"This is the time to think about the importance of old buildings in New York's urban fabric -- and how to preserve those worth keeping"

Julia Vitullo-Martin, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, has an op-ed in the Post today on why it's time to save the city's imperiled landmarks:

The pause in New York City's building boom may have one side benefit: It gives everyone a chance to think. As projects skid to a halt and buildings get stopped in mid-construction, developers - and their neighbors -- have an opportunity to reassess their plans and consider different options for the future. Can that gorgeous but crumbling church on the corner be saved with neighborhood support? Is an old industrial warehouse a candidate for rehabilitation rather than demolition? Could a clever architect renovate that empty commercial skyscraper for residential? This is the time to think about the importance of old buildings in New York's urban fabric -- and how to preserve those worth keeping.

The Post also offers up a listicle of the 10 endangered buildings in the city worth saving, such as the Corn Exchange Bank in Harlem (pictured above) on the northwest corner of 125th Street and Park Avenue. You can view the slideshow here.

"NYC for the most part is a dead playground for yuppies and trustfunders"

Yesterday, BoingBoing posted an excerpt from the July Vanity Fair essay by Christopher Hitchens on the demolishment/development of Greenwich Village.

Here are a few responses to the essay/post:

#9 POSTED BY SEYO , SEPTEMBER 4, 2008 11:25 AM
The only thing that will save NYC in general, let alone the Vill., would be a brutal global recession. An economic downturn that would drive the rich people away and back to the burbs, and that would make foreigners stay home. Crime rates rising, budgetary deficits forcing reduction of police, and infrastructure breakdowns would help. In other words, the 1970's all over again. Not likely to happen. Bloomberg has a budgetary surplus, and has devoted his mayoralty towards turning Manhattan into a "luxury product" for financial service executives, lawyers, media moguls, international restaurateurs and fashion designers, and foreigners from the wealthy EU and Arab nations. His strategy is impervious to recession. While the rest of the country might be experiencing contraction, NYC, specifically Manhattan, has stayed stable. He doesn't give a shit about Bohemian culture, nor do the wealthy people flocking here. What they want is an Epcott Center simulacra of NYC grit and edginess because it is so Sex and the City, but they certainly don't want the real thing.

#14 POSTED BY ORCATEERS , SEPTEMBER 4, 2008 11:54 AM
I think that in a lot of neighborhoods like this, small business owners get punished for their success. They stick it out for years in a non-central neighborhood with a high crime rate and after all their hard work, the residual benefit of their business (increased community interaction, more pedestrian taffic, etc.) causes rents to rise outside their grasp, or for wholesale redevelopment to occur.

Recently I visited a traditionally downtrodden suburb of Seattle and my first thought was "wow, so many authentic, diverse, independent businesses, this place doesn't stand a chance!"

#15 POSTED BY NEWWAVE , SEPTEMBER 4, 2008 12:03 PM
Forget the Village, there isn't a single neighborhood in New York that resembles what it was in it's "heyday". Most of the people complaining have already missed the party. NYC for the most part is a dead playground for yuppies and trustfunders. Look in your backyard before you head to NYC looking for bohemia. The real thing is probably closer than you think.

"Every successful society needs its Bohemia, a haven for the artists, exiles, and misfits who regenerate the culture"

Finally made it past the cover of the July Vanity Fair.

Recommended reading, this piece by Christopher Hitchens:

Last Call, Bohemia
Every successful society needs its Bohemia, a haven for the artists, exiles, and misfits who regenerate the culture. With the heart of New York’s West Village threatened by developers, London, Paris, and San Francisco have a message for Manhattan: Don’t do it!

[The photo: The studio of the artist Arnold Bergier, at Greenwich Avenue and 10th Street, which was demolished in 1960 to make way for a 14-story building (despite the painted entreaties). Photograph by Fred W. McDarrah.]

"If you are at the corner of Bowery and Houston, and think about what it was like 10 to 15 years ago compared with today, you couldn’t recognize it"

As it was widely reported, the National Trust for Historic Preservation designated the Lower East Side as one of the 11 most endangered places in America.

In a City Room posting this afternoon, the Times asks: " 'Endangered’ Lower East Side? What’s New, Some Ask."

From the post:

Suzanne Wasserman, a historian and filmmaker at the Gotham Center for New York City History at the City University of New York Graduate Center, was similarly pragmatic about the Lower East Side having already been transformed.

“It is incredible, the changes that have gone on there in the last five to 10 years,” she said in a phone interview. “I would say the neighborhood is almost unrecognizable. If you drive south down Bowery, you almost have a sense of dislocation. If you are at the corner of Bowery and Houston, and think about what it was like 10 to 15 years ago compared with today, you couldn’t recognize it. Personally I find that sad, but we live a capitalistic society.”

By the way, photographer Brian Rose has some great shots of the LES here and here.