New Haven Independent

Posted by: Walt | July 17, 2008 5:08 PM

What makes these decrepit buildings "gems " instead of ripe for demolition?

They looked like dumps 50 years ago.

Posted by: Beansie's Mom | July 17, 2008 6:26 PM

Walt,

What shame that my 8 year old can see what you can't.

She said the owner should start by putting in windows.

PS Can you count to 50. 1966 was only 42 years ago, and the picture doesn't show a dump.

50 years ago, wasn't the dump where the current Transfer Station is.

Posted by: Robert Greenberg | July 17, 2008 6:46 PM

Shame on the people that let these magnificiant historical buildings get this far. With that said, I more than anyone out there have vested interest in these great structures being restored. I have literally gazed at them my entire life. My father is Alan who is quoted in the article above and I can safely say that we have seen enough clear cutting of New Haven's history.
Our business has served the citizens and local businesses of the New Haven area since 1912 and we have been in the Ninth Square since my grandfather started the company back then with buildings on State St. that were razed in 1966.

These building's on Crown St. are symbols of days when this city was promenant in the industrial revolution and was a leader in manufacturing in America (and the world). The souls who worked in them (without electricity which is why one has so many windows) may be gone, but to the citizens and youth that are interested in their history they are a vital visual to our past.

The person who posted the message above about them being ripe for demolition has as much creative insight about how valuable they are as R C Lee had about old State St and it's deverse architecture or Oak St's. etc... They were going to tear down the giant post office and court house on Church St across from the green too, imagine that. Hey Walt, get a tour of the interior of that sometime.

These fantastic structures deserve to live again and not fall like the YALE Boathouse, or the even the Spectors building. They must be saved to preserve some reference to what the ninth square's value to the city was.

In the future, I am afraid we are going to be judged not by the buildings that we build but those that we have destroyed.
Maybe if people knew a little more about the illustrious history of these buildings they would care more. This city is missing the greatest PR assest it possess's, which I believe is it's past accomplishments to American history. Take example of Providence R. I. or even the Lower East side of New York City for examples of creative development of frail and negleted historic brick buildings. If the City of New Haven allows these 3 buildings to be razed by a well intentioned but possibly uninformed developer, then our future will be dictated by the written word, a few maps and a handfull of old photos.

This would have also been the fate of Grand Central station. I don't know about others but I still get the chills walking into Grand Central and thinking what great landfill it would have made.
Lets save these structures for future generations to admire and stop thinking about how we are going to make money with this historic land. Historic structures are a spice to the Architectural community and without them New Haven would become visually common and bland. We need to be careful, the Three Churches on the Green might be next.
Robert S. Greenberg.

Posted by: Robert | July 17, 2008 7:45 PM

Shame on the people that let these magnificiant historical buildings get this far. With that said, I more than anyone out there have vested interest in these great structures being restored. I have literally gazed at them my entire life. My father is Alan who is quoted in the article above and I can safely say that we have seen enough clear cutting of New Haven's history.
Our business has served the citizens and local businesses of the New Haven area since 1912 and we have been in the Ninth Square since my grandfather started the company back then with buildings on State St. that were razed in 1966.

These building's on Crown St. are symbols of days when this city was promenant in the industrial revolution and was a leader in manufacturing in America (and the world). The souls who worked in them (without electricity which is why one has so many windows) may be gone, but to the citizens and youth that are interested in their history they are a vital visual to our past.

The person who posted the message above about them being ripe for demolition has as much creative insight about how valuable they are as R C Lee had about old State St and it's deverse architecture or Oak St's. etc... They were going to tear down the giant post office and court house on Church St across from the green too, imagine that. Hey Walt, get a tour of the interior of that sometime.

These fantastic structures deserve to live again and not fall like the YALE Boathouse, or the even the Spectors building. They must be saved to preserve some reference to what the ninth square's value to the city was.

In the future, I am afraid we are going to be judged not by the buildings that we build but those that we have destroyed.
Maybe if people knew a little more about the illustrious history of these buildings they would care more. This city is missing the greatest PR assest it possess's, which I believe is it's past accomplishments to American history. Take example of Providence R. I. or even the Lower East side of New York City for examples of creative development of frail and negleted historic brick buildings. If the City of New Haven allows these 3 buildings to be razed by a well intentioned but possibly uninformed developer, then our future will be dictated by the written word, a few maps and a handfull of old photos.

This would have also been the fate of Grand Central station. I don't know about others but I still get the chills walking into Grand Central and thinking what great landfill it would have made.
Lets save these structures for future generations to admire and stop thinking about how we are going to make money with this historic land. Historic structures are a spice to the Architectural community and without them New Haven would become visually common and bland. We need to be careful, the Three Churches on the Green might be next.
Robert S. Greenberg.

Posted by: anon | July 17, 2008 8:15 PM

"Once Rizzo receives the engineer's report, he said he will evaluate whether the buildings need to come down for reasons of structural instability."

Who defines what you mean by "needs to"? Buildings can be saved if the community deems it important enough. If City Hall were in danger of collapse, people would rally to save it. That's what will happen with these buildings.

Posted by: vblaisdell | July 17, 2008 10:39 PM

50 years ago was 1958. The picture from 1966 above is how I remember these buildings. Especially SZ Field. They were a high-end printer, with state of the art equipment and lots of customers. Not decrepit by any means. It's interesting how light industrial businesses occupied the areas close to downtown, with ground-floor retail making the area walkable and people-friendly. Walt may or may not remember Crown Billiards, down the street from SZ Field. The only place in New Haven that had more billiard tables than pocket pool tables, and where they had brushes to sweep your cigar ashes off the felt it you got careless.

But what I don't understand is how the city can declare an area to be in need of revitalizing and then just turn a huge chuck of it over to some, quote, developer who sits on it forever. McCormack Barron did that to us for a long time. Why don't we just take it over? Why can't we control these people? How come the zoning board has to pass on some homeowner's desire to extend their stupid little kitchen 15 feet in the wrong direction yet the entire City of New Haven is in thrall to some greedy developer who is just sitting there waiting for Nature to do the tear-down?

Oh wait. Privatization was supposed to be more efficient.

Posted by: JD | July 17, 2008 11:17 PM

It is an utter tragedy that these buildings have not been renovated and occupied. Mr. Nyberg has failed in his civic responsibility. If he is unwilling or unable to develop these structures, then he should pass the project on to someone who cares enough to do so.

Posted by: fedupwithliberals | July 18, 2008 7:12 AM

We should start paying attention to the Marcel Breuer designed Pirelli building that IKEA acquired as part of the deal to build on Long Wharf. That's another structure deemed an architectural landmark which is also being neglected purposefully in hopes that it becomes too far gone to restore.

Posted by: Walt | July 18, 2008 7:51 AM

Mr Greenberg has a point. Art and I guess, old buildings are judged by the eye of the beholder.

The whole area to me, including Acme Furniture, which I am surprised to see is still in operation, always looked rundown and poorly maintained to me.

Comparison to the old Post Office, Grand Central Station, or the Churches on the Green seems a hell of a stretch, but as Mr Greenberg points out, I know little about the inside of those Crown St buildings, recalling only a couple of visits to S Z Field.

Do recall the pool hall cited above, but as nothing architecturally significant.

Mr Greenberg may well be right though. I do recall the old Gas Co headquarters in the next block as a beautiful building inside and out, which in my opinion would have been worth saving. The Aschenbrodel (sp?) near Church also sticks out in my memory

Another would be the Bigelow Boiler Works on Water St. which may be still there, facing demolition soon..

Sorry to upset you, Mr Greenberg. Do not consider those buildings gems as you do, but you know them better than I.

Posted by: Kyle | July 18, 2008 9:56 AM

There is also the environmental argument, for those who care about it. They say that it takes about 65 years for a new energy-efficient building to save the energy lost when demolishing an existing building (National Trust for Historic Preservation).

"And let's face it: Most new buildings aren't designed to last anywhere near 65 years" (Richard Moe, Sustainable Stewardship).

As someone pointed out, we recycle bottles and aluminum cans but throw away entire buildings and neighborhoods.

Posted by: anon | July 18, 2008 10:13 AM

Great post, Robert. I agree 100%.

Posted by: Alphonse Credenza | July 18, 2008 11:46 AM

Slums are historically important as well, representing the existence and perseverance of an economic under-class.

There is an illustrious history of the poor and downtrodden New Havener embedded in those decrepit buildings, one we can't simply ignore by razing them.

Slyvan Avenue, Davenport Avenue, Orchard St. -- these are all historic neighborhoods. Keep them -- forbid razing them to put up something more livable.

Posted by: Walt | July 18, 2008 5:23 PM

I would add the little firehouse to the buildings on Crown deserving saving, but I gather that has already been done privately which is good.

Will take a run down there to check remaining buildings one of these days.

Have no problem with preservationists or developers buying the properties and rebuilding with their own money if they so desire.

The idea that preservationists,, or the apparent property owner across the street like Mr. Greenberg can require the new property owners, or the taxpayers in general to pay many extra bucks to preserve what appear to be just old brick boxy warehouses does not sound too good to me, although I admit there are other sites like those cited above, City Hall, the old Morris Plan Bank and the old Superior Court which should qualify for saving. .

Posted by: anstress Farwell, New Haven Urban Design League | July 18, 2008 5:28 PM

Dear Readers:

Although we realize that Mr. Credenza's comments are simply sarcastic - as well as completely uninformed about the historic and architectural significance of the Crown Street buildings, I am offering few corrections to his statements, which I hope you find useful.

"History of the poor and downtrodden"? These comely buildings were built by the savvy entrepreneurs who created New Haven's economy during its boom years. The buildings we have inherited add distinction and character to downtown, and create new economic opportunities. It is a great pleasure to walk around these blocks and look at the great work done by many local businesses who have treated historic buildings wisely and well, and put them to new uses.

And let's offer an apology to the residents and businesses of Sylvan, Davenport and Orchard Streets, whose neighborhood is gratuitously mocked in Mr. Credenza's comments. We have worked in this neighborhood to preserve affordable housing, historic structures, and improve transportation planning. And through this work we have met many residents who are devoted to improving their neighborhood. It is unkind and destructive to use the names of their streets as a punch line, especially when one of the neighborhood's great challenges being redlined.

Previous commentators have made good arguments for the preservation of the Crown Street buildings. We all appreciate the efforts the city is making to enforce contracts and laws protecting these resources.