Open Thread Wednesday

Article in Brownstoner about BookCourt, and the destruction of the smaller building, built in the early 1840s:

http://tinyurl.com/y7hfylxu

The wanton destruction of this structure is a real tragedy, and makes me ever so much happier I live in a Landmarked area.

Looks like one of the many tranquil, beautiful places that will be destroyed by the innovative approach to repairing the BQE.
If I’m correct about the location, we will instead have 6 lanes of truck traffic running 24/7 in that same spot.

I’d prefer to hear that from an independent engineer. DOT’s engineers have their own ax to grind supporting their “innovative approach”. The Promenade’s surface maintenance has been sadly lacking in the past 5 to 10 years. Perhaps by design.

It was made clear several years ago during the last round of DOT presentations that after the initial penetration testing the Promenade had to be replaced while roadways themselves might be repaired in place.

https://youtu.be/frweBVvDlW8

Is there somewhere in all this data where there is a clear statement that the Promenade needs to be replaced? If so, please share that quote with us.

thanks for sharing those, Arch. from my reading of the first document it actually says that the promenade structure is in better condition than the ones below because it has a layer of waterproofing that has protected the structure at least from above. my guess is that there are a few things going on here – 1) from a structural engineer’s perspective building the whole thing new from the ground up gives you the most assurance of the whole structure’s capacity and control of its design. that said – structural engineers are notorious over-builders. 2) demolishing the promenade cantilever will make it easier to do all the work below because you’ll have more overhead room. 3) taking the promenade out of service for several years doesn’t impact traffic so it’s an easier sell to the DOT – the impact on local commerce and residents is another story, and one worth clarifying for DOT.

Are you implying the engineering firm hired by the DOT to assess the condition of the BQE, falsified the report? If so, please provide evidence otherwise, your remarks are just slander.

Pretty strong words from someone who is clearly not an attorney.

As much as I loved and supported BookCourt at every turn, that’s a pretty harsh assessment. They ran a wonderful store for decades. Eventually, despite working long hours, they were essentially making little profit. And they were getting older.

Jorale-man, If you owned an asset worth $13,000,000 which would you personally choose? Working 60 hours a week to barely scrape by or selling it and conservatively investing your profits to provide a work-free income for life?

I suppose there’s a middle-ground — they could have kept the buildings, continued to live upstairs, and been landlords to whatever business they chose to replace the bookstore. That would likely have provided a decent income and a free place to live without the architectural destruction that’s going on now. But the bookstore would still be gone and they’d still have all the hassles of being a landlord and the owner of an extremely aged building.

Bottom line, I don’t like the result of their decision. And I miss the store. But I understand why they did what they did and I’m fairly sure I and most everyone I know would have made the same heartbreaking decision. :-/

I see your points, and I don’t know the particulars of their financial circumstances or the options in selling. On the same token, there are a lot of 150-year-old buildings that change hands in this city and don’t end up being destroyed in the process. Sellers must have at least some say in who buys a building and what their intended plans are. At any rate, as Andrew Porter says, it makes me glad I live in a landmarked district.

Why, when that’s what you were implying.

Well, the thing is, engineers tend to be very data-driven but don’t always think about the impact on people’s lives. Yes, it might be cheaper or quicker but the human impact is too detrimental.

What we haven’t seen from the city yet is an impact study on congestion pricing and/or bridge tolls – and how that would mitigate traffic on the BQE. Combine those measures with re-routing to Adams Street, Fourth Ave., and/or Furman, and there might be other ways to tackle this.

Or will they lower the lower cantilever by 4’ and the middle cantilever by 2’? Or lower them each somewhat but make the cantilevers thinner in vertical profile? Lots of ways they can gain those 2’ per direction.

that’s what I was thinking. i don’t think they could rebuild the promenade higher and the clearance on Furman street is pretty high now.