Yesterday, the Municipal Art Society, garnered a lot of coverage by releasing the alternative proposals it has developed that would allow for the preservation of the historic buildings of Admiral’s Row–which could be a Brooklyn treasure for future generations–and for the development of a huge supermarket and other retail and business space. The city and the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corp. have steadfastly said that the only option for Admiral’s Row is demolition. Yet, a raft of proposals have now shown that preservation of the structures and development of the property could be so easily accomplished that destruction of this important part of American history would be nothing short of an act of cultural and historical vandalism, if not intellectual criminality.

Brooklyn has lost many historic structures during the Bloomberg Era at City Hall and the Markowitz Era at Borough Hall. They have fallen to demolition crews, backhoes, bulldozers and to spectacular suspicious fires. In most cases, political leaders have stood by and cheered this despicable loss of history as the price of progress. Virtually no attempt has been made to negotiate with developers from a position of strength or to find a rational middle ground. We have said it before and we will say it again: the current generation of leaders who have stood as cheerleaders for the piecemeal destruction of buildings that represent Brooklyn’s industrial history–let alone worked to make it untenable for viable industries to continue to do business in the borough–will be viewed as cultural and historical vandals by future generations. Today, people wonder how New York leaders of the 1960s could have allowed Pennsylvania Station to fall and regard it as one of the most horrendous acts of architectural barbarism of the last century. They look at the way Robert Moses raped and destroyed neighborhoods to build his megaprojects and highways and consider him the epitome of evil planning arrogance. The grandchildren of today’s demolishers and destroyers of Brooklyn will shake their heads the same way in the 2030s and 40s and 50s. We won’t be around to see it, but we hope a planning student at Pratt in 2055 retrieves this post and others like it and realizes that were people a lot of people around that raised their voices and said, “No, this is wrong.”

Admiral’s Row is not the old Penn Station, but it should be a symbolic line drawn in the sand. The ugly and facile race card of “food justice” that supporters of demolition have tried to play should be rejected for what it is: ugly, class- and race-baiting, not to mention a rejection of intelligent compromise. Yesterday, Andrew Kimball, who heads the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corp., played the card again, telling the CityRoom: “The alternatives presented by MAS and others, however well-intentioned, do nothing to change this reality as well as the fiscal reality that the buildings cannot be saved or the fact that development realities require the kind of plan we have put forward.” To put it bluntly: Phooey. What a crock. We are certain Mr. Kimball is a very nice and intelligent person and dedicated his job of developing the Navy Yard. In this case, however, he is spewing out a nasty load of something that originates from the output end of a bull. It would cost a mere $20 million to fully restore the buildings of Admiral’s Row and the estimate comes from the Army Corps of Engineers. (We will add that some of the MAS alternatives include “partial removal” of some of the buildings, which we believe is an absolutely unacceptable alternative too.)

We have said it before and we will continue to say it: if people like Mr. Kimball, and some of the politicians who support this position–many of whom we respect on other issues–refuse to uphold the public trust by safeguarding a piece of American history because it would be easier not to move a parking lot or increase the cost of a project by $20 million (against the billions of dollars lavished on other projects), the Federal Government should refuse to turn the property over to the city. If the city cannot not restrain itself from committing an act of short-sighted historical vandalism, we hope that the Federal government will protect our history until public officials committed to compromise who value historic preservation take office.

God, please forgive us for saying this: May the Federal Government protect us from our own local elected officials and bureaucrats. Admiral’s Row is truly a moral line in the sand. The City of New York does not deserve this property from the Federal Government if it cannot respsect and protect a small piece of history that is important to Brooklyn and to all Americans.