Please come speak in support of the proposed landmarking of the Historic Russian Orthodox Cathedral of the Holy Virgin Martyr on East Second Street.
Thursday, July 15 at 6 pm at the Community Board 3 Landmarks Subcommittee meeting at BRC, 30 Delancey St. (between Chrystie and Forsyth Streets).
In 2008 GVSHP and the East Village Community Coalition urged the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) to consider landmark designation of the Cathedral, where an 8-story condo-tower was being considered to be added to the building. Earlier this year, the LPC held a hearing on potential landmark designation of the historic building, but has not yet voted on the proposal. Now Community Board 3, which has not yet taken a position on the landmarking proposal, is considering it. While the leadership of the Cathedral is opposing landmark designation, some congregants have spoken out in favor of landmarking and many in the neighborhood also support designation.
For more information, go to the GVSHP site.
http://www.gvshp.org/_gvshp/preservation/cathedral-hvp/cathedral-main.htm
To sign an online petition, go here.
By the way, per the EVCC, the Cathedral was built in 1867, designed by the renowned architect Josiah Cleveland Cady, who later designed the Metropolitan Opera House and the auditorium of the American Museum of Natural History
[Cathedral image courtesy of Barry Munger]
Does anyone know why the cathedral leadership opposes landmark designation?
ReplyDeleteHi T.E.V.B.,
ReplyDeleteIf it is landmarked, then the church can't renovate the space and add the additional 8 stories of condo for the revenue...
Please come and see how community groups have slandered this topic. The above statement is flat out a lie. There has been tremendous misinformation about this. There is no proposed 8 story condo which the community groups keep pushing. There is no threat of this happening now or in the future. If you know anything about landmarking (which I totally support in many many cases and support preservation in most all cases), landmarking is very expensive at the churches expense and ties up basic maintanaince sometimes with unbearable red tape.... This orthodox community which saved this buiding and which has been meticulously caring for it daily since the 1940's, has been amazingly attacked, without our community groups (95% of the work they do I applaud) bothering to do the community thing.... get to know those in the church, knock on the door and get the facts first. This is non community action and a real crime and should not be rewarded with the granting. So yes, come, with an open mind, and get facts. These groups seem to have lost balance on this one... concerned about stones (which I love too) instead of a genuine East Village living historic community group.... one that's been actively serving NYC since the 1890's.... Religous or not, they are welcoming, have had nothing to hide, and welcome, yes, your support.
ReplyDeleteE. V. Grieve, thank you very much for giving this topic space and accepting my quick response... look forward to it. it's been very tough on the Cathedral. Much appreciated.
ReplyDeleteI look forward to an update after the meeting -- from Grieve or Anonymous or anyone else who attends. I'd like to hear both sides of the story! Where did the 8-story-condo tale come from? Does the church want to sell its airspace?
ReplyDeleteIt's a beautiful building. My favorite view from my tenement's roof used to be the World Trade Center's stark towers looming behind this pretty little Romanesque fairy-castle-y church and its wooden door. It was a wonderful NYC contrast.
I wish I could go to this meeting, Marjorie.. this and the CB3/SLA meeting on the same night, and a have a work conflict and can't hit either!
ReplyDeleteI was there, and the two sides are really at odds, which is so strange because ultimately they want the same thing - to preserve the church they love.
ReplyDeleteThe meeting ended with both sides agreeing to go to a mediator to try to work it out.
Apparently there is a group that helps with financing and all the red tape that the church is worried about. But the anger seemed to go beyond that. What I got from the speeches was that the church members feel like they felt like they are being invaded by strangers who want to proclaim landmark status on the building without engaging the occupants of the building. Like their opinion on the matter was an afterthought.
However, if this fight has been going on since before the rezoning (which is why they say they can't add an addition even if they want to), then the 8 story addition was probably a real threat, and the landmark status was meant to stop them, so engaging them wouldn't have made much sense then, as it was a strategy to stop them from proceeding with their plan.
I wonder if it is possible to could get landmark status in spite of what the church members want. It seems to me that if EVCC et al are worried that the church, or their future congregants will try to change the building in any way (8 story addition not withstanding) then they are exactly who landmark status is meant to protect the building from.
Interesting, Jill...Thanks! I appreciate the report... I should make this a separate item tomorrow to continue the discussion...
ReplyDeleteThe conflict there, aside from the history of distrust, is pretty simple:
ReplyDelete1) the church cannot guarantee that they can preserve the building in perpetuity (the congregation and administration might change in ten or twenty years -- it could fold entirely),
2) the preservationists cannot guarantee help with the burden of effort and financial expense implied in landmarking.
The Landmarks commission offers grants, but only to "restore severely deteriorated facades," not improvements like, say, adding air conditioning.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/html/about/hpgp.shtml
And the building doesn't need restoration.
The Landmarks Conservancy, however, offers grants for a variety of work, but their funds are limited.
http://www.nylandmarks.org/programs_services/grants/sacred_sites_program/criteria/
In the upcoming mediation, the church should try to get a clear commitment on specific assistance, whether it's through the Conservancy or political support from EVCC, which is spearheading the landmarking. It won't be easy, since there's no legal burden on the community for which the landmark is preserved. The legal burden is entirely on the owner. Once the community gets its landmark, it can forget all about it. The owner has to live with it.
Thanks for the perspective, Rob.
ReplyDelete