Restore Transcribed the TRC's Meeting on the Palace – held on April 28, 2004
Since the city and state governments instituted the Technical Review Committee as a check and balance for the redevelopment process, it is vital that the public knows that in the case of the 1888 Carousel House, which was listed on the National and State Registers, and possibly other situations past and future, the wishes of this body have not been carried out. The Carousel House was demolished – apparently without ever having a structural engineer’s report – on May 26th. Sadly the Carousel’s future is moot. However, what we’ve witnessed is a serious breach of our government’s accountability to the people – indeed to the very people who make up their own committees. We deserve a full accounting as well as assurances for the future.
(Note: Calafati and Loffredo are closest to the mic, other voices, with the occasional exception of Faiella, are difficult to hear. Consequently, I’ve summarized some bits of conversations, which appear in brackets.)
Michael Calafati, architect, paid member of TRC: Cafra says aspects and portions of the building will be relocated and preserved. So there’s nothing other than the artifacts that Mr Crane described and the murals from the outside of the building – no other aspect of the complex to be saved. Is that correct? That’s correct? Then I have a few things I want to say.
#1 – Typically when the TRC meets we’re talking about new designs; there’s no need to go to the site because we’re all familiar with the site and we rely on the architects’ drawings. In this case I find it curious that it would’ve been very beneficial if the TRC had been able to go through the building to begin with. Not having been through the building since the year 2000, it would’ve been helpful – certainly not out of the realm of reasonability.
What’s totally absent in this conversation -- and I know I’m bringing up old battle wounds -- I almost said that I’m upset at the prominent elevation of this building, as you approach from Cookman…which you see the 1950’s building. This building is on the National Register because it maps out a form of architecture from the 19th century – over the course of almost 100 years; and there’s been no conversation for example about the Carousel House. [i.e.; the truly historic site is largely hidden by the less historically significant 1950’s building, which owes its recognition to the Carousel House, the hidden building.]
I’m not one of those strident preservationists. I like to think of myself as a realist, but in this country we are much too enamored with knocking buildings down and not trying to find a way to rehabilitate them to serve a new purpose. I think there’s a way to save some of the architectural fabric of this building and still make a hotel… For example, what is the condition of the Carousel House that was built in 1888? It’s a metal structure isn’t it? Might that 100’ x 100’ sweet spot be incorporated into a cocktail lounge into the new building design? But this has never been presented and yet we’re expected to accept the wholesale demolition.
I am not so enamored with the artifacts that are painted on (the Palace wall). They can easily be replicated 100% artistically. I don’t find that fabric particularly precious… What I do find is the history of the building and as you go further back the origin of the building is the most important part.
Now, has a structural engineer, for example, evaluated that so-called sweet spot, that 100’ x 100’ sq that was the Carousel House? I know we can’t bring the Carousel House back, but even if it were to become the reception lobby and cocktail lounge for a hotel that would go on the site, it’s a way of marrying new development with vestiges of the old. But this sort of thinking seems to be absent from everything that everyone’s ever presented. And I’m asking you, Nory (Nory Hazaveh of SOSH Architects), have you ever…
City Redevelopment Attorney, James Aaron: [responds first but is too far for mic to pick up]
Hazaveh: [There is an apparent exchange between the architect for Asbury Partners and the committee, but it is mainly inaudible.]
Calafati: I would say that if we allowed developers to run the world, we’d have a very ugly world. Thank god there are architects today.
Put in practical terms: The initial expense of rehabbing the frame of the original Carousel House will be paid back in compound interest just by that act. Yes it’s not cost effective initially, but the payback over the long term is significant. And I’m upset that this type of thinking has not been applied to this type of project.
Asbury Partners’ legal counsel, Alfred Faiella: [appears to ask about tax credits]
Calafati: Tax credits? Tax credits would help, certainly… I’m talking about the marketability. I mean why do people go to Ocean Grove and…
Councilmember John Loffredo: He knows what he’s talking about when he says use the building for…[he stops to direct positioning of a graphic] I actually did go through this building with this guy who actually did all the work… We had to walk on planks cause there’s really no floor to speak of. But this is the part you’re talking about…
Calafati: Yes, the Carousel House.
Loffredo: Unfortunately this is the nicest part. The other part the roof is falling apart. I felt very unsafe over here. [There is an exchange between Calafati and Loffredo] I agree with Michael that if there was something that could be done with this part of the building…because if you look at the earlier pictures of it, this is really a very nice section. And this was actually an old hotel here…there are pictures of this. [ref. to someone who had an apartment “up there.”]
So I wouldn’t object…and I don’t know how badly deteriorated that part is…
Hazeveh: That design could be incorporated…
Calafati: You mean the flavor of it…
Hazeveh: If it could be considered safe and I think it’s pretty much impossible…
Calafati: Based on what information? That’s what I’d like to know. I wouldn’t base it on an architect’s opinion. I would base it on an engineer who is familiar with this type of construction. It’s largely a structural issue.
There is some discussion off mic–
Calafati: Well, if no one will even spend the $2000 to get a structural engineer in there…
Faiella: Let me make a suggestion…[he starts to say it’s not the money, then debates the cost vs the wisdom of doing it…then a discussion of the safety factor of entering the building...
Loffredo: But guys, can you understand what we’re saying?
Faiella: We’ll take a look at it…
Loffredo: The cement wall I’ve never had any particular love for the piece of cement (wall with Tillie face). But the other part of it is quite nice and it could be something if it can be saved.
Faiella: Anything can be saved -- it’s a question of at what cost…
Loffredo: Yes and…
Faiella: We’ll take a look at it though…1890 something – they don’t build them like that anymore. We can sure take a look at it though. And we need to get a professional to do a report on it though.
Aaron: [seems to be recommending an engineering firm on Madison Ave., in NY.]
Faiella: Whoever, it should be a legitimate professional…
Loffredo: Otherwise, there’s really no objection. Do you want to do that? If you want to reserve those faces, those letters [from Palace and Tillie murals]? I have no objection to that.
[Faiella off mic…refs to how to save the latter]
Calafati: I would ask you one thing, of all the things you’re going to save, don’t bother to save the National Register plaque. The reason it’s on the National Register is because of its integrity. You’re violating the very reason it’s on the National Register so you might as well throw the plaque away.
Faiella: [Sounds like:] It ain’t junk. Mr Crane (Bob Crane of Save the Tillie) may want the National Register plaque for himself...
Calafati: Thing is there’s a project approach and the premise is that this building should come down. And that’s what troubles me.
Faiella: [discussion of practicalities, workarounds for demolishing one structure and sparing the Carousel…] We ought to get in there.
Hazeveh is talking but inaudible on tape.
Calafati: What it comes down to is you’re asking us to trust you and based on your presentation I have questions.
Loffredo: Look, I don’t think Mike’s being unreasonable or anyone else to ask to see that section of the building…
[More discussion off mic, then…]
Faiella: We’ll notify the committee of the engineer we select and if next Tuesday’s all right, we’ll coordinate how to get in there…
Loffredo: All right, gentlemen.
Faiella: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Questions: What firm was hired to carry out this structural engineers’ report? Where is the report? Was it in fact ever done? If Calafati’s request wasn’t carried out as agreed, why are we continuing this charade?