Proposed Expansion of Carroll Gardens Historic District Draws Early Opposition

A very slow-moving application seeking to expand the tiny Carroll Gardens Historic District has been making its way through the Landmarks Preservation Commission and Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association since 2007. As with any landmarking movement, there are two main sides (Glenn Kelly did an excellent job at a recent CGNA meeting of eloquently stating that most people are somewhere in the middle on the issue and will need to be persuaded to take a position on the issue). The Courier Life Publications did a good job summing up the dividing lines on the issue:

"Critics contend that the push to extend the district will be a hassle for homeowners, who will be forced to win the blessing of the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission for all exterior work done on their property. Moreover, the work and materials are thought to be more expensive, and some contend that property taxes might rise on blocks that are landmarked."

"The Carroll Gardens Neighborhood Association has taken up the proposal, which initially was introduced in 2007 in response to a spreading wave of residential development, which the group felt threatened to engulf the neighborhood with out-of-scale buildings. A survey the group conducted at the time showed that while many in the neighborhood expressed real concern with new buildings being constructed, many did not understand landmarking, which can add a layer of protection from wildly out of character buildings. “We think it’s worth explaining,” said Glenn Kelly, co-chair of the group’s Land Use Committee."

Although I will refrain from supporting one position or another at this point, I will say that both Mr. Kelly and Mr. Esposito (the owner of Sal's Pizzeria on Court Street, and the founder of CALM, an anti-landmarking group) are correct in most respects, and there could be no better personifications of the diametrically opposed factions than the educated, politically active and historic district resident Mr. Kelly, and the Italian-American business owner Mr. Esposito.

Mr. Kelly is correct in that landmarking is worth explaining, but he and those supporting landmarking fail to consider the reality that many older, long-time residents often do not have liquid funds to do Landmarks-worthy improvements. Likewise, Mr. Esposito is correct in that Landmarks improvements and approvals are lengthy and expensive, but he and those opposing landmarking fail to consider that property values tend to increase in landmarked areas.

An interesting subtext to this that should be considered is that Italians (and especially Sicilians) have an inherent distrust of governmental regulation, which has allowed "friends of friends" to operate as a supplement to governmental authority in many areas. It is not surprising that they would oppose a process which would add an additional layer of regulation to their properties.