is your area trying to overturn designation?
If you are not living in a neighborhood that is designated, then may be invite you to share your view in such a community and report back to us thier response?
I guess that the irrate"developer" (in desguise) who posted the last comment doesn't know "squat" about the landmark process (or even how to wipe his "bum)! Just using "scare tactics" eh? Well, we all know better! Good try, though! I guess he's afraid that this site has made a lot of "inroads" and that Queens residents are "pissed off" and are not going to take the destruction of their neighborhoods lightly anymore! Go back to your blueprints and peddle your "poop" elswhere!
I agree, it's got to be a real estate guy or builder who's so anti-landmarking! They're always the ones that hate any restrictions being placed on neighborhoods that interfere with their plans for over-developing them. These are the same bastards that hate down-zoning also! They like to view Queens as the "wild west" where they're permitted to get away with anything! They like to build quick, cash out and then leave you other residents with the mess. He probably lives in Old Brookville and doesn't have to look at the Queens crap that he's building!
Hey, just because the housing stock of New York is "older" its "classy" and sound! It doesn't mean that it won't outlast some of the shoddy-shit that's being built today! I guess you'd stick a knife in the back of you're mother just because she's "old " and needs to be replaced! Whoever you are, you are definitely in the "tear down business"! We've got your number!
Thanks, last poster. You just "plastered" him good. Ooops, my bad. I guess they use cheap wallboard now when they build. Anyway, you get the drift!
I don't want my "hood" blockbusted with out of context "butt-ugly" houses. I'm in favor of historic districts. It's worth a little bother (I've already applied for some grants that'll help me defray any extra costs). If my block had gotten "ruined" the value of my home would have gone down. Remember, it's "location, location, location", when you're selling or buying a home!
I think that anti-landmark poster is really one of those "self-certifying" architects whose afraid of losing business. .
Could he be from the Dept. of City Plotting....I mean Planning"?
I think you've got it backwards, at least with respect to historic districts rather than individual buildings. Where areas filled with beautiful old buildings are landmarked, wealth has a tendency to follow, especially when the demand for housing goes up. For example, Clinton Hill and Fort Greene, together constituting a huge contiguous area of brownstones, were landmarked decades ago. At that time, nobody would claim these areas were havens for the wealthy. Cabs wouldn't go there, crime was much higher, and at least in the mid-eighties, it was hard to convince a friend to visit - the area's reputation (not totally deserved) terrified those unfamiliar with it. But gradually the state of preservation of these neighborhoods continued to attract first people interested in restoring lovely old houses, and then people with a lot more money who found the original restorers "artsy" and "diverse." Now the diversity is vanishing as us "artsy" folk and families who lived here even longer become "oldtimers" and the Bugaboos have moved in. But at least in this case, I think you have the cause and effect reversed.
Although both Brooklyn and Queens are part of Long Island, Ft. Greener, the rules of wealth and landmarking are different in Queens. I'm also old enough to remember Ft. Greene's "reputation" in the early days . It was always a magnificently beautiful neighborhood! I always wanted to live there.
Post a Comment