Brooklyn Navy Yard industrious enclave
authors
Bram D’hoedt Jeroen Kessels Jérôme Kockerols Tara Op de Beeck Margot Proesmans Michaël Sarens Reinaart Vandersloten Jeroen Vandervelden
promotors
Tom Thys Ward Verbakel
Studio Brooklyn at work, volume 2
Studio Brooklyn Brooklyn navy Studio Brooklyn sixth chapter onYard a productive Borough industrious enclave
sixth chapter on a productive Borough
Bram D’hoedt Jeroen Kessels Bram D’hoedt Jérôme Kockerols Jeroen Kessels Tara Op de Beeck Jérôme Kockerols Margot Proesmans Tara Op de Beeck Michaël Sarens Margot Proesmans Reinaart Vandersloten Michaël Sarens Jeroen Vandervelden Reinaart Vandersloten Jeroen Vandervelden
Thesis voorgedragen tot het behalen van de graad Master of Science Thesis voorgedragen tot Architectuur het behalen in de ingenieurswetenschappen: van de graad Master of Science in de ingenieurswetenschappen: Architectuur Promotoren: Tom Thys Promotoren: Ward Verbakel Tom Thys Ward Verbakel
Academiejaar 2012 – 2013 Academiejaar 2012 – 2013 Master of Science in de ingenieurswetenschappen: Architectuur Master of Science in de ingenieurswetenschappen: Architectuur
Š Copyright by k.u.leuven without written permission of the promotors and the authors it is forbidden to reproduce or adapt in any form or by any means any part of this publication. requests for obtaining the right to reproduce or utilize parts of this publication should be addressed to k.u.leuven, Faculty of engineering – kasteelpark arenberg 1, B-3001 Heverlee (BelgiÍ). telefoon +3216-32 13 50 & Fax. +32-16-32 19 88. a written permission of the promotor is also required to use the methods, products, schematics and programs described in this work for industrial or commercial use, and for submitting this publication in scientific contests. all images in this booklet are, unless credits are given, made or drawn by the authors (Studio Brooklyn).
Brooklyn Navy Yard industrious enclave
Presentation of Studio
12 10 20 Students return to Belgium
Brooklyn: varieties on city life and other master projects,
12 10 24 Pin-up 4: quick start and case study proposal
aSro, leuven
launch of Studio Brooklyn
12 11 07
First meeting Studio Brooklyn, aSro, leuven
application deadline Studio
Pin-up 5: Site analysis + experiment
2011-2012 blog
12 11 29
Pin-up 6: individual session design proposal
12 12 19 Pin-up 7: “does your project
Brooklyn and other master
make sense?” + brief contract +
project studio’s
extrapolation borough
decision by PoC council of
13 01 09 Pin-up 8: Group discussion
aSro concerning all master
‘Case Study’ + Group
project applications
discussion ‘102’ + Group discussion ‘Bny’ + Group
aSro informs the 8 applicants
discussion project design
they are approved to join Studio Brooklyn
13 01 25 Pin-up 9: individual worksession project design
12 09 05 Pin-up 1: presentation individual literature study and substantive interest
12 09 16 arrival students in Brooklyn, nyC
12 09 30 arrival tom thys and ward verbakel in Brooklyn, nyC
12 10 01 Pin-up 2: research presentation
13 01 29 review 2 at kul studio de molen
13 02 13 Pin-up 10: individual worksession project design
27 02 13 Pin-up 11: individual worksession project design
13 03 13 Pin-up 12: individual worksession project design
12 10 02 meeting with Justin moore, city planner for the City of new york
with lars Ficher and kris Scheerlinck
department of City Planning, at the Brooklyn Planning Office Construction site visit leeser
27 03 13 Pin-up 13: feedback and divided worksessions
architecture 17 04 13 Pin-up 14: individual 12 10 03 Seminar Site Documentation
worksession project design and
talk by andrea kahn at GSaPP
postersession with Brooklyn
room 114
101 students
lecture by dense Scott Brown at GSaPP wood auditorium
26 04 13 Pin-up 15: individual worksession project design
12 10 07 Pin-up 3: workshop 08 05 13 Pin-up 16: individual 12 10 08 Site visit Brooklyn navy yard
12 10 09 Brooklyn 101 exhibition at mex
worksession project design
15 05 13 Pin-up 17: individual worksession project design
12 10 13 Faculty return to Belgium 28 06 13 Final presentation
acknowledgement
on behalf of all students of Studio Brooklyn 2012-2013, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to all people who made our graduation project possible. we would like to thank our two promotors, tom thys and ward verbakel, for their unexhaustible effort to inspire us from start to finish and for their knowledge they have shared with us. we would like to thank the students of Studio Brooklyn 2011-2012 for their indispensable work that served as a strong foundation. we want to express our gratitude to Justin moore (GSaPP), mojdeh Baratloo (GSaPP) and Giovanni Santamaria (nyit), for sharing their knowledge, and to david Graham Shane (GSaPP), dongsei kim (GSaPP) and maarten van acker (Parsons) for guiding us in our research. we also would like to thank Joseph Haberl (leeser), Peter Coombe and michaela metcalfe (Sage and Coombe) for helping us discover Brooklyn, and matthew Hopkins and emilie evans (BldG92) for guiding us around the Brooklyn navy yard. lastly, we are grateful to aSro, nyit, Columbia university, and GSaPP, for making Studio Brooklyn possible. Studio Brooklyn
brooklyn 102: sixth chapter on a productive borough
brooklyn made brooklyn changed creative impulse transport in need greener choices
brooklyn navy yard: industrious enclave
the evolution of bny brooklyn navy yard today surrounding tissue bny and the sixth borough
case studies 8 case studies
individual design proJects channel vision east river exchange
what about wallabout big and small
bird’s nest
border spectrum
on top
e.a.t.
methodology
this volume on the Brooklyn navy yard is the second volume in the studio’s series, which presents results of the ku leuven master of architecture graduation thesis “Studio Brooklyn at work, a guide to the post-crisis city”. the investigation was carried out during the academic year 2012-2013 by eight graduation students. Brooklyn 102, the first of three studio books is a sequel on last year’s Brooklyn 101 and explores Brooklyn as a productive city. this second studio book, an elaborate site analysis, is limited to the Brooklyn navy yard, a single enclave in the borough. the former shipyard, now industrial park, represents in many ways the tendencies going on in the borough. the third and last studio book is a collection of 8 case studies. throughout the collective research, personal design proposals have arisen and led to the student’s individual graduation design theses.
Chapter index
i
Introduction
1
The evolution of BNY a waterfront machine 24 26 30 34 38 40 44
2
Brooklyn Navy Yard Today an industrial sanctuary at the heart of the city 60 62 64 66 68 70 74 76 78 82 84 102 104 106 108 110
3
organizational structure double hull Guarded entrance reaching the yard travel times Shifting boundaries Spatial economics Creative and small made in the navy yard reusing infrastructures Buildings: typologies water infrastructure rails under the road Green vision Sandy: vulnerability unveiled organized chaos
Surrounding Tissue Synergy and disruption 124 126 130 132 142 144 164
4
naval shipyards, government owned installations an idyllic navy yard an industrial navy yard navy yard: bigger then ever Closure; CliCk takes over a commercial yard; Seatrain a summary of evolutions
From farmland to grid Completing the grid the BQe the BQe: cityshaper a sampling of building blocks Socio-economic constituencies impact on the grid
BNY and the sixth borough an ambiguous coexistence 178 180 182 184 186 188
east river: not a river east river: an estuarine habitat east river: a dynamic balance rising sea-levels Socio-spatial relationship anatomy of the waterfront
o
Outro
r
references
introduction
Greenpoint
williamsburg Brooklyn navy yard downtown Brooklyn dumBo Brooklyn Heights Clinton Hill Fort Greene Cobble Hill
Caroll Gardens
red Hook
Gowanus
Sunset Park
Brooklyn Queens expressway
20
INTRODUCTION | Context
INTRODUCTION
Industrious Enclave the Brooklyn navy yard is both a unique spatial entity within the borough of Brooklyn as well as a pars pro toto for different spatial-economic tendencies. Phenomena like the manifestation of an upcoming creative class, spatial fragmentation and the exploration of new organizational strategies and networks are all present within the yard’s territory. its exclusionary state makes for a welldefined case study, offering a clear approach to various themes touched upon earlier in the first volume: Brooklyn 102. this volume offers a thorough observation of how the navy yard works within its own fabric of industrial heritage and new development. yet it also demonstrates how its position as an enclave within its surroundings is influenced by receding activity at the waterfront and a changing attitude towards its neighbors.
21
Brooklyn Navy Yard
The evolution of BNY A waterfront machine Situated along the East River waterfront, in the corner of Wallabout Bay, the 300 acres of the Brooklyn Navy Yard (BNY) have made up an intricate part of Brooklyn’s history, manufacturing some of the best known wartime naval vessels right in the heart of New York City. At its peak, during World War II, the Yard employed over 65.000 people, making it Brooklyn’s largest employer. Today, as ‘making things’ has contributed to Brooklyn’s revival, the historic Yard has once again become a centre for manufacturing, housing over 250 different tenants. Within the old structures, which have been refurbished to suit needs of today’s tenants, an array of niche products are being produced by the over 5000 employees working at the Yard. The history of the Brooklyn Navy Yard remains ever present, which is why the first part of the Yard’s narrative will focus on how it became the industrial park that it is today.
Naval shipyards, government-owned installations Since the founding of the Nation, the US has always operated their own
Naval
Shipyards.
The
US
Government and its citizens felt that in order to defend their country they needed a navy, to be designed and built within a US-owned installation to protect the fleet from possible espionage
and
established,
corruption.
navy
yards
Once
became
powerful economic institutions within their localities, often becoming a large employer to the area. Brooklyn Navy Yard, along with five other naval shipyards across the country (Norfolk, Portsmouth, Puget Sound, Boston and Washington), was among the first yards to be established. Regardless of their location, they all abided to the policies dictated by the US Federal Government. Because of this the Brooklyn Navy Yard has grown as an enclave indifferent to its surroundings, quite literally so, as the Yard has throughout it’s history always been fenced off. In the overview of the Yard’s history, we will discuss five eras (An Idyllic Navy Yard, An Industrious Navy Yard, Navy Yard Bigger than Ever, Closure; CLICK Takes Over and A Commercial Yard;
Seatrain)
characterising
portraying
elements
of
the each
period. Only the Yard and not its surroundings
will
be
considered.
However, these surroundings and the impact the Brooklyn Navy Yard had on them will be extensively examined within their own chapter.
24
evolution of bny | Naval shipyards, government-owned installations
Wallabout bay Brooklyn Navy Yard is located at the former Wallabout Bay along the East River in Brooklyn, in close proximity to Manhattan, quite central within New York City. How does a once industrial giant come to be located on what would today be classified as
prime
real
estate
location?
Historically, bays have always been prime locations to harbor ships, as these inlets have protected them from heavy winds and storms. In the case of Wallabout Bay, an inlet provided safety from the strong tidal 1
flows of the East River, which caused some areas of the bay to become bare during low tide. That feature was used as an opportunity to do repairs to the moored ships and led to the choice of locating the Brooklyn Navy Yard here. Initially it was John Jackson who started a commercial shipyard here in 1781, this yard was then purchased by the US Government in 1801 and the Brooklyn Navy Yard was established.
2
1
1766 Map of Wallabout Bay
2
Map of bedding bare during low tide marshland bare at low tide bare at very low tide
Wallabout bay
25
An idyllic Navy Yard 1801 - 1866
Although the Brooklyn Navy Yard was acquired in 1801, there was little activity there until 1805 when construction began on the first six buildings.
It
would
take
another
year until the Yard would receive its first Commandant, for whom the Commandant’s House on Vinegar Hill was built in the same year 4 . Despite the slow start, the Yard quickly became a place developing cuttingedge technology in its time, such as the introduction of steam as a means
1
of propulsion. To further develop this knowledge, one of the world’s first military think tanks was created with the establishment of the Naval Lyceum in 1833
2
. Another institute
to be established was the Naval Hospital, of which the first building was built in 1838
1 5,
accounting for
quite a few discoveries within the medical field. The Navy Yard can be described as
2
idyllic during this period as Navy Yard work was relatively light, consisting of an eight-hour workday in comparison to
the
usual
twelve
expected
elsewhere, furthermore punctuated with a certain labouring-class civility. Another factor contributing to this romantic
image,
are
the
many
ceremonies that would be held at the Yard, on Independence Day or
3
other national holidays. On these occasions
26
Brooklynites
belonging
1
to the better social circles would
1833 Naval hospital
2
be invited to join in the festivities
1838 Naval lyceum
3
arranged by the Naval Officers.
1855 Aerial of Brooklyn Navy Yard
4
1845, Commandants House indicated
5
1866, Naval Hospital indicated
evolution of BNY | An idyllic navy yard
Maps
4
5
Historic maps
27
Technical aspects During that first period, before the advent of steam propulsion, wood was the main building material of the first ships to be built at the yard. To prepare the logs for construction, they would be left to soak within the mill pond
7
, softening the wood to
make it easier to work with. At first, ships would be constructed in the open air. Only later two ship sheds were built
1
2
1
to house the ship’s
construction. Once completed the ship could then be slid along greased rails into the water. Around 1837, steam power was introduced
at
the
Navy
Yard,
first with the construction of the warship Fulton II, second with the construction of Dry Dock 1 (18411851)
3 4,
the foundations of which
2
were constructed with the use of a steam powered pile driver. Dry Docks are used for ship repair; working with a gate and pump system. When a ship comes in, the gate closes and water is pumped out so workers can access the ship’s hull. Once the ship is repaired, water is pumped back into the docks, the gate opens and the ship can sail away. As for the Yard itself, as mentioned, development but grew
5
started
out
slowly
3
quite quickly, especially
around 1860
6
DRY DOCK
as the Yard began
to prepare for the Civil War (1861-
1
4
1865). By this time wood was rapidly
28
being replaced by a material far more
1
1845 Ship construction house
superior, iron, heralding the Yard into
2
1845 Inside ship construction house
a new industrial period.
3
1851 Construction of dry dock 1
4
Dry dock 1 85x12m
Evolution of BNY | An idyllic navy yard
Maps
5
7
6
8
5
1845 Built up area
6
1866 Built up area
7
1845 Building functions
8
1866 Building functions
1845
2013
work shops
1866
mill pond
energy production
naval quarters
Explanatory maps
29
An industrial Navy Yard 1866 - 1940
After the Civil War (1861-1865), which temporarily resulted in a peak in employment at the Yard, peace returned and employment was scaled down. The pace at the yard slowed down for a while, even though the face of the Yard continued to change as new buildings were being erected; such as Admirals Row along Flushing Avenue
1 4
and many new steel day-
light structures within the yard
2
. In
1
1877 part of the Yard which had not been put to use as yet, was sold off to Wallabout Market 5 , which became New York City’s biggest fresh food market. It wasn’t until Presidents Benjamin Harrison
and
Grover
Cleveland
came to power in 1889 and 1893, that the importance of a modern navy was recognised, which was then confirmed during the SpanishAmerican
war
(1898). After
this
episode the Yard again died down, until
World
War
I
2
(1914-1918).
Although this war never had a significant impact on the United States, it did temporarily cause the workforce at the Yard to expand from 6.000 to 18.000. Following WWI, President Warren G. Harding initiated the Washington Naval Conference, which
restricted
the
ships
the
could
fleet
number
of
possess.
3
Subsequently the 1920’s and 30’s saw little new construction.
30
Evolution of BNY | An industrial navy yard
1
1877 Admirals row
2
1904 Taken along Morris Avenue
3
1924 Aerial of Brooklyn Navy Yard
4
1900, Admirals Row indicated
5
1924, Wallabout Market indicated
Maps
4
5
Historic maps
31
Technical advancement During that time the face of the Yard was changed mainly as a result of technical advancements. The Yard was entering the 20th century,
leaving
behind
wood,
sails and even iron and welcoming new developments such as screw propellers, armour plate, and gun turrets.
The
Yard’s
landscape
became more industrious as Cob
1
Dock Island was finally connected to the main land
1
were constructed dry docks
4
5
6
9,
four new piers
and three new each accompanied
by steel cranes on tracks elements
were
linked
constructed rail tracks
3
2
. These
by
newly
,making the
connection between manufacturing shops, ship construction shed and dry docks a lot easier. The Navy
2
Yard’s landscape had gone from the idyllic park to an efficient battleship producing machine, as image 10_
3
DRY DOCK
2
DRY DOCK
3
DRY DOCK
4
4
depicts the flow of raw steel to its end product. 5
6
1
32
evolution of bny | An industrial navy yard
1904 Connecting cob dock to the yard
2
1924 Crane located at dry dock 1
3
1924 Rail lines being laid along pier d
4
Dry dock 2 137x21m
5
Dry dock 3 186x21m
6
Dry dock 4 211x29m
Maps
7
9
8
10
7
1900 Built up area
8
1924 Built up area
9
1900 Building functions
10
1924 Building functions and flows
1900
work shops
naval quarters
flow of metals
1924
infrastructure
exchange
flow of energy
2013
energy production
entrance
railtracks
naval quarters
Explanatory maps
33
Navy Yard, bigger than ever 1940 - 1950
By the end of the 1930’s, with rumours of war flooding the country, productivity finally returned to the Yard in a big way. Long before the attack on Pearl Harbour which officially
plunged
the
US
into
the global war, military planners anticipated
this
war
over
two
oceanic fronts and started to prepare and
expand
Brooklyn
the
Navy
country’s
Yard
navy.
needed
to
expand, resulting in the reclaiming and
destruction
of
1
Wallabout
Market for war-effort purposes. The extra
shoreline
was
completely
transformed to suit the needs of battleship production as large as aircraft carriers. The most impressive aspect of the Navy Yard’s expansion was the speed at which it all took place, made possible by the over 70.000 people employed there at the time. As at many other naval
2
shipyards around the country, women were amongst those employed
1
,
not only to perform light tasks such as flag sewing, but to perform the heavier work tasks, such as welding as well. Additionally African Americans
2
were
also
admitted
to be employed at the Yard, and continued to work at the Yard up until its closure. Their female colleagues however,
were
dismissed
when
peace had returned. While
only
around
thirteen
new
vessels were constructed, the Yard’s primary responsibility was the repair of ships, over 5000 of which steamed into Wallabout Bay for repair. The Yard’s high efficiency acquired it the nickname the ‘Can-do Yard’. 34
evolution of bny | Navy Yard, bigger than ever
3 1
1942 First female shop workers
2
1942 African American shop workers
3
1944 Aerial of Brooklyn Navy Yard
4
1945
5
1945 Aerial of the Navy Yard
Maps
4
5
Historic map
35
Expansion The newly acquired land, previously belonging to the Wallabout Market, was set straight to work, changing the
shoreline
quite
dramatically.
Two new gigantic Dry Docks were constructed
1
3
4
at an astonishing
speed thanks to the new ‘tremie’ method.
Furthermore,
the
pier
structure of the former Cob Dock was
drastically
reconfigured,
as
1
new stronger piers were added. Another quite amazing structure built for WWII, was the Hammerhead Crane
2
. A cantilever-style crane
that was capable of lifting over 350 tons from its horizontal jib, the crane was used primarily to lift armour plates and to install completed turrets. Furthermore, the Yard’s rail tracks were improved to maximise
connectivity
within
the
Yard, connecting the new building
2
structures and Dry Docks 5 and 6 to form an efficient whole. Image
6
illustrates how raw metals arrive by barge in the Yard’s top corner, and
DRY DOCK
5
DRY DOCK
6
3
after having completed the half circle, end up as part of one of the Yard’s warships. During WWII the Yard
4
peaked as a machinic landscape, however after WWII the 300 acres making up the Brooklyn Navy Yard would never form a whole again.
36
Evolution of bny | Navy Yard, bigger than ever
1
1941 Birdseye of Dry Dock 5 and 6
2
1941 Hammerhead Crane
3
Dry Dock 5 579x45m
4
Dry Dock 6 579x45m
5
1943 Built Up Area
6
1943 Building Functions and Flows
Maps
5
6
1943
work shops
naval quarters
flow of metals
2013
energy production
exchange
flow of energy
railtracks
infrastructure
entrance
Explanatory map
37
Closure; CLICK takes over 1966
In November 1964 it was announced that the Yard would close in 1966, despite much protest from a workforce of just under 10,000 people. The Brooklyn Navy had been a source of well-paid, skilled-trade and professional positions, good jobs that had contributed to Brooklyn’s image as much as any other Brooklyn icon. The closure brought about a jolt to the City’s economic base and was part of the industrial flight taking place along the East River and in the rest of Brooklyn. The main reason for the closure was budget cuts at a federal level by the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, to enable them to further finance the ongoing Vietnam War. Other related reasons were the fact that the Navy Yard had never constructed submarines or worked with nuclear ships and modern ships were becoming so large that many could no longer fit under the Brooklyn and Manhattan Bridge to get to the Yard. In 1967 the City purchases 260 acres of the Yard (the other 40 acres remaining property of the federal government) and made
38
Evolution of Bny | Closure; CLICK takes over
plans to reuse the Yard as an industrial park. A local non-profit development corporation, named “Commerce Labor and Industry in the County of Kings” or CLICK, was set up to run the Yard for the City. It reopened the yard in 1971 as a private commercial industrial park.
image
1966 Closure of the Yard
39
A commercial yard; Seatrain 1967 - 1979
CLICK’s economic strategy for the Yard was to find a tenant large enough to fill the infrastructures of
the
the
abandoned
same
year
Yard.
(1967)
Within Seatrain
Shipbuilding signed a lease with CLICK for the use of the two largest Dry Docks, surrounding piers and a number of manufacturing buildings. So even though the Yard had found a tenant not all its infrastructures were being put to work. Their time at the
1
Yard was rather short, mainly due to the economic climate of New York during the 1970’s as in 1979 Seatrain closed its gates, ending a long history of shipbuilding at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. Despite Seatrain’s short lease, the company was still employing a workforce of over 6000 at peak moments. After Seatrain’s departure CLICK was to be replaced by another nonprofit Yard
corporation;
Brooklyn
Development
2
Navy
Corporation
(BNYDC) who took over the Yard in 1981. Up until today the Yard is being successfully run by BNYDC. At first it seemed they wouldn’t find a shipbuilding or ship-repair company to lease the dry docks either, meaning the end of the Yard’s relationship with ships. Eventually GMD Ship-repair came along, now leasing dry docks 1, 5 and 6 and
3
maintaining the Yard’s historic legacy. 1
40
Evolution of BNY | A commercial yard; Seatrain
1972 Workers on a Lunchbreak
2
1975 Worker posing near a Crane
3
1975 Worker posing near a Crane
4
1970
Map
4
Historic map
41
The system of a commercial yard Seatrain
was
originally
operator,
not
builder,
a so
ship once
construction was underway at the Yard the company’s goal was to develop a very efficient and costeffective
shipyard.
Studies
were
done to determine the most practical material flow methods and production procedures used by both European and Japanese shipbuilders. They created a system
4
that would
effectively use their most important resources;
two
of
the
US’s
1
largest Dry Docks and three large manufacturing buildings, combining them so that space and labor would not go to waste. The system was designed as a smooth continuous flow, achieved through automated transportation and
modular
components.
and
production,
production Within
this
of
ship
system
Seatrain built four Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCC’s)
1
2
, eight barges
2
and one ice-breaker barge.
42
evolution of BNY | A commercial yard; Seatrain
1
1970 VLCC repair to deck
2
VLCC out at sea
3
1970 Built up area
4
1970 Building functions and flows
Maps
3
4
1970
work shops
exchange
flow of metals
2013
energy production
entrance
flow of energy
infrastructure
Explanatory map
43
A summary of evolutions Starting out as no more than six buildings in 1801, one of which was
the
Commandants
House
and another the Naval Hospital, the
yard
grew
to
become
an
industrial giant by the start of World War II; counting over one hundred buildings, six dry docks, five piers and an extensive rail system. built
Today
during
many
WWII
buildings
have
been
demolished and replaced by more modern infrastructure, but the more resilient infrastructures have been refurbished and are being reused by tenants today. As the face of the Yard has been altered dramatically over the years, so has the waterline. Where once the Yard’s waterline was no more than a soft line of marshland,
over
200
years
of
extensive filling and dredging have changed the waterline to a hard line, intersected by dry docks. On
the
following
page
BNY’s
evolution has been summarised in a timeline. The timeline illustrates how both on a National (USA) level as on the level of the Borough (Brooklyn), BNY’s history (BNY) has been determined. Furthermore, the timeline illustrates the number of people employed at the yard (employment)
and
how
much
procent of the national GDP is spent on defense, as expected these two graphs peak during periods of war.
44
evolution of bny | A summary of evolutions
Map
1845
1938
1866
1943
1900
1966
1924
2013
A summary of evolutions
45
USA INH.
Establishment of Navy Department
8 303
Prevailing-wages law
20 535
138 822 First migration wave
419 921
838 547 Second migration wave
BROOKLYN
Steam ferry to Brooklyn Heights Finishing of Erie Canal
City of Brooklyn
Brooklyn leading manufacturer in
10-hour day with no loss of pay
8-hour day
Classification system for white collar jobs into 4 classes
Classification of white collar jobs in 10 classes
BNY hires before nat fired afterw
13% 1820
1830
1840
1850
Dry dock 1
46
Favoritism
8000 1810
1860 1870 Civil War 1861-1865
1880
1890
BUILT AT BNY
1800
Corruption scandal at the Brooklyn Navy Yard Rumors of closing
ESTABLISHMENT BNY
EMPLOYMENT % OF GDP SPENT ON DEFENSE 2%
PHENOMENA
BNY
NAVY DEPARTMENT
evolution of bny | A summary of evolutions
Dry dock 2 and 3
1900
timeline
EfďŹ ciency rating system Washington-London disarmament treaties National Industrial Recovery Act Japan refuses to sign accord on disarmament conference. 1 634 351 Great migration
2 560 401
2 738 175
2 602 012
2 300 664
40% of Brooklyn works in manufacturing business 10% of U.S. manufacturing products are NY made
n U.S.
Brooklyn Burns
Stock market crash 43%
Manufacturing shrinks to half in 40 years SEA TRAIN Blue-collar jobs paid-sick leave
Saturday-half holiday in summer
Back to 40-hour, 5-day work week
70000
White-collar jobs incorporated in civil service 15 days leave with pay Blue collar workers part of civil service
CLICK
World War I regulation 5-day week as work spreading regulation Upsurge in warship production due to international tensions
s 1000 workers tional elections, wards
Photo-ID’s
BNY remains open on Independence Day
1920
Dry dock 4
1930 1940 1950 1960 Great WW II Korean War Depression 1941-1945 1950-1953
1970
6000
9000
CLOSING OF BNY
5000
12000
15000
24%
22%
First restaurant for workers
WW I 1917-1918
BNYDC
World War II regulations.
m in hiring
1910
2 504 700
1980
1990 Gulf War 1990-1991
2000 2010 War On Terror 2001- present
Dry dock 5 and 6
47
Brooklyn navy yard today An industrial sanctuary at the heart of the city After almost two decades of obsolescence, a new wave of industrialization is taking place at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. Managed by a not-for-profit corporation, the Yard attracts a great amount of small and medium sized businesses. Not only charmed by the historic structures, the tenants also find an industrial park that offers economic and spatial advantages, a safe haven for their businesses.
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
Organizational structure The Brooklyn Navy Yard has a long history as public property, first as a naval base and ship building facility since the early 19th century, and later as city property after the 1967 purchase. With the city as its owner, the yard is now under the management of the Brooklyn Navy Yard
Development
Corporation
(BNYDC), a not-for-profit corporation that is under contract with the city of New York for the development of the yard. The corporation’s board of directors is comprised of leaders of Brooklyn’s business community and their appointment is a political
1
decision. BNYDC is charged with the leasing of spaces in the Navy Yard, and also plays a proactive role in the development of underutilized areas and the modernization of the Yard’s
infrastructures.
BNYDC
is
not a public institution, but since the yard is a city-owned property, it has to use public request for proposal procedures
for
development
maintenance
contracts.
and
These
projects are often leveraged using public funds, but the majority of investments in the Yard comes from private investors. When
selecting
tenants
BNYDC
looks for businesses that fit the Yard’s vision of becoming a green industrial park with a diverse tenancy. The main factors in the selection process are the amount of jobs that a company creates,
and
whether
these
are
manufacturing jobs or not. With an occupancy of 98% and waiting list of
60
NAVY YARD TODAY | Organizational structure
2
over a hundred companies looking to get into the Yard, BNYDC has plenty of leverage to choose the companies that fit the sought after profiles. This also means that not all its tenants are equal. Smaller manufacturers or creative businesses only lease spaces in one of the Yard’s buildings, but larger employers such as Steiner Studios or Duggal Visual Solutions get to weigh on policy decisions and play an active role in the
3
development of the site. These large space-users manifest themselves as enclaves within the perimeter of the Navy Yard, sometimes with their own fence and security personnel. This means that the Navy Yard, perceived from the outside as one big entity, is in fact a sort of archipelago of smaller business enclaves. The relation between tenants to the
Development
Corporation
is
ultimately flexible. Inside the territory of
the
shipyard,
the
managing
corporation applies its own set of rules. Tenants are allowed to take their pet to work, and can take their bikes inside their offices for instance. On a larger scale, this flexibility manifests itself in the development strategy of the entire Yard. Acting without a general masterplan, the
4
Navy Yard is developed gradually, providing partial and ad-hoc solutions where necessary. 1
Builders of the world’s mightiest warships
2
2 decades of obscolescence have taken its toll
3
Nowadays the Navy Yard is an industrial park
4
Inside Capsys Corp, one of the new tenants
61
Double hull The long waiting list of businesses applying to get into the Navy Yard confirms the strong attraction it exerts as an industrial park. Beside the easygoing politics of the managing corporation, the Yard can also offer favorable conditions to its tenants due to two specific spatial demarcations. The first one is a virtual boundary. The Brooklyn Navy Yard has been designated as an Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) since early 2006. Just like the other IBZ’s in Brooklyn, this designation implies there will be no deviation on the M3-zoning in the appointed area. the
development
As a result
corporation
can
guarantee this territory will not be rezoned to residential use. It also means the Navy Yard has lower realestate development and maintenance costs. Additionally, businesses in the Yard are favored with tax incentives. The second demarcation is a physical boundary. A fence around the Navy Yard limits access for unauthorized visitors and protects the industrial activities inside. The fence demarcates an extremely controlled and safe area, almost completely oblivious to the harsh economic climate of the city outside its perimeter. Unlike the purely formal IBZ, that can equally be found elsewhere in Brooklyn, the fence is a unique presence, inducing an extra shield of protection.
62
NAVY YARD TODAY | Double hull
COLLAGE
Private territory
63
Guarded entrance The
protection
offered
by
the
presence of the fence allows tenants to safely use the open space for 24 hours, seven days a week, without being hindered or having to fear for leaving things unattended. In total, eight different guarded entrances allow passage to trucks, vans, goods and people, all at different times of the day, allowing a smooth operation of the Yard. Steiner Studios has its
1
own gates at Washington Avenue and Clymer Street, as the NYPD Towing Pound at Navy Street.
2
3
1
64
navy yard today | Guarded entrance
Sand Street entrance
2
Cumberland Street entrance
3
Vanderbilt Ave - pedestrians only
Scheme
00.00
02.00
04.00
06.00
08.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
18.00
20.00
22.00
Clinton Ave. Cumberland St. Sands St. Washington Ave. Vanderbilt Ave. Clymer St. Building 92 NYPD towing
00.00
02.00
04.00
02.00
04.00
06.00
08.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
18.00
20.00
22.00
Clinton Ave. Cumberland St.
00.00
06.00
08.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
Clinton Ave.St. Sands Cumberland WashingtonSt. Ave. Vanderbilt Ave. Sands St. Clymer St.
Washington Ave.
Building 92
Vanderbilt Ave.
NYPD towing
Clymer St. Building 92 NYPD towing
goods people
Entrance hours
65
18.00
20.00
2
Reaching the Yard In
observing
the
infrastructures
around the Navy Yard, both the solitary
and
aspects
become
difference
production-oriented noticeable.
between
freight-
The and
public access is clarified in the layout of fixed infrastructures. The piers and the highway system enclose the Yard, while the subway network keeps its distance. Whereas laborers used to live in the
1
Yard`s direct vicinity when it was still a Naval operation,
the current mix
of employment provides for a more complicated situation of some people commuting
from
far
and
others
rejuvenating the surrounding districts. Flexible systems like the bus network and bycicle Greenway should be able to adapt to these changes.
1
66
navy yard today | Reaching the yard
Cumberlandstreet entrance
map
BNY Fence Entrances
Entrances of the Navy Yard
67
Travel times Cyclists can take the shortest route
0’
60’
60’
60’
and are not obstructed by road 50’
50’
40’
30’ congestion. The greenway, which
30’ 20’
50’ 40’
40’ 30’
30’ 20’
20’
usually follows the coastline, bends
10’
20’ 10’
10’
10’
around the Yard since this site is fenced off. Bycicle road Greenway 1
Auto
Ferry
Fiets
When travelling by car, it depends 60’ on the highway’s proximity how long 50’
60’
Openbaar verveoer algemeen 60’
60’ 50’
it will take to reach the Yard. The 30’
50’
50’ 40’
40’
40’
40’ 30’
30’
30’ 20’
20’
expressway runs along the edge of 10’
20’
20’ 10’
10’
the borough, which privileges certain neighborhoods
connectivity.
In
general, car use is supported in the east of the borough because of bad
BQE
public transport connections. 2
Metro
Auto
Ferry
Subway stops are dispersed in a radial way around the Navy Yard, mean-
60’
60’
ing a strong disconnection to the most
50’ 40’
40’
40’ 30’
30’
30’ 20’
20’
used mode of public transportation.
60’ 50’
50’
10’
20’ 10’
10’
Subway
3
Metro
68
navy yard today | Travel times
Auto
Ferry
schemes
The is
60’ 50’
sixth
borough
underused,50’ since
neighborhoods
40’ 30’ 20’ 10’
the
(the
60’
borough
water)
only
in30’ the
40’
20’
make 10’ use
three
north of
60’
60’
50’
50’
of
40’
40’
30’
30’
20’
20’
this
10’
10’
transportation system. Surprisingly, lots of districts along the coastline don’t have a ferry stop. A missed opportunity, since it is a very fast means of travel.
Metro
Ferry 4
Auto
Ferry
Using public transportation in general to get to 60’ the Navy Yard, means long 50’
’ 50’
60’ 50’
40’ travel times for 30’ some disadvantaged
40’ 30’
40’ 30’
20’
20’ 10’
Fiets
20’
regions in the East10’of Brooklyn.
10’
Bus
5
Ferry
Fiets
Openbaar verveoer algemeen
1
Bicycle
2
Vehicles
3
Subway
4
Ferry
5
Subway + Bus
Travel times
69
Shifting boundaries Since the loss of the Yard’s unitary state, the direct relation with its neighbors
has
become
more
differentiated. The final perimeter of the outer fence remains, but the clear distinction between the in- and outside of the Navy Yard is slowly fading away. The changed status of the fence creates new and
challenging
embodying
both
opportunities
for
situations,
often
threats
and
the
1
surrounding
neighborhoods. In
many
cases
contradiction
the
remains,
direct
manifesting
itself through a sequence of an industrial
zone
followed
by
bufferzone or a residential zone.
a 3
2
However, at some places ground is privatised on both sides of the fence, almost completely blurring the onceexplicit boundary.
4
Demolition of obsolete structures after
World
War
II,
resulted
vacant and undefined territories. These
in 1
large vacant sites can now
be discussed for new developments.
3
Plans proposing different public uses like a media campus and a largesurface retail zone have already been proposed for two vacant historic sites in the southern corners of the Yard. Starting
this
outreach,
the
Yard 1
opened up its gates for the public,
4
allowing them guided tours in the 3
Yard’s operation. Formal spaces like the BLDG 92 front yard are designed to emphasize this movement.
70
2
2
navy yard today | Shifting boundaries
4
D A F 2300
TURBO
TURBO
2300 D A F
D A F 2300
TURBO
TURBO
2300 D A F
Sections
D A F 2300
BNY
TURBO
TURBO
2300 D A F
PRIVATE COMPANY
5
Peterbuil eterbu
t
Peterbuil
t
Peterbuil
BNY
t
PUBLIC PLAZA
6
Peterbuil
t
BNY 7
BNY
PRIVATE
8
Vacant Brownfield Site
5
section 1
2
BLDG 92 - public acces/guided tours
6
section 2
3
In between industrial and residential
7
section 3
4
sections through the fence
8
section 4
1
Ownerships at the border
71
72
73
Spatial economics As a consequence of the safeguarded environment inside its borders, the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation can excercise a locationspecific
economic
strategy
and
offer alluring conditions that attract large numbers of creative start-up businesses. In most cases in Brooklyn, a starting enterprise rents a small place for doing business. This space fulfills the needs of the starting company, but offers no room for expansion. Consequently, once growth occurs, the business needs
to
move
elsewhere. This
happens every time the business grows
larger
than
the
space
it
occupies. Furthermore the business experiences a constant threat of being displaced due to rezoning policy. In
1
the end the owner of the enterprise may want to move the business outside the city, where large spaces are more affordable and can be found more easily. The Brooklyn Navy Yard offers an alternative scenario for a starting business. Large spaces can be rent inexpensively, typically between four and twenty dollars per square foot, priced well below neighboring districts’ averages such as DUMBO (27$/sqft) and Downtown Brooklyn (27$-31$/ sqft). The small business has a safe environment in which it can grow at its own pace without the threat of being displaced. Moreover, the Navy Yard Development Corporation allows
2
subletting a part of the rented space. Therefore unused space does not automatically imply unwanted losses.
74
NAVY YARD TODAY | Spatial economics
1
Classic scenario
2
BNY scenario
TIMELINE
?
SUBLET AREA
Two timelines showing different scenarios for starting businesses
75
Fenced off territories Fenced territories Fenced off territories
Creative and small
Arts Fenced off territories Arts FencedManufacturing off territories Arts Manufacturing Services Arts Manufacturing Services Technology Manufacturing Services Technology Storage Services Technology Storage Other Technology Storage
Arts
Manufacturing Services
Artisanal / Niche manufacturing 40,4 %
The development corporation defines the Navy Yard as a modern industrial park in a historic setting. In the
Retail trade 2,5 % Information 2,9 %
past, this government-owned ship
Pro, Sci, Tech 4,0 %
manufacturer employed over 70000 people. Nowadays, a various array of
Wholesale trade 14,2 % Transport and warehousing 9,4 %
tenants reside at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. However, only 14% of a total of
1
Construction 12,5 %
Manufacturing 14,1 %
manufacturing jobs.
number of employees
nearly 6000 jobs are categorized as 1
Large companies like Steiner Studios (the largest film studio on the American East Coast) and GMD shipyard find a home inside the Navy Yard. They gratefully use the space and existing infrastructure. These loyal tenants, who settled a long time ago, can get leases up to 99 years, which almost equals ownership of the site. They are allowed to fence off their property, which results in a few superprivate territories inside the Navy Yard. enterprises on the navy yard
However, within the Yard, the greatest
2 6
part of the enterprises employ less than 6 people.
2
These small enterprises
could be largely defined as arts and crafts business. Small-scale creative businesses engender an industrial sprawl inside the Yard that consumes large
surfaces.
Typically
flexible
historical buildings get parcelized into many small spaces in order to house small businesses.
Fenced off territories Fenced territories Fenced off territories Arts Fenced off territories Arts Fenced off territories Manufacturing Arts Manufacturing Services Arts Manufacturing Services Technology Manufacturing Services Technology Storage Services Technology Storage Other Technology Storage Other Storage Other Other
Arts
Manufacturing Services
76
3
Fenced off territories Fenced off territories Arts Fenced off territories Arts Manufacturing Arts Manufacturing Services Manufacturing Services Technology Services Technology Storage Technology Storage Other Storage Other Other
3
Sector distribution
Technology
2
Storage
3
Business size
Other
4
Spatial organization in building
NAVY YARD TODAY | Big and small
Fenced off territories Arts Fenced off territories Arts Manufacturing Arts Manufacturing Services Manufacturing Services Technology Services Technology Storage Technology Storage Other Storage Other Other
Technology Storage Other
MAP
BLDG 131
BLDG 3
Bailey Humbert Heck Erik Sun Architect PLLC Fabulux, Inc Hip Hop Closet Inc Joseph Sport & Uniforms L&M Impex Madison Man Ltd Modular Design and Fabrication Precision Plumbing & Services SDC Assets Inc Susan Woods Studio Swift Contracting & Maint Corp The Gemini Company Vachette Inc
Art-In Construction Artistic Wood Crafts, Inc BNY Construction, Inc Bower Publishing Company Chase Office Supplies, Ltd. E&C Decorators Corp Evan Hughes Furniture Everyday Group LLC Far East Empire LTD Green Mt. Construction and Design IV Design Inc John Randall D/B/A Bien Hecho Justin Paul Inc Marc Ganzglass Mercedes Distribution Center, Inc Noah Storage Group Inc S&G Fine Chair Collection Inc Schwimmer & Meisles Corp Smalls Electrical Construction Stitch Co Surround Art Management LLC Tom Edmonds Triple J Bedding LLC
Lehigh Cement
Sand & Stone
125
35
GMD
Steiner Studios
GMD
Brinks
NYPD Tow Compound
Dep. of Justice Storage
BLDG 280
BLDG 120
AIS Furniture Refinishing Annandale Contracting, Inc Anne Collier Inc Artopia Atair Aerospace, Inc BPL R&D, LLC Barnett Spice of NY Inc Daddy-O Productions Darcy Brennan Poor/Erica Greenwald Ecological Solutions, Inc Engraved Sign Studio, Inc F&R Installers Fabio Woodworking & framing Fervent Electrical Corporation Integrity Electronics, Inc Israel Cohen & Sons Metal Fabrication. Michelle Greene NYS Ass. Of Minority Contractors Paladin Construction Ressler Importers Robert Clark Photography LLC Robert Martin Design Inc Ryba Merchandising, Inc Scott Jordan Furniture
Akiva Supplies Inc Boland Studio Man Power Trucking Co Orient V Restoration Corporation Sublime Studios Urban Homecraft World Links Trading Inc Rose Solomon Co.
BLDG 5 Ares Equities C.A.C.C.I DFORM DeVore Fidelity Durable Machinery Corp LLC Evan Eisman Co Joseph Peller Poster Fix Corp Robert Kalka Custom Woodworking Schematic LLc T&S Supplies VOM Carpentry WilsonBuilt Inc
Businesses allocated in 5 buildings
77
Made in the Navy Yard As the Navy Yard evolved from a well-oiled whole to a scattering of independent enterprises, so did the outcome of its products. The diversity in produced goods is immense. The Yard’s small businesses manufacture mostly high-end niche products, which find a big market not only in Brooklyn,
1
but sometimes even in the rest of the nation. The merchandise, mainly sold online, ranges from garments, over furniture design, to aerospace vehicles. The
focus
on
a
very
specific
2
market equally applies to the larger employers. Noteworthy tenants are Steiner Studios,
the largest tenant
at the Yard and the largest film studio on the American East Coast; Capsys Corp, a construction company building modular homes; Icestone, who turns recycled glass into building materials; Duggal Visual Solutions and Brinks Secure Logistics. 3
1
Dargelos accessories and garments
2
Aswoon Susan Woods Susan
3
Atair Aerospace Vehicles
4
Locally produced bike racks 4
78
NAVY YARD TODAY | Made in the Navy Yard
MAP
Artist Paul Campbell keeps track of his clients and visitors
79
26
27
Reusing infrastructures Two centuries of manufacturing at the Navy Yard resulted in large amounts of infrastructure. As a part of the U.S. Navy Department, times of war effort were the hay days of the Navy Yard. Most of the Yard was developed and expanded before and during wars, often regardless of the surrounding neighborhoods and their interests. Buildings were built, railroad tracks were set up and drydocks were dug, all with the purpose of fueling a manufacturing machine. 32 000
However,
in
28 000
1979, 20 years of disinterest left the
after
Seatrain
left
24 000
remaining infrastructures in ruins.
20 000
Today a major task at the Yard
16 000
consists of redeveloping or adapting
12 000
these relics from the past in order to
8 000
rejuvenate them and make them apt
4 000
for contemporary use. After stabilizing
0
the infrastructure with city investment, the
tenants
are
encouraged
to
invest in development. With over 40 buildings in 2011, which equals almost 200 000 square meters of adaptively re-used space and new construction, the Brooklyn Navy Yard is in the midst of its largest expansion since World War II. Taking into account the existing infrastructures, a distinction can be made between the buildings on the shipyard, the infrastructures at the waterfront and the roads and tracks connecting them. Prewar preparations Prewar preparations Prewar Prewar preparations preparations Prewar preparations War War War War War Services Services Services Services Services Built ships Built Built ships Built ships ships Built ships Employees Employees Employees Employees Employees % defense % GDP GDP spent spent on on defense % GDP spent on defense %GDP on defense % GDP spent spent on defense 82
NAVY YARD TODAY | Reusing infrastructures
Civil War
1810
1820
1830
1840
1850
1860 BRICK SHEDS
1870
TIMELINE
24 21 18 15 12 9 6 3 0
World War I
1880
1890
1900
STEEL ASSEMBLY LINES
1910
1920
World War II Korean War
1930
MULTI-STORY WAREHOUSES
1940
1950
1960
1970
CORRUGATED STEEL SHEDS
1980
1990
2000
2010
REDEVELOPMENT AND REUSE
Correlation expansion to war effort
83
Buildings: typologies Architecturally, the Brooklyn Navy Yard offers an interesting retrospective on the evolution of industrial buildings in Brooklyn. The different typologies that can be found at the Yard are often the result of changing technologies and politics. Today redevelopment of these buildings for a new purpose is the main focus. The popular wave of adaptive reuse that is taking place everywhere in Brooklyn today, has become one of the main strategies to redevelop the Yard into a successful industrial park. An analysis of the buildings inside the Navy Yard shows some
typologies
that
reappear,
such as different types of sheds and warehouses. Other types, like the power plant and the sewage treatment plant are unique inside the Navy Yard.
5 4
1 5
2 3
84
NAVY YARD TODAY | Typologies
OBSERVATION
1
Brick Shed
3
Warehouse
5
Power plant
2
Machine Shop
4
1
Corrugated steel shed
Sewage treatment plant
Atlas of typologies
85
Brick shed The brick sheds are the oldest constructions on the Brooklyn Navy Yard. Most of the sheds were laid out on a grid that was initially planned for the Navy Yard. This explains the similar dimensions of these types of buildings. The oldest brick sheds date back to before the civil war. Characterizing
are
inclined
roof
92,5 m
structures and the brick walls. All kinds of ship equipment was manufactured
26,2 m
in the sheds. Today, each of these constructions
is divided amongst a
large number of tenants who occupy one or multiple spaces inside.
one structure
86
NAVY YARD TODAY | Typologies
Image
Brick shed
87
Machine shop The machine shop, which has large windows in the walls and roof that guarantees the necessary light for precision work at the assembly line, was originally constructed around the 1890’s. Structurally similar to the dismantled ship launch ways, the
162,9 m
building expanded gradually in length. Equipped with a crane that could move along the full length of the building, the massive steel framework housed the workshops that constructed the ship’s engines. Today, the structure is in development to be adaptively reused as a green manufacturing center.
88
NAVY YARD TODAY | Typologies
40,5 m
image
machine shop
89
Warehouse Due to the colossal warehouses erected along its waterfront, Brooklyn received the nickname ‘the walled city’.
These typical buildings of
Brooklyn can also be found inside the Navy Yard. The 7 remaining warehouses at the Brooklyn Navy Yard were mainly used as storage units in the past. An array of railroad tracks connected the storehouses to the drydocks and other parts of the
110,5 m
Navy Yard. Loading platforms eased the transition of goods between the vehicles and the buildings. Vertical transportation
of
goods
between
different levels happened with freight elevators. The multi-story warehouses were made of a reinforced concrete or a steel grid structure, which implies an open and flexible plan. The brick facades enclose immense spaces, the magnitude of which is demonstrated by office boys racing down the building on roller skates. Warehouses prove to be very adaptive buildings, as today some of them house over 50 enterprises.
90
NAVY YARD TODAY | Typologies
55,9 m
image
Warehouse
91
Corrugated steel shed The war effort during the years of World War II are characterized by a fast and uncontrolled expansion of the Navy Yard, which also resulted in the dispossession of the Wallabout Market by the US Navy Department. During the effort in this period, a great number of buildings had to be erected fast and
77,1 m
cheaply. This resulted in sheds made of corrugated steel plates and varry in scale from small to extremely large. Although many of these constructions were only provisional, today this type of building can still be found in large numbers at the Yard. However, the value and durability of these buildings is considered far less than warehouses or
brick
constructions.
Being
unappealing to small businesses and artists, the corrugated steel sheds mainly house larger companies that need large open floor plans.
92
NAVY YARD TODAY | Typologies
27,4 m
image
Corrugated steel shed
93
Power plant The Brooklyn Navy Yard Cogeneration Plant is situated at the heart of the Navy Yard. Unlike the rest of the Navy Yard, this building is not managed by the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation. This natural gas-fired plant produces 286 Mega-Watt of power and supplies the electric needs of the city of New York. The plant also provides 10 MW of power for the Navy Yard. However, this will be a problem in the near future, as the Yard estimates a demand for 30 MW of power. Investment in renewable energy sources such as wind turbines and solar energy attempts to counter the problem. However the future energy demand remains one of the great challenges for the future of the Yard.
Sewage treatment plant Another unique building is the Red Hook Water Pollution Control Plant. The municipal building was hard-tosite due to a ‘Not In My Backyard’ mindset and was finally located in the Navy Yard. The complex was built on the site of the former ship launch ways during the 1990s and is run by the NYC Department of Environmental Protection.
The
plant
treats
the
wastewater of the area of Red Hook and as a byproduct of the anaerobic digestion of the sewage, the plant produces methane gas. This gas is transformed into heat and electric power by the Yard’s power plant.
94
NAVY YARD TODAY | Typologies
image
Power plant
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
Water infrastructure Maybe the most significant remainder of the Brooklyn Navy Yard’s rich history is its water infrastructure. Consisting of six drydocks, five piers and a series of cranes, the waterfront bears witness to the productive past of the shipyard. However, currently only three drydocks and two piers are still in use. Only three among 300 tenants run a water-related business: GMD Ship Repairs occupies three drydocks to repair ships; Lehigh Cement and New York Sand & Stone Co. Each use their own pier. Hence the unused infrastructure is decomposing rapidly, leaving huge open spaces, where nature seems to redeem its power over human
achievement.
Nonetheless
the decaying port is valued in other domains, for instance as popular setting for cinematic productions and photoshoots.
5
4
3
1
2
6
Unused piers Used piers Unused drydocks Used drydocks 102
NAVY YARD TODAY | Water infrastructure
1
5 4
2
3
image
1
2
1
Crane infrastructure
2
View on abandoned pier
3
Drydock 1 used as filmset
3
Used and unused water infrastructure
103
Rails under the road In
the
former
activities
on
the
Brooklyn Navy Yard, railroad tracks were an indispensable part of the infrastructure. The tracks, used by trains and cranes, achieved a proper connection between the drydocks, piers and buildings on the yard. The shift from one organized industry to a hodgepodge of independent entrepreneurs manifested itself in the disappearance of these trains in favor of the use of cars and trucks. Today most of the tracks have been
1
covered under the road’s surface, with exception of the crane’s rails used by GMD Ship Repairs. The configuration of buildings, train tracks and drydocks was a well-coordinated system with specific flows. The disconnection due to the disappearing railroad tracks presents
organizational
problems
for the current activity at the Navy Yard. Delivering goods in narrow spaces between the buildings can be problematic. Many tenants and their employees
2
come to work by car, since the Navy Yard is bypassed by most of the public transportation networks. Consequently parking lots consume a large part of the unbuilt and open spaces at the Yard.
3
104
NAVY YARD TODAY | Rails and trucks
image
4
5
6
skcart enarC sskkcca arrtt e dn aa orrC liaR arrtt d eno arC ssskkkacccea iarR arart gena niakrrclC u T s k c a r t d a o r R ssa kdcrrellC uiia TnU a ernd nio a kkccea a a R orarrdttygd sru skaceo rad gdrndaiokdrcelu ruR T se y s a r t i a ca sa ep ras ggnniikkcra uP rTnU sska ceop e syyggrrnd niikkd a rad cre ussP ru TnU sekccca o d d d e u U ps gnikreasPun sekcca aopdsygrdnid kraP nU ecaps gnikraP
1
Original crane tracks
2
Remaining crane tracks and trucking areas
3
Parking space
4
View on parked trucks
5
Manoevring truck
6
Parking spaces inside the yard Crane tracks Railroad tracks Trucking areas Unused drydocks Parking space
Evolution rails to truck
105
Green vision In line with New York City’s PLANYC 2030
and
the
environmental
awareness of the creative class in
Brooklyn,
the
Navy
Yard’s
Development Corporation endeavours to profile the Yard as a green industrial park. The active involvement in a debate about pertinent issues such as climate change and the city’s ecology ,puts the shipyard in a forefront position and increases its popularity
1
even more. The green vision of the Development Corporation consists of numerous initiatives. The Yard has already installed trash compactors, solar and wind powered-lightning poles and a number of bike racks. Moreover, all new developments at the Navy Yard are imposed to meet LEED standards, a certificate for sustainable buildings. Further, the recent establishment of an urban farm on the rooftop of one of the Yard’s most
2
prominent buildings, relates to the creative Brooklynite’s infatuation for locally produced organic food. Another initiative
concerning
Brooklyn’s
inhabitants is a future participation on
the
Brooklyn
Greenway,
a
planned bike lane along Brooklyn’s waterfront. A part of the fenced off Navy Yard would be made accessible and transformed into a public park. Nonetheless, taking into account the development corporation’s eagerness to realise its green directory, it is highly questionable whether these different initiatives express a marketing strategy (the ambition of being a attractive and modern industrial epitome), or a real ecological concern.
106
NAVY YARD TODAY | Green vision
3
image
1
Trash compactors
2
Wind turbines
3
Solar powered lighting
4
Bike racks
The Brooklyn Grange
107
Sandy, vulnerability unveiled The choice for the initial placement of the shipyard at the Wallabout Bay originated in the natural tidal flows, which caused dry land at low tide and flooding at high tide. For more than 150 years the very existence of the Yard depended on the proximity of water. Nowadays water may have become the Yard’s most important menace. Due to climate changes water is likely to rise to higher levels
1
during superstorms, which will only occur
more
often.
Such
natural
phenomena cause floodings that are devastating to the buildings on the Navy Yard. In the night of 29th to 30th of October 2012, hurricane Sandy reached the East Coast of the United States, causing particularly severe damage. The water rose to more than 1,5 meters above sea level, flooding a large number of buildings at the Yard, leaving hardly any of them untouched.
2
In a total of more than 275 enterprises, at least 40 of them suffered an estimated total of $50 million in losses due to Sandy. Despite the adversity, most tenants are optimistic about the future of their businesses. Besides the help and assistance by other tenants, some of the hard-hit enterprises such as
IceStone
used
crowdsourcing
(the practice of obtaining needed services by soliciting contribution from a large group of people) to raise funds
for
recovery.
Nevertheless
3
Sandy unveiled the Yard’s foremost vulnerability:
regardless
of
the
protection offered by a fence or an
108
economic construction, the yard is still
1
View on BNY during the storm
at the mercy of the elements.
2
Damage inside Icestone
3
Damage inside Icestone
NAvy yard TODAY | Vulnerability unveiled
Map
2ft 4ft 6ft 8ft 0ft 2ft 4ft 6ft 4ft 2ft 0ft
8ft
6ft 4ft 2ft 0ft 8ft 4ft
6ft
8ft
10ft
12ft
14ft 16ft 18ft 20ft 22ft 24ft
26ft
30ft
28ft
26ft
Flooded by Sandy Buildings emersed by flooding
Sandy’s floodline
109
Organized chaos One of the reasons why the Navy Yard is a large success in Brooklyn is because it is not attached to rigid rules or strict regulations within its borders. Consequently the Yard allows a certain degree of freedom that is not at hand in other parts of the city. For instance tenants can park their cars or store their goods more or less wherever they want. The laissez-faire authority of the Brooklyn Navy Yard’s Developments Corporation achieves
1
an odd balance between a structured whole and a chaotic aggregate. Furthermore, the Yard’s board of direction does not apply a long-term development plan for the industrial park,
but
progresses
gradually,
providing appropriate measurements where needed. Not only does such a strategy allow the Development Corporation to quickly adjust its vision for the future, the Yard’s inherent flexibility also hoards a broad diversity
2
among its tenants. Public functions such as the city’s tow compound and the salt reserve are located within the Navy Yard, along with a power plant and a sewage treatment plant. Some tenants employing hundreds of
workmen
manufacture
their
products next to artists who work solitary. However, as the Navy Yard expands quickly due to its success, it will become increasingly difficult to sustain the present policies.
1
110
Capsys Corp storing modules in front of the Navy Hospital
2
Organized chaos
3
Do not put trash in this hopper
NAvy yard TODAY | Organized chaos
3
MAP
Intended parking space Unused space, often used as parking space
Ad rem solutions and laissez-faire policy
111
Surroundings
Surrounding Tissue Synergy and disruption The Brooklyn Navy Yard is and always has been a peculiar entity in the surrounding urban tissue. Its independent growth regardless to the adjacent neighborhoods has resulted in a strong, however indifferent enclave at the heart of the city Although the Yard’s physical and virtual isolation benefits its operation, it now begins to act as a novice within the urban tissue, with the revival in productivity and the change in ideology of the Yard’s management. The surrounding tissue, formed by historic choices, an array of building typologies and an amalgam of actors forms an interesting mix quite unique within Brooklyn.
From farmland to grid 1636 - 1836
Early Brooklyn settlements (1636), like
Breukelen,
Bushwick
and
Bedford were village centers along the
Lenape
Indian
trails,
with
farmlands organized around them, their layout hinting towards today’s grid structures. The wetlands of Waalbocht (Wallabout Bay) served as a natural tidal harbor which would later attract the Navy Yard. With the emergence of industries, shorelines become piers and are landfilled,
grids
out
from
the
and
built
are
being
waterfront
form
follows
laid
1
inwards in
their
path. Williamsburgh, as a smaller settlement rapidly
in
Bushwick
overtakes
magnitude.
Ferries
the
territory latter
indicate
in the
influx into the main two villages. The pioneering Navy Yard is established in no-man’s land in between the two villages, bordering only Vinegar Hill with the commodore’s and other notables’ formal houses. Vinegar Hill served as the yard’s first workers quarters. The oldest City Park, later renamed Commodore Barry Park, also borders the yard, contributing the Yard’s formal status.
124
Surroundings
| Formation
1
1851 Birds Eye of Wallabout Bay
2
1770 Wallabout Bay
3
1820 Wallabout Bay
Maps
2
3
Marshland
Farmland
Forest
Indian trail
Ferry Grid
Piers
Settlement
Urbanized
Grid evolution
125
Completing the Grid 1836 - 1938
Growth
spreads
south
along
developable waterfronts towards the Red Hook basins, with the Brooklyn and Williamsburgh waterfronts fully exploited. The Navy Yard claims an extra site far from urbanization for its hospital campus in 1830. A decade later, the grid connecting both towns was laid neatly around the Yard, facilitating the unification of both villages into the Town of Brooklyn in 1854. The first occupation of the Wallabout area comes into existence,
1
nourishing rapid further residential and
later
industrial
development
in this area, as a consequence of the proximity to the Yard. The grid structures are implemented between old Indian trails. The completion of the Long Island Rail Road induces a second line of growth.
126
Surroundings
| Formation
1
1861 Birds Eye of the Surrounding
2
ca. 1855 Wallabout Bay
Map
2
Marshland
Ferry
Navy Hospital
New Grid
Piers
Urbanized
Grid evolution
127
While the Brooklyn Bridge over the East River was being constructed (1870-1883), the grid was completed around the Yard. The Wallabout Market,
which
claimed
a
part
of the Yard’s territory in 1880 in between the Naval Hospital and production
site,
operation
of
manufacturing
encouraged warehouses
in
east
the and
Wallabout
and around the Wallabout Creek. This spurred the development of the area south of the Naval Hospital,
1
which had been left untouched. This part of the grid would become home to industrial factories and warehouses. This facilitated the bifold development south of the Yard, with Wallabout being the fourth largest manufacturing centre in the country. As with large parts of the industrial waterfront,
the
neighborhoods
that lie beyond are a mixture of ancillary
workshops
and
housing
2
quarters for laborers. Around the Yard, a notorious fusion of sailors’ dark taverns and red light districts, southeast and southwest of the Yard, emerges.
3
1
128
Surroundings
| Formation
1933 Sands Street
2
1938 Clinton Street
3
1938 Wallabout Market
4
1930 Wallabout bay
Map
4
Manufacturing Bridges
New grid
Piers
Urbanized
Grid evolution
129
The BQE 1938 - today
The
last
drastic
surrounding
change
in
morphology
the
came
about with the implementation of the Highway System, already planned in 1936 and re-imagined in 1940 by Robert Moses. Moses played various roles in city and state government, being City Parks Comissioner and chairman of Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority. These titles say little about his real power, reigning nearly 40 years over all public works, of which the most notoriously were the
1
Title 1 Slum Clearance Plans. Under the housing Act of 1949, those plans displaced
entire
neighborhoods
throughout NYC. In planning the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE), Moses’ power was challenged by different actors. For example: the wealthy Brooklyn Heights residents were influential enough to propose the iconic three decked More
‘Citizen Alternative importantly,
(pre-)war
the
situation
Plan’.
2
precarious
led
to
an
alteration of the highway trajectory, abandoning
the proposed Brooklyn
Shoreline path, which would cut the Navy Yard short.
Instead, the
last part completed of the BQE (in 1960) now bends around the Yard, contributing to the many design flaws with its short turns and ramps, that were inherent to this pre-Interstate Highway design.
130
Surroundings
| Formation
1
BQE Trench near Carrol Gardens
2
2009 ‘The BQE’ by Sufjan Srevens
3
1960 Wallabout Bay
Map
3
BQE Proposed
Grid
BQE Built
Urbanized
Grid evolution
131
The BQE - Cityshaper The implementation of the BQE has had an overwhelming influence on its surroundings. These various effects shall be discussed for each of the various situations located between the barriers of the Navy Yard and the BQE. Physically, the BQE scars the urban tissue in different manners. When
1
raised, the talud provides a drastic separation
between
two
parts,
cutting off both passage and views. A very wide plot of land is needed. the highway itself however remains invisible between its embankements. When trenched, views are preserved and the grid can continue, passing over by means of bridges and decks. When elevated, a continuous passage
is
possible
underneath,
while views higher up are hindered
2
by the structure. Nuisance, such as noise, smell and particle pollution, gains importance due to building proximity.
3
132
Surroundings
| BQE: cityshaper
1
Talud - Near Navy Hill
2
Trenched - South Williamsburg
3
Raised - Spanning 100m Between Buildings
Sections
2
69503 9393
69503 28987
9393
28987
9064 9064
69503 9393
69503 28987
9064
9393
28987
9064
69503 9393
28987
9064
69503 9393
28987
9064
51418
4
11664 11664
11145
51418 22110
11145
22110 51418
11664 11664
11145
51418 22110
11145
22110
51418 11664
11145
22110 51418
11664
11145
22110
6
10
20
50m
4
Talud - Near Williamsburg
5
Trenched - spanning 70m Between Buildings
6
Raised - spanning 50m Between Buildings
69503 9393
28987
9064
Direct spatial impact
133
The BQE - Cityshaper Slum Clearance 1940 - 1955
In
expropriating
the
construction
building of
blocks,
the
BQE
simultaneously became a benefactor for slum clearance. 23 blocks in the Yards direct vicinity that didn’t directly were
interfere demolished
construction, making
room
for social housing, but also for redevelopment. On one hand, this relieved housing demands for the enormous
employment
boom
in
the Yard during WO II, but on the other hand, it erased lively historic districts, like the Sands Street Red Light District. But also parts of Fort Greene
and
Downtown
Brooklyn
were torn down, mainly consisting of manufacturing and retail zones, leaving tens of thousands without a job. This was an extra blow on top of the already faltering economy. Yet, the appearance and contemporary
1
functions of Downtown Brookyln as a civic centre, including offices and education is a direct result from this operation. “Redevelopment decisions obliterated the industrial legacy on both sides of the east river. They not only brought the largest elimination of blue collar jobs in the city’s history, they preempted future space for manufacturing and warehousing.” - Joel Schwartz
134
Surroundings
| BQE: cityshaper
1
Slum Clearance plan Downtown Brooklyn
2
BQE and the social housing
Map
2
Fence BNY
Blocks cleared
BQE
Social Housing
Slum clearance
135
The BQE - Cityshaper Rezoning 1961 - today
The planning and completion of the BQE coincided with the planning and completion of the 1961 zoning resolution. The drastic change from the 1916 zoning that demarcated strictly residential areas and area’s where every use was permitted, to a very strict set of rules in 1961, implied an exclusionary choice to be made. The mixed use area of northern Wallabout was declared M1, operating as a commonly used buffer in between heavy industries (M3) and
1
residential zones, derived from the BQE as separator of manufacturing and residential uses. The
mechanism
buffer
to
industry
protect
brought
and
northern
Wallabout into a frozen state, with large manufacturers like Mergenthaler Linotype
leaving,
and
no
new
development to fill in the gaps. The region became known for its scattered small historic residences
2
and enormous vacant warehouses, merged
together
active storage
with
remaining
facilities and small
manufacturers. Despite its intention as a buffer, the
revival process
proves to be too strong for exclusive zoning to handle. The
landbanked
gradually
opening
tissue up
is
now
to
new
investment with the popularization of
3
the Yard and the historic aesthetic of select parts of Wallabout. Following
136
legal loft conversions, bigger real
1
Residual Tenements
estate operations now force rezoning
2
Manufacturing/Vacant
and even displace thriving new small
3
Pre Civil War House
businesses.
4
Impact BQE on Wallabout
Surroundings
| BQE: cityshaper
Map
4
Fence BNY
M1-zoned buffer
BQE
Non-manufacturing Land use
Planned impact
137
The BQE - Cityshaper Creation of Enclosed Areas 1961 - today
After the war, resettlement of Jewish inhabitants through the influx of Hungarian
Hasidim,
combined
with a Puerto Rican immigration in Williamsburg, exerted tensions on the existing housing stock in South
Williamsburg,
bordering
the Yard. The creation of several community
organisations
like
the
United Jewish Organisation (UJO) and the Southside United Housing Development
Fund
Cooperation,
aided in development. And because
1
of space freed up by departing manufacturing, completely other
large
already
experienced
parts
reconstructed, a
residential more
were while area’s
incremental
transformation. The strong involvement in housing development,
strengthened
by
physical cultural outings, was outed inside the specific area closed off by the BQE and the Williamsburg
2
Bridge, which now contrasts areas outside
the
physical
borders
as
seen in the typology of the tissue. Buildings range from semi detached houses to housing slabs and towers, mixed within fragments of the older tissue. As the community keeps growing, the active role of the UJO in development remains.
138
Surroundings
| BQE: cityshaper
3 1
Semi-detached, multi-family housing
2
Religious annex during holidays
3
Slab and tower social housing
4
BQE and the Hasidic community
Map
4
East River bridges Fence BNY
Remaining buildings
BQE
Built after BQE
Unplanned impact
139
A sampling of building blocks architecturally,
the
navy
yard’s
direct surroundings offer a look into a very diverse history of building practice of Brooklyn. Both relicts of the industrial era and new waterfront condominiums are seen from the east
river.
succeeding
Both slum
social
tenements
and
new semi-detached building blocks
1
location of the sampling blocks
house all kinds of people. and
2
residential zone
both warehouses and office towers
3
residential zone
provide this part of Brooklyn with
4
manufacturing zone
working spaces. a quick sampling of
4
manufacturing zone
building blocks across is shown on
6
mixed use district
the right.
7
Special waterfront zone
1
142
housing
Surroundings
Bny Fence
| typologies
typology examples
Axonometry
2
3
5
4
6
7
a sampling of building blocks
143
Socio-economic constituencies the
area
around
characterized
by
a
Bny
is
number
of
economic and social stakeholders. none of those however, have the same mindset as the navy yard, it
being
zone.
an
the
industrial nearby
protected
stakeholders
tend to gather in different Business improvement make
their
Zones,
trying
neighborhood
economically
to more
attractive
and
competitive. the brand new concept of the ‘Brooklyn tech triangle’ tries to find a common ground for the diverse constituencies involved and aims at a local cooperation. on a city scale the most important territory
is
downtown
Partnership,
which
Brooklyn
embodies
the
third biggest central business district of nyC. other groups contribute to the diverse tissue of northern Brooklyn.
dumBo
expanding
entity
is
a
rapidly
with
a
strong
support for the arts and culture. a third economic development is myrtle avenue Brooklyn Partnership, focusing on a commercial avenue life. Socially, define
the very
local distinct
communities areas
both
geographically and physically. the most noticeable in the vicinity is the
Hasidic
Jewish
Community.
Hasidism is a branch of orthodox Judaism that promotes a pious life following the guidelines of the torah. another social structure is the social housing
program,
which
creates
small isolated entities within the neighborhood.
144
Surroundings
| Constituencies
Map
BID
nyCHa Bid
IBZ - EZ
iBZ
Hasidim
BID IBZ - EZ
hasidics
Situating the constituencies
Projects hasidics
145
Brooklyn Navy Yard the navy yard is an interesting economic entity. First of all it is an iBZ and eZ therefore protected by the city and receiving benefits from the state. Protected by a fence it could stay a industrial district for over two centuries. Furthermore it is managed by the not-for-profit BnydC to
further
as
an
enhance
industrial
its
potential
zone.
BnydC
promotes cooperations, firms working together and sharing information,
1
and operates incubators creating a secured environment for starting business giving them time to grow. on the yard there is a possibility of education by the construction of a media campus for Steiner Studios giving the Bny an even more diverse character. every constituency is described in certain aspects, ranging from culture and housing to work and education. this
schematic
representation
of
the constituencies gives a basic idea
of
their
overall
mindset.
also, a synthesized vision of the microeconomic structure present, is added to the scheme with distinction in
expenditures
either
inside
or
outside the virtual boundary.
1
146
Surroundings
| Constituencies
arial view of the navy yard
Scheme
Small Business Services
IBZ empire zone
Innovation Safety Employment Sanitiation
CULTURE
HOUSING
Food Retail Health Transport Leisure
Work advantages
Rent
WORK
EDUCATION
Industry Sevices Manufacturing Storage
Film School
Coop
Brooklyn navy yard
147
Downtown Brooklyn Partnership Historically, downtown Brooklyn has known great development because of its close proximity to manhattan. nowadays
downtown
Brooklyn Metrotech BID
incorporates the third biggest central business district (CBd) of nyC, providing cheaper office rents than
Court-LivingstonSchermerhorn BID
downtown manhattan. this is the greatest
asset
of
downtown
Fulton Mall Improvement Association
for
the city, giving nyC a competitive alternative for the cheaper office space in new Jersey, hence keeping
1
the businesses, and therefore the tax incomes, in nyC. on a more local scale, downtown is organized to some degree by the downtown (dBP),
Brooklyn a
development
Partnership
not-for-profit corporation
local founded
in 2006. the objective of dBP is to enhance the area’s position as a mixed-use commercial, cultural, academic and residential center.
2
in addition, the dBP manages three Business improvement districts, the Fulton mall improvement association, the metrotech Bid and the Courtlivingston-Schermerhorn
Bid,
providing supplementary sanitation, security and promotional services to local businesses, residents and property owners. the downtown region also includes the Brooklyn academy of music (Bam)
and
supervised
its by
cultural the
district,
3
Partnership.
another asset is the housing of multiple higher education institutes,
148
giving it a steady stream of new high-
1
skilled workforce and the undertaking
the three Bid’s composing the dBP
2
of cutting-edge research.
work environment downtown Brooklyn
3
Brooklyn academy of music
Surroundings
| Constituencies
Scheme
Tax incentives
Small Business Services
Innovation Transport Streetscapes Safety
BID CULTURE BAM District
HOUSING $2000-$3000
Rented Owned
24 000 people
Meeting space Lunch Public space
Food Fulton Mall Education Leisure
incubator
WORK $60 000 - $90 000
Services Retail Education
EDUCATION 12 uni’s & colleges 60 000 students
Rent Food Health Transport Leisure
downtown Brooklyn Partnership
149
DUMBO in 1978 the artists who lived between the
manhattan
Bridge
and
the
Brooklyn Bridge came up with a strange acronym for their region in an attempt to keep investors away. “dumBo� was born (down under the manhattan Bridge overpass). in 1981 however, david walentas bought
most
of
the
abandoned
warehouses in the dumBo region
1
with a new development in mind. this investment really started to pay off in 1998 with the rezoning from manufacturing to mixed-use. this
rezoning
legalized
the
conversion of the big warehouses into
loft
and
artist
spaces.
in
2006 the artists and developers created a Bid, called the dumBo improvement district, which aims to promote dumBo as a creative haven for artists. the Bid oversees
2
the arts Cluster, a council of arts and cultural organizations working together to support and foster the local cultural community. in 2012 dumBo is famous for its art, culture and high-tech companies located in warehouses built at the beginning of the 20th Century.
150
Surroundings
| Constituencies
1
dumBo creative storefront
2
work environment dumBo
Scheme
Small Business Services
Innovation Streetscapes Safety Marketing Advocacy
BID
CULTURE
Dumbo arts Galleries Events
HOUSING >$3600
3600 people
Rented Owned
Meeting space Galleries Lunch Co-working Public space
WORK Creative services Tech
Rent Food Retail Food Health Retail Transport Leisure
dumBo
151
Myrtle Avenue Brooklyn Partnership myrtle
avenue
is
thoroughfare,
an
east/west
running
from
downtown Brooklyn to Queens. it used to be the home to an elevated railroad line, used from 1888 to 1969. the growth of myrtle avenue in the Fort Greene and Clinton Hill neighborhoods was stimulated by its proximity to the navy yard. despite many advantages, myrtle avenue began to lose some of
1
its vitality in the early 1970’s. the decommissioning of the Bny and the
demolition
of
the
elevated
subway line were key elements that contributed to the decline of the commercial
strip.
myrtle
avenue
became notorious under the name of murder avenue. today
the
community
merchants are
working
and
the
together
to revitalize myrtle avenue under
2
myrtle avenue Brooklyn Partnership. the Partnership is comprised of three entities, the myrtle avenue revitalization
Project
(marP),
the myrtle avenue Brooklyn Bid (2004)
and
the
myrtle
avenue
merchants association. they assist the
small
businesses
located
along the avenue, and improve the quality of life of the surrounding
3
neighborhoods. a big influence in the development of myrtle avenue is Pratt institute, near myrtle avenue. they contribute by performing studies to improve the overall quality of the region and
152
assist the Partnership with ideas and
1
opportunities.
2
“murder avenue”
3
myrtle Hall, Pratt institute
Surroundings
| Constituencies
ca. 1920 elevated railroad line
Scheme
Innovation Development
Small Business Services
Revitalizing Streetscapes Safety
BID CULTURE
WORK EDUCATION
HOUSING $1500-$2000 17 000 people Rented Owned
$45 000 - 55 000
Food Retail
Retail (97% local) Education Manufacturing
Neighbourhood studies & planning
Rent Food Health Transport Leisure
myrtle avenue Brooklyn Partnership
153
New York City Housing Authority new york City Housing authority (nyCHa) is responsible for providing affordable housing for the low– to moderate-income
population
of
new york City. their objective in real-estate
is
maintenance,
preservation,
modernization
and
expansion of its housing stock. until 2009, nyCHa also handled the regularization of Section 8 leased Houses, which stated that inhabitants could get grants for financial relief on renting a house outside nyCHa projects. nyCHa started during the great depression,
and
was
the
first
organization that was responsible
1
for the creation of a housing market accessible
for
everyone,
with
a
decent comfort level. unfortunately
the
social
high-
rise towers became a city within a city, isolated from surrounding communities, giving nyCHa housing a
negative
connotation.
People
would only live there as a last resort. this
perception
of
the
nyCHa
housing doesn’t relate to the real
2
notion, namely that they are vibrant communities. taking this bad image into account, nyCHa took measures. in their latest plan, which stated nyCHa’s roadmap for the following years, an emphasis on a stronger integration of buildings and its tenants into the existing neighborhoods was pursued.
154
Surroundings
| Constituencies
1
ingersoll housing
2
Farragut housing
Scheme
HOUSING 2-3 people
WORK 70%
Leisure
EDUCATION
30%
Food Health Retail
Rent
Projects
155
Hasidic jewish community immigration
of
ultra-orthodox
Hasidism,
Jewish
following
the
increased
significantly
an
movement
torah
verbatim, after
the
holocaust. in the 80’s, 100.000 of the
remaining
250.000
Hasidim
lived in Brooklyn. For achieving a righteous and pure life they live within a sanctified community. this community
kept
growing,
leaving
a strong mark on contemporary
1
Brooklyn. Hasidim seem like a closed-off, homogeneous
community,
but
in
fact it isn’t true. there are different subcultures, named after the place they originated, and each incorporate great individual variety. in Brooklyn this shows in mainly three Hasidic neighborhoods or courts: the Satmar Hasidism located in williamsburg, the Bobover Hasidism in Borough Park
2
and the lubavitch Hasidism in Crown Heights. in
preserving
religious
their
beliefs,
secluded
culture
Hasidics
communities,
geographically
and
and form both
socially,
demarcated with a cleansing wire (eyruv) strung around their territory. externally
visible
aspects
like
speaking yiddish and strict clothing regulations blending.
discourage the
Satmar
cultural are
the
most resistant to american culture, prohibiting all activities and contacts that would lead to an adaptation of this culture.
156
Surroundings
| Constituencies
1
Hasidic community
2
eyruv, border between pure and impure
Scheme
Transport Safety Employment
HOUSING
Welfare Foodstamps
RELIGION
Multi-family Row houses
WORK
EDUCATION
$20 000
Food Health Retail Transport
Retail Manufacturing Schools
Low education Seperated
Rent Lobby
7000
NYCHA Projects Bedford Gardens
50 000
$450-$1000
Hasidics
157
their wish to promote their religion is
reflected
system.
in
their
Hasidic
educational
Jews
operate
separated private schools, barely reaching the nationwide standard, with an emphasis on Hasidism. it doesn’t encourage higher education, meaning
Hasidic
Jews
have
a
defined space on the labor market. Hasidic Jews don’t pursue careers, but
organize
their
livelihood
so
1
that it does not interfere with their religious obligations. Concentrated in small-scale operations (retail, in – or export, manufacturing) preferably close-by or family-owned, this doesn’t mean they won’t work outside their community, a fair amount of them do. as a direct result more than 50% of the Hasidic population in williamsburg lives under the poverty line, making them applicable for all kinds of grants ranging from the
2
Ceta (Comprehensive employment training act), section 8 housing assistance, school meal funds, … the main reason for their survival in this place in spite of their bad economic position is redeemed by strong social cohesion based on Hasidic teachings promoting to be a better person and help each other out.
158
Surroundings
| Constituencies
1
Hasidic educational system
2
labour work in the vicinity
Image
Hasidics
159
Situation and study Tech Triangle the
Brooklyn
tech
triangle
is
Situation and study
a recent concept, first launched
T
in 2011, by downtown Brooklyn Partnership. it originated from the
DUMBO
idea of the exploitation of dumBo’s and
navy
yard’s
success.
Navy Yard
the DUMBO
tech triangle is situated between
Navy Yard
the dumBo improvement district, BnydC and downtown Brooklyn Partnership. mostly
in
a
study,
this
Downtown Brooklyn
conducted
region,
Downtown Brooklyn
suggests
an expansion both in area and employment of tech functions. this
1
conclusion is supported by the fact that most tech firms want to work in this region. there are many
2012
2015
sq. ft
sq. ft
challenges and opportunities to foster the continuing growth of this vital sector in the years to come. this idea of a strong and diverse entity, its economic impact on the
1.7 million sq. ft
3.1 million sq. ft
creative and tech sectors and the growth is
of
widely
downtown
Brooklyn
supported.
Some
governmental institutions involved in its realization are the empire State development Corporation, SBS of nyC and the Council of Brooklyn
9 628 employees
17 960 employees
2
and community foundation. on a more direct scale the 3 Bids are participating as well as some strong individual companies and institutions like Steiner Studios, etsy, and Pratt institute.
160
Surroundings
| Constituencies
1
location tech triangle
2
Study tech triangle
3
objectives tech triangle
occup ± 10
y y
Tech Triangle Tech Triangle
First of all, while tech functions have
1. more area to develop
cropped up in these three distinct areas, they remain disconnected by uninviting streetscapes, underused open spaces, low quality pedestrian amenities and a lack of public transit. By linking these places, the tech sector will have more options for expanding its footprint and creating 2. overflow occupance redirecting to downtown occupation ± 100% occupation ± 100%
occupation ± 100% occupation ± 100%
new jobs. Secondly, Brooklyn
though has
downtown
made
tremendous
efforts over the past few years, it continues to have a high office vacancy rate of 10%, while dumBo
occupation ± 90% occupation ± 90%
and the navy yard are literally running out of space. By connecting these
areas,
they
believe
that
the spill over effect to downtown 3. unemployed people social housing as entry-level tech job workforce
Brooklyn will be significant. thirdly, has
a
housing
downtown number
of
Brooklyn major
developments
that
public have
historically had some of the highest unemployment rates in the City. By
fostering
better
connections
between the community and this growing
sector,
there
are
many
opportunities to create training and 4. education downtown delivers skilled workforce
placement programs for new types of
manufacturing
and
entry-level
technology jobs. lastly, despite the 57,000 college students and numerous high schools in
the
area,
many
technology
companies are reporting a shortage of qualified employees to fill the demands of this sector. By linking these
educational
institutions
to
this vital sector, they aim to create 3
a
pipeline
for
new
high-skilled
161
workforce towards those tech jobs. as said before, the triangle idea was only recently aired. the goals to be achieved are still very theoretical and in planning phase. the tech triangle Commission want to connect the three distinct regions by means of improving streetscape and public space. this connectivity will be a difficult problem due to the nyCHa housing localized in the centre of the area. the intention of using the unemployed people of this social
1
housing as entry-level jobs is also problematic. with the gradual filling up of the area with tech companies, mostly small scale, the amount of people of the projects getting courses to start here are presumably low, and their chances for skill-based manufacturing jobs also decline. the tech triangle is still in its first stage from being a vision to a successful plan. to take this idea of one uniform tech region to the next level, the tech triangle commission
2
created a design competition in the summer of 2012. the winner of this competition
was
wXy architects
in association with urban design, who will now develop a masterplan, anticipated for spring 2013.
1
162
Surroundings
| Constituencies
dumbo, warehouses
2
Brooklyn navy yard, dry dock 1
3
Central business district downtown
IMAge
3
dumBo - navy yard - downtown Brooklyn
163
Impact on the grid the combined result of all these
ave, but also to les represented
constituencies is that the region
areas such as wallabout, shown
between the Brooklyn Bridge and the
in an on-going study concerning
williamsburg Bridge is a constantly
an innovation corridor between the
shifting active area. all groups strive
yard’s new coming media campus
to achieve their goals, meaning they
and Pratt itself.
urge to expand, or influence others in
the Satmar Hasidic Jews are an
positive, or negative way.
ever-growing residential community
a first factor is a direct result of
in williamsburg, having the highest
dumBo
maximum
birth rates of nyC. this results in
occupancy. dumBo is expanding
a constant search for new terrain.
into vinegar Hill, putting the historic
in viewing america as impure, the
fabric under pressure. this was one
urge to expand within a purified
of the reasons for the creation of the
area
tech triangle. that expansion gives
conflicts, laying a strong emphasis
dumBo, and to some degree Bny,
on their borders. Conflicts range
common ground to enlarge their
from the large scale, forbidding the
region of influence.
Green way to run through their
the tech triangle wants to boost
neighborhood, to the local scale, in
its commercial and service aspects,
constant conflicts with other social
claiming the area in between as its
groups.
own, putting that region under a lot of
Furthermore
pressure. the new york City Housing
of
authority
social
williamsburg, a steady pressure is
housing in this district, and in theory
been set on the Hasidic community
they decide what happens on their
by
converting
territory. However, the ingersoll social
a
strong
housing residents still have some
southwards toward the wallabout
leverage because of their inclusion in
Corridor.
the myrtle ave Bid.
Between all these influences and
myrtle avenue in itself is a strong
expansion of economic and social
commercial strip, which makes it the
systems, only the navy yard stands
place to be for shopping, acting as
untouched,
the local little brother of Fulton Street
with the idea of the tech triangle
mall. this Bid is yet again supported
Bny is currently reaching out of
by Pratt institute, a university with
its fence to participate in an area
a lot of intellectual influence on
already changing under pressure of
its nearby region. they undertake
a multitude of strong constituencies.
research and studies about certain
other
districts,
slowly vanish and be absorbed by the
reaching
its
manages
creating
the
interesting
and
innovating ideas to further improve overall quality, not only for myrtle
164
Surroundings
| Constituencies
results
the
in
due
a
to
gentrified
less
multitude
enlargement waterfront
lofts,
resulting
Hasidim
thanks
to
cohesive
larger constitutions.
of
of
in
movement
its
fence.
groups
will
Map
nyCHa
economical
Gentrification wave
Brooklyn tech triangle
Social
Pratt innovation Corridor (Study)
impact on the grid and each other
165
Leisure Transport Retail Health Food
Retail Food
Rent Tech Creative services
Public space Co-working Lunch Galleries
Meeting space
WORK
CULTURE
Owned Rented
Galleries Dumbo arts
HOUSING >$3600 3600 people
Events
BID Advocacy Marketing Safety Streetscapes Innovation
FARRAGUT 2-3 people
Food Health Retail
Leisure
Rent Small Business
Tax incentives Services
Innovation Transport Streetscapes Safety
BID CULTURE BAM District
HOUSING 24 000 people Rented
$2000-$3000
Owned
Meeting space Lunch Public space
Food Fulton Mall Education Leisure
incubator
WORK
EDUCATION
Services
12 uni’s & colleges 60 000 students
$60 000 - $90 000
Retail Education
Rent Food Health Transport Leisure
Transport Safety Employment
HOUSING
Welfare Foodstamps
RELIGION 7000
NYCHA Projects Bedford Gardens
50 000
$450-$1000
Multi-family Row houses
WORK Food Health Retail Transport
Manufacturing Schools
Lobby
Rent
WORK 70
EDUCATION Innovation Safety Employment Sanitiation
30
empire zone
IBZ
Work advantages HOUSING
Rent
Food Retail Health Transport Leisure
WORK Industry Sevices Manufacturing Storage
EDUCATION Film School
PRATT INCUBATOR
Coop
Innovation Development
Revitalizing Streetscapes Safety
BID
WORK EDUCATION
HOUSING $1500-$2000 17 000 people Rented Owned NYCHA
$45 000 - 55 000
Food Retail
Rent Food Health Transport Leisure
Retail (97% local)
Education Manufacturing
EDUCATION
$20 000
Retail
Neighbourhood studies & planning
Low education Seperated
BNY and the Sixth Borough an ambiguous coexistence The Brooklyn Navy Yard has always had a strong relationship with its waterfront. Where historically, the very existence of the Yard depended on the East River’s vast waterbody, nowadays that dependency is less clear. The Yard’s naval infrastructure however, remains a silent witness of a once flourishing past. The fragile balance between nature and industry reveals interesting threats and opportunities.
East River: not a river The East River, contrary to what its name suggests, is not a river. Instead, it is a tidal strait connecting the New York-New Jersey Bay with the Long Island Sound. Typical for this type of “river” is that it falls under the influence of the daily rise and fall of the sea levels. In combination with the Hudson River which brings in its wake fresh water into the saline environment, this results in a complex dynamic system. Twice a day, during high tide, the saline water of the ocean pushes the fresh water of creeks and rivers inwards, back towards the land. The tidal pulse of the ocean can be felt all the way up to Troy, 150 miles upstream the Hudson River.
1
That is why, in precolonial times, the natives called the Hudson river “Mahicantuk” which can roughly be translated as “great rivers in constant motion”.
2
178
Sixth Borough
| East River
1
Flood current
2
Ebb current
Ha
r le
m
Riv er
Map
Ea
st
Ri
ve
r
Hu
dso
nR
ive
r
Long Island Sound
Ne
w
to w
n
Cr ee
wa
rk
Ba
y
k
Ne
Gowanus Canal NY-NJ Upper Bay Jamaica Bay
Lower Bay Atlantic Ocean
Raritan Bay
Waterbodies of New York
179
East River: an estuarine habitat The system where salt water is mixed with fresh water, at the mound of a large river, forms an ideal breeding ground for fish, shellfish and plants. These,
so-called
estuaries,
are
some of the world’s most productive ecosystems. A wide variety of wildlife can be found in the area. The Atlantic Sturgeon, logo of the Hudson River, is the biggest fish that can be found in the East River. Of critical importance in the estuarine ecosystem is the intertidal zone, a
Birds
constantly alternating system where a wide variety of organisms thrive. However, in a typical section of the East River, the intertidal zone is
Herring Gull
Cormorant
Marsh plants
absent, as is the case in the Brooklyn
Eelgrass
Bladderwrack
Navy Yard. This results in a crippled ecosystem.
Molluks and invertibrates Moon jelly fish Eastern Oyster
Lady crab
Fish
Blackfish
Atlantic Sturgeon
Brooklyn Navy Yard Extreme high spring / storm tide
Mean high tide
Mean low tide
supra littoral zone
180
Sixth Borough
| East River
Scheme
Black Crowned Night Heron
Herring Gull
Cormorant
Snowy Egret repipdnaS dettopS
Canada Goose Black Duck
Eelgrass
Bladderwrack Common Glasswort
Common Reed Purple Loosestrife Smooth Cordgrass
Sand Shrimp Moon jelly fish Eastern Oyster
Blue Mussels
Eastern Mud Snail
Ghost crab
Lady crab Bluecrab Alewife Blue-green Algae
Atlantic Sturgeon
Blackfish American Shad
sublitoral zone
Porgy
Atlantic Herring
Whiting
intertidal littoral zone
Estuarine habitat East River
181
East River: a dynamic balance Twice a day the ebb and flood currents push the water level towards a mean difference of 2’8”.
12 hours
Twice a month spring tides occur where the maximum water level reaches a height of up to only 2’ from the surface of the Navy Yard. In an annual tidal period, the highest peaks can be found during spring and autumn. During these months the surface becomes more vulnerable to floods as was painfully exemplified by Hurricane Sandy. The
tension
constructed
between land
the
body
and
fixed, the
dynamically oscillating East River is apparent.
3 Storm Sur Cat. ge 27ft.
Taken into account the projected
year flood 500-
sea level rise as a consequence of climate change over a period of 100 years and the increased frequency of severe storm surges, it becomes clear that this tension is a prelude for
17ft.
15ft.
ear flood 100-y Hurricane Sand y
14ft.
disaster. Brooklyn Navy Yard Level 7ft. 5
4
3,6
6
3 2
0,9
1 0 -1
182
Sixth Borough
| East River
7 days
12 hours
9 hours
6 hours
3 hours
-2
Graph rising currents
2100
2080
2060
2040
2020
December -1,2
September
June
March
28 days
21 days
14 days
5,9
100 years
1 year
1 month
graph
183
Rising sea-levels With Hurricane Sandy still fresh in mind, the delicate relationship with the water is currently a hot topic in New York City. The storm was widely covered in both social media and published media. On Thursday the 28th of November 2012
NYC’s
Bloomberg
Mayor
declared
Michael mandatory
evacuation of all civilians in the first coastal storm impact zone. All citizens living or working in zone 2 were
1
strongly advised to leave so as well. On the 29th of November 2012, so-called Frankenstorm Sandy, a 1100-mile wide tropical cyclone, made landfall over the New York City territory with
devastating
consequences.
NYC typical buzzing city life came to a sudden halt with the shut down of Manhattans Financial District. A huge power outfall left a part of Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan in the pitch-
2
dark for up to four days and miles of subway tunnels submerged. Next to thousands of damaged cars, buildings and infrastructure, the storm brought in its wake a huge amount of garbage and polluted silt onto the streets. The flood was a brutal wake-up call Cat.1(74-95mph) and reminder to New Yorkers of its
Cat.1(74-95mph) relationship with the vast waterbody it Cat.2(96-110mph) is embraced by. Cat.1(74-95mph) 3 Cat.2(96-110mph) Cat.3(111-130mph) Cat.1(74-95mph) Cat.1 (74-95 Cat.2(96-110mph) mph) Cat.3(111-130mph) Cat.2 (96-110 mph) Cat.4(131-94mph) Cat.3 (111-130 mph) Cat.4 (131+ mph)Cat.2(96-110mph) Cat.3(111-130mph) Cat.4(131-94mph) 184
Sixth Borough
| Rising sea-levels
Cat.3(111-130mph) Cat.4(131-94mph)
1
Coastal Storm Impact Zones
2
DUMBO Distrct in te wake of Sandy
3
East River bursting its banks in DUMBO
As for the Navy Yard, which is almost entirely situated into the first coastal storm impact zone, Hurricane Sandy struck hard. According to testimonies the water level reached up to 9 feet at some locations. The Yard experienced an estimated $50 million dollar of damage, according to Lee Siberstein, spokesman of the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation. Among the great losses in the 4
industrial park is the commercial Brooklyn Grange’s Apiary where a colony of a million bees has been wiped away. Low-laying storage spaces aswell flooded during the storm, the contents of which were partially destroyed. Despite the ravage Sandy left in her wake, the floodwaters of the storm didn t even reach the 100-year flood elevation. The Yard is as well home to a wide
5
variety of enterprises where, next to industrial property, some works of art in low-lying storage spaces have been permanently destroyed.
6
4
Waterline at building 20 in the BNY
5
Destroyed apiary
6
Accumulation of debris at the BNY 185
Socio-spatial relationship The
dominating
land-water
edge
consists of a hard surfaced border, a
silent witness of an essentially
maritime past. This narrow zone of historical manufacturing and industry formes a physical border between the Brooklynite and the East River, making it inaccessible to the great public. The
morphology
of
the
land-
water frontier however, is far from homogeneous. Recent developments have allowed citizens to rediscover, experience and enjoy the water.
1
For example, the reconversion of piers and harbor infrastructure of a 1.3 mile post-industrial waterfront site into the Brooklyn Bridge Park is as of 2009 open to the public. The Brooklyn Waterfront Greenway is a bottom-up risen initiative, the main
1
objective of which is to connect the waterfront, green areas and parks by a safe off-street pedestrian-friendly route.
2
Simultaneously, in the wake of VISION 2020, New York City’s comprehensive waterfront plan, the East River Ferry pilot program has been set up in 2011. Over 1 million passengers have used this alternative mode of transport to get from North to South in its first year A
tremendous
pressure
on
the
waterfront is exerted by brokers in a land value race as well as communal driven
pressure
lobbying
for
recreational area. But where will the industry go? high bulkhead high bulkhead high bulkhead soft highedge bulkhead soft edge high bulkhead soft edge bulkedge soft soft edge bulk bulk bulk bulk gas drydock drydock gas dry dock drydock gas drydock gas 186
Sixth Borough
| Socio-spatial relationship
3
1
Land-water edge
2
Annaccesible waterfront
3
Industrial barrier
Map
inaccessible waterfront
inaccessible waterfront inaccessible waterfront inaccessible waterfront accesible waterfront accesible waterfront accesible waterfront accesible waterfront
Publicly accessible waterfront
inaccessible waterfront
inaccessible waterfront Publicly inaccessible waterfront waterfront blockage waterfront blockage waterfront blockage
waterfront blockage Waterfront blockage views views views waterfront blockage Views
accesible waterfront accesible waterfront views
ferrywaterfront blockage views
ferryferryferry ferry views ferry stops
East River Ferry
ferry stops
ferryferryferry stopsstops ferry stops
ferry stops
Ferry stops
Waterfront accessibility
187
Anatomy of the waterfront At first sight land and water are
Remains of deteriorating piers and
perceived as two separated surfaces
ruins under the water surface are an
divided by a clean edge. However
intrinsic part of the industrial legacy of
bathymetry and topography are in
the Navy Yard.
fact one continuous surface and more
Section by section the significant and
than 200 years of industrial and naval
characteristic areas are explored in
activity left its traces both above and
the following pages.
below the waterline. Invisible to the eye, but not less present, a cable ditch shortcuts the 5.7 miles of waterfront of the Navy Yard, connecting northeast shore with the southwest shore, South-Williamsburg with Dumbo. The same can be said for the shore to shore connection over the East River. The “Mega� projects of first the Brooklyn Bridge, followed by the Williamsburg Bridge and the Manhattan Bridge, leave a great physical and visual impact on the surrounding urban tissue. Under the East River stream a parallel motion takes place as an invisible ditch of cables and pipes connects Manhattan with Brooklyn. It is the hardware of what is often perceived as virtual that stands as an at least as important connection too.
188
1
Hurricane Irene, Belt Parkway
2
Closed Subway Station for Irene
Sixth Borough
| Waterfront anatomy
1
Bathymetry and topography
2
Plan of section
Map
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft+24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft
1
-32ft -32ft -34ft -34ft -36ft -36ft -38ft -38ft -40ft -40ft -42ft -42ft -44ft -44ft -46ft -46ft -44ft -44ft -42ft -42ft -40ft -40ft
+24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft
-38ft -38ft -36ft -36ft -34ft -34ft -32ft -32ft -30ft -30ft -28ft -28ft +4ft +4ft
+24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft
+6ft +6ft
+24ft +24ft
+8ft +8ft
+24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft
+10ft +10ft
+24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft
+12ft +12ft +14ft +14ft +16ft +16ft +18ft +18ft +20ft +20ft +22ft +22ft +24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+26ft +26ft +24ft +24ft
+28ft +28ft +30ft +30ft
+24ft +24ft
+28ft +28ft +24ft +24ft +26ft +26ft
+24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft +24ft 2 +24ft
+24ft +24ft +24ft+24ft +24ft+24ft +24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
cable didge cable didge cable didge pier deteriorating deteriorating deteriorating pier pier section section section ruins ruins ruins +24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
cable didge deteriorating Cable ditch pier
+24ft +24ft
+24ft +24ft
Deteriorating pier section Section Ruins ruins
Waterfront section
189
Section 1: Wallabout Channel
tier 1 cso
tier 2 cso
tier 3 cso
Major CSO’s in Brooklyn Tier 1 CSO (50%) Tier 2 CSO (20%) Tier 3 CSO (15%) Concrete Landfill Sediment Bedrock
190
Sixth Borough
| Waterfront anatomy
section
The first section cuts through the
a deserted wasteland, but in the
Wallabout
of
1930’s it consisted of heavy industry
the Wallabout Creek, named after
such as the Williamsburg Branch
the
Power Station and the coal powered
Channel,
original
Walloon
terminus
inhabitants
(Wallabout=Waalse Bocht).
Brooklyn Union Gas Co. They are
The environmental conditions in this
long gone, but their presence is
part of the yard are dramatic. One of
felt in the form of soil contaminated
the three Tier 1 Combined Sewage
with metals, solvents, petroleum,
Outfalls (CSO’s) in Brooklyn has its
PCB’s and VOC’s. The site presents
output in the Wallabout Channel.
a current or potentially significant
These three CSO’s are responsible
threat to the public health and/
for nearly 50% of spilled raw sewage
or environment, was declared a
into Brooklyn’s waterbody.
Hazardous Waste Superfund Site
Specifically, this means that each
and
time it rains, raw, untreated sewage
Remediation Project in March 2009.
is dumped into the Channel making
Its unique location and its inactive
it into one of Brooklyn’s most polluted
status provides it, however, with
creeks.
the potential as a public waterfront
Nowadays, the adjacent land is
access site.
became
an
Environmental
Waterfront section
191
Section 2: dry dock 6, dry dock 1
Concrete Landfill Sediment Bedrock
192
Sixth Borough
| Waterfront anatomy
section
maritime
Corporation. With its stunning 580m
developments resulted in changed
by 46m it could fit a floating Freedom
techniques
With
Tower. Erected 90 years later than its
time, boats got bigger and the docks
predecessor, dry dock 1, construction
for constructing and repairing them
changed
developed in a similar way.
widespread emergence of reinforced
This shows very clearly in the
concrete resulted in the use of this
comparison of dry dock 1 with dry
material. An enormous amount of
dock 6.
concrete was poured into the basin.
In 1851, dry dock 1 with dimensions
Hundreds
of 85m by 12m was the first dry
prevent the dock from floating. The
dock
The
evolution of
in
construction.
spectacularly.
of
steel
The
anchorages
Yard.
massive eight meters thick base
Heavy granite blocks were used in
ensures the firmness of the dry dock
this construction to compensate the
but makes it an everlasting part of the
water pressure.
Navy Yard.
constructed
on
the
Dry dock 6, constructed in 1941, is the largest dry dock on the Yard and is still in use by GMD Shipping
Waterfront section
193
Section 3: pier c and pier d
gribbles
teredo worms
Deteriorating piers
Concrete Landfill Sediment Bedrock
194
Sixth Borough
| Waterfront anatomy
section
Since the 1930’s industrial waterfront
Teredo
activity
Inversely
equivalent of termites, devouring
proportional to this tendency, the
wooden pilings of structures. Even
water quality in the East River has
more alarming are gribbles which
improved. Slowly marine life returned
feed on concrete, making the piers
to the river and its creeks today,
deteriorate even faster.
diminishes.
worms
are
the
naval
making it, according to NYCDEP, suitable
for
secondary
contact
recreation.
Pier c and especially pier d, are both severely damaged despite the present industrial activity on their
Together
with
environmental
this recovery,
striking
surface.
smaller
organisms too are lurking in the water. Teredo worms and gribbles pose a real threat to the Navy Yard’s piers and bulkheads.
Waterfront section
195
Section 4: East River
NJ
BNY
New Jersey - BNY relationship
Concrete Landfill Sediment Bedrock
196
Sixth Borough
| Waterfront anatomy
section
The evolution from converted cargo
The Port Newark Container Terminal
vessels and tankers with a length of
in New Jersey is nowadays the prime
656 ft in the 1970’s to container ship
container harbor.
Panamax class - post Panamax class
A strong relation however remains
and post Panamax Plus class with
between the New Jersey Harbor and
lengths up to 1100 ft resulted in the
Brooklyn Navy Yard. The shipyard
East River waterfront area being no
facilities are in fact used by vessels
longer operable as prime container
in need of repair or dry-docking. To
ship harbor for the largest ships in the
remain competitive and economically
world. The clearance of the bridges
vital, an interstate fund was founded.
sets the restrictive condition with the
The
Brooklyn Bridge and Williamsburg
Fund will be used to dredge dry
Bridge being the lowest with their 135
docks 5 and 6 and their navigational
ft of underpass.
approach.
so-called
Bi-State
Dredging
Waterfront section
197
Channel Vision East River Exchange
Big & Small
Border Spectrum Bird’s Nest
What about Wallabout
On Top
E.A.T.
references
tHe evolution oF Bny BookS p 26
Berner, thomas F., The Brooklyn Navy Yard, San Fransico: arcadia Publishing, 1999
p 32
Berner, thomas F., The Brooklyn Navy Yard, San Fransico: arcadia Publishing, 1999
p 36
Berner, thomas F., The Brooklyn Navy Yard, San Fransico: arcadia Publishing, 1999
JournalS, articles & PuBliCationS p 26
“the Brooklyn navy yard,” Harper’s new monthly magazine, december 1870.
p 28
Brown, raymond J. “Floating derrick launches vessel.” Popular Science, march 1937.
p 36
mclendon, Charles. “underwater Construction Speeds naval dry docks.” Popular Science, may 1943.
imaGeS p 25
lutz, nancy e., “Part of nassau island”, map. 1766. Brooklyn Genealogy Information. accessed october 7, 2012. http://www.bklyn-genealogy-info.com/map/maps.main.html.
p 26 - 27
anon, “[u.S. navy yard Hospital, on wallabout Bay]”, lithograph. 1857. Walt Whitman’s Brooklyn. accessed november 12, 2012. http://www.whitmans-brooklyn.org/2010/06/navy-yard-hospital/ anon, “[naval lyceum]”, lithograph. 1845. The Brooklyn Navy Yard, San Francisco: arcadia Publishing, 19 anon, “[Birds eye of Brooklyn navy yard]”, lithograph. 1845. The Brooklyn Historical Society Blog accessed november 10, 2012. http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2011/11/29/more-brooklyn-navy-yard/ anon, “[map 1845]”, map. 1845. The Brooklyn Historical Society Blog accessed november 10, 2012. http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2011/11/29/more-brooklyn-navy-yard/ anon, “[map 1866]”, map. 1866. The Brooklyn Historical Society Blog accessed november 10, 2012. http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2011/11/29/more-brooklyn-navy-yard/
p 28
anon, “[Cannonball garden].” lithograph. 1851. Walt Whitman’s Brooklyn accessed november 9, 2012. http://www.whitmans-brooklyn.org/2008/07/cannonball-gardens/ anon, “[inside a navy yard ship shed].” lithograph. 1870. Walt Whitman’s Brooklyn, accessed november 9, 2012. http://www.whitmans-brooklyn.org/2008/06/navy-yard-water-view/ anon, “lincoln photo” Photograph. 1846. Turnstile Tours Blog accessed october 28, 2012. http://turnstiletours.com/the-brooklyn-navy-yards-lincoln-photo/#.uwemGl85r-0
p 30 - 31
nara, ”[admirals row]”, Photograph. 1877. National Archives & Records Administration. Accessed November 9, 2013. http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/picture_this/public/2011/11/10/188683-5brook lyn-navy-yard.jpg nara, ”[morris avenue]”, Photograph. 1904. National Archives & Records Administration. Accessed November 19, 2013. http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/picture_this/pub lic/2011/11/10/188683-5brooklyn-navy-yard.jpg nara, ”[Birds eye of Brooklyn navy yard]”, Photograph. 1924. National Archives & Records Administration. Accessed November 19, 2013. http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/picture_this/pub lic/2011/11/10/188683-5brooklyn-navy-yard.jpg anon. “map 1900.” map. 1900. The Brooklyn Historical Society Blog. accessed november 9, 2012 http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2011/11/29/more-brooklyn-navy-yard/ nyC Gov, “map 1924” aerial Photograph. 1924. accessed november 21, 2012. http://maps.nyc.gov/doitt/nycitymap/
p 32
202
nara, ”[Connecting Cob dock to the yard]”, Photograph. 1904. National Archives & Records Administration. Accessed November 2, 2013. http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/picture_this/pub
references
|the evolution of Bny
References
lic/2011/11/10/188683-5brooklyn-navy-yard.jpg anon, “[Crane located at dry dock 1]” Photograph, ca. 1924, Brooklyn Navy Yard Center at BLDG 92 Accessed November 28, 2012 http://www.flickr.com/photos/brooklynnavyyard/page7/ anon, “[rail lines at pier d].” Photograph, ca. 1924, Brooklyn Navy Yard Center at BLDG 92, Accessed November 28, 2012 http://www.flickr.com/photos/brooklynnavyyard/page4/ p 34 - 35
anon, “[women workers head home from the navy yard at quitting time].” Photograph, 1942. accessed november 5, 2012. new york, http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2012/07/davidson-on-preserving-the-brooklyn-na vy-yard.html Strock, George. “Patriotic workers.” Photograph, 1942. life archives, accessed november 24, 2012. http://images.google.com/hosted/life/64e557db5eff4372.html anon, “[Birds eye].” Photograph, 1944, Brooklyn Navy Yard Center at BLDG 92, Accessed November 28, 2012 http://www.flickr.com/photos/brooklynnavyyard/page6/ anon, “[map 1945]” aerial Photograph. 1945. accessed november 21, 2012 http://maps.nyc.gov/doitt/nycitymap/
p 36
nara, ”[dry dock 5 & 6]”, Photograph. 1941. National Archives & Records Administration. Accessed November 25, 2012. http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/picture_this/pub lic/2011/11/10/188683-5brooklyn-navy-yard.jpg anon, “[350-ton hammerhead crane]” Photograph. 1941. BLDG92 Brooklyn Navy Yard Center (blog). accessed 25 november, 2012 http://bldg92.org/blog/yard-guardian-the-350-ton-hammerhead-crane/
p 39
Fratini, Charles. “Carmela Nof answers a phone in an empty office of the Brooklyn Navy Yard.” Photograph, 1966. Daily News accessed november 23, 2012. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/admiral-row-back-gallery-1.1013156?pmSlide=1
p 40 - 41
trezza, Frank J. “Seatrain workers on a Break at the Brooklyn navy yard.” Photograph. 1977. Brooklyn Historical Society accessed november 13, 2012. http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2012/02/01/brooklyn-history-photo-of-the-week-seatrain-workers-atthe-brooklyn-navy-yard/ trezza, Frank J. “Seatrain worker.” Photograph. 1975. Brooklyn Historical Society accessed november 13, 2012. http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2012/02/01/brooklyn-history-photo-of-the-week-seatrain-workers-atthe-brooklyn-navy-yard/ trezza, Frank J. “Seatrain worker.” Photograph. 1975. Brooklyn Historical Society accessed november 13, 2012. http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2012/02/01/brooklyn-history-photo-of-the-week-seatrain-workers-atthe-brooklyn-navy-yard/ anon. “map 1961” map. 1961. Military Railroads of the New York Metropolitan Area. accessed november 15, 2012. http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/milrr/Bnymap.html
p 42
trezza, Frank J. “aerial view of the Brooklyn shipyard.” Photograph. 1972. Brooklyn Historical Society, accessed november 13, 2012. http://brooklynhistory.pastperfect-online.com/35872cgi/mweb.exe?request=record;id=44aF9e1dF8eC-4d25-9C05-437626849479;type=102 anon. “vlCC” Photograph. 2011. Safety 4 Sea accessed February 12, 2012. http://www.safety4sea.com/images/media/2011.11.23-%20vlCC.jpg
internet p 24
Colton, tim, “Public Shipyards” Shipbuilding History accessed February 1, 2013. http://shipbuildinghistory.com/history/shipyards/3public.htm.
p 26
Granger, russel. “navy yard Hospital” Whitman’s Brooklyn Last modified June 1, 2010. http://www.whitmans-brooklyn.org/category/navy-yard/. BnydC, “the History of Bny” Brooklyn Navy Yard Industrial Park. Last modified 2005. http://www.brooklynnavyyard.org/history.html.
p 30
Goldstein, Philip m. “Brooklyn navy yard/new york naval Shipyard.” Military Railroads of the New York Metropolitan Area. Last modified March 11, 2012. http://www.trainweb.org/bedt/milrr/bny.html “an introduction to the labor History of navy yards.” The Brooklyn Navy Yard: Civil Servants Building Warships. accessed november 10, 2012. http://www.columbia.edu/~jrs9/navy-yard-views.html
the evolution of Bny
203
p 36
anon, “map 2,” The Brooklyn Navy Yard: Civil Servants Building Warships accessed november 11, 2012. http://www.columbia.edu/~jrs9/navy-yard-views.html Goldstein, Philip m. “Brooklyn navy yard/new york naval Shipyard,” Military Railroads of the New York Metropolitan Area Last modified March 11, 2012. http://www.trainweb.org/bedt/milrr/bny.html wisner, meredith, “yard Guardian: the 350-ton Hammerhead Crane,” BLDG92 Brooklyn Navy Yard Center (blog), January 7, 2012. http://bldg92.org/blog/yard-guardian-the-350-ton-hammerhead-crane/
p 40
terry, Steve, “Brooklyn History Photo of the week: Seatrain workers at the Brooklyn navy yard,” The Brooklyn Historical Society February 1, 2012.http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2012/02/01/brooklyn-history-photo-of-the-week-seatrain-workers-at-the-brooklynnavy-yard/
p 42
Goldstein, Philip m. “Seatrain Shipbuilding,” n ustrial ffline Ter inal ailroa s of roo l n Manhattan. Last modified August 27, 2009. http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/indloco/sts.html
204
references
| the evolution of Bny
ueens
taten slan
ron
References
Brooklyn navy yard today JournalS, articles & PuBliCationS p 60-61
levere, Jane l. “Brooklyn navy yard, a roomy haven for industry, once again is booming”. new york times, august 29, 2007
p 62-63
nyCedC, mayor Bloomberg, City of new york, “new york City’s industrial Policy, Protecting and Growing new york City’s industrial Job Base”. [policy], January 2005, p 15-17 http://www.nycedc.com/system/files/files/industry/New%20York%20City%20Industrial%20Policy%20%282005%29.pdf
p 64-65
BNYDC. “Gate Hours”. Accessed January 20, 2013. http://www.brooklynnavyyard.org/gate_hours.html
p 74-75
BnydC. “available Space”. accessed January 22, 2013. http://www.brooklynnavyyard.org/bldg293.html Nitasha Tiku, BetaBeat. “Has Digital Dumbo Reached Maximum Capacity? Techies Drive Down Vacancy Rates for Office Space?”. accessed January 22, 2013. http://betabeat.com/2012/04/digital-dumbo-maximum-capacity-commercial-office-space-vacancy-rates-04042012/ nyCedC “downtown Brooklyn”. accessed January 22, 2013. http://www.nycedc.com/sites/default/files/filemanager/Services/Location_Services/Downtown_Brooklyn/CBD_1Q11_DB.pdf
p 76-77
NYC Department of City Planning. “Vision 2020: New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan, Appendix B: Significant Maritime and industrial areas”. [development vision], march 2011, page 169 manta. “Businesses at the Brooklyn navy yard”. accessed october 2, 2012. www.manta.com
p 82-83
Stobo, John r. “Ships Constructed at the navy yard”. accessed january 5, 2013. http://www.columbia.edu/~jrs9/Bny-Ships.html BnydC. “History of the Brooklyn navy yard”. [permanent exhibition at BldG92, Brooklyn navy yard, Brooklyn, ny] last visited october 13, 2012.
p 86-87
BnydC. “History of the Brooklyn navy yard”. [permanent exhibition at BldG92, Brooklyn navy yard, Brooklyn, ny] last visited october 13, 2012.
p 88-89
BnydC. “History of the Brooklyn navy yard”. [permanent exhibition at BldG92, Brooklyn navy yard, Brooklyn, ny] last visited october 13, 2012. kimball, andrew H. “news from the Brooklyn navy yard, BnyC92”. accessed april 8, 2013. http://www.brooklynnavyyard.org/newsletters/novnewsletter.html
p 90-91
Brooklyn Genealogy “Brooklyn in 1863... anniversary edition”. accessed march 3, 2013. http://www.bklyn-genealogy-info.com/newspaper/BSu/anniversary/1863.Bklyn.html anon. “u.S. navy Fleet Supply Base. Brooklyn, n.y.”, Photocopy of “a record of wartime activities”, by turner Construction, p 41. s.l.: s.n., 1919. accessed march 4, 2013. http://members.trainweb.com/bedt/milrr/ndfsbp2.gif BnydC. “existing tenants information”. accessed october 2, 2012. http://www.brooklynnavyyard.org/existing.html
p 92-93
Stobo, John r. “labor History time line for the Brooklyn navy yard”. accessed october 2, 2012. http://www.columbia.edu/~jrs9/Bny-labor-time-line.html BnydC. “History of the Brooklyn navy yard”. [permanent exhibition at BldG92, Brooklyn navy yard, Brooklyn, ny] last visited october 13, 2012.
p 93-94
olympus Power llC. “Brooklyn navy yard Cogeneration Plant”. accessed october 5, 2012. http://www.olympuspower.com/project_portfolio/current_projects/brooklyn.php the right to know network, “red Hook water Pollution Control Plant”. accessed october 5, 2012. http://data.rtknet.org/rmp/rmp.php?database=rmp&detail=3&datype=T&facility_id=100000124368 BnydC. “History of the Brooklyn navy yard”. [permanent exhibition at BldG92, Brooklyn navy yard, Brooklyn, ny] last visited october 13, 2012.
p 106-107
BnydC. “Green directory”. accessed april 6, 2013. http://www.brooklynnavyyard.org/Greendirectory/html-edition-professional/templates/liquid-green/index.html
p 108-109
Croghan, Lore. “Brooklyn Navy Yard businesses drowned in five feet of floodwaters struggle to survive”. Accessed April 7, 2013. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/soaked-navy-yard-firms-struggle-survive-sandy-article-1.1197016#ixzz2Psuj35oF Chapman, doug. “navy yard manufacturer iceStone uses Crowdsourcing to recover from Sandy”. accessed april 7, 2013. http://turnstiletours.com/manufacturer-icestone-recovers-from-sandy-with-crowdsourcing/#.uwlefZPriSp Howe, Jeff. “the rise of Crowdsourcing”. wired, issue 14.06. June (2006). accessed april 7, 2013. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds.html
Brooklyn navy yard today
205
References
imaGeS p 60-61
anon. “Builders of the world’s mightiest warships Pier J”. Photograph. 1973. Panoramio.com. accessed april 9, 2013 http://www.panoramio.com/photo/39481317 trezza, Frank J. “damaged Sea witch Ship”. Seatrain Shipbuilding Collection. Photograph. 1977. Brooklynhistory.org. accessed a april 9, 2013. http://brooklynhistory.org/blog/2012/06/01/tragedy-at-sea-the-sea-witch-and-esso-brussels-crash-in-1973/ dobkin, Jake. “inside the Brooklyn navy yard”. Photograph. 2008. accessed april 9, 2013. http://www.bluejake.com/2008/10/inside-the-brooklyn-navy-yard.html moore, andrew. “Brooklyn navy yard”. Photograph. 2011. accessed april 9, 2013. http://www.andrewlmoore.com/2011/brooklyn-navy-yard/
p 78-79
anon. “trans-Porter” Photograph. accessed april 8, 2013. http://www.dargelos.cc/ anon. “new wave design” Photograph. accessed april 8, 2013. http://aswoon.com/ anon. “Chimera military tactical vehicle” Photograph. accessed april 8, 2013. http://atair.com/ anon. “Bike rack” Photograph. accessed april 8, 2013. http://architecturama.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/a-walk-through-the-yard-part-9/
p 102-103
anon. “white Collar imdb cast image”. Photograph. 2012. imdb.com. accessed may 24, 2013. http://gal2.piclab.us/key/white%20collar%20imdb%20cast
p 108-109
anon. “Sandy Passing over Brooklyn navy yard”. Photograph. 2012. http://transportationnation.org. accessed april 7, 2013. http://transportationnation.org/2012/10/29/photos-sandy-moves-into-the-new-york-region/ anon. “icestone Hit Hard By Sandy”. Photograph. 2012. http://smallknot.com. accessede april 7, 2013. http://smallknot.com/icestone
206
references
| Brooklyn navy yard today
References
SURROUNDING TISSUE BOOKS p 130-139
Caro, Robert A., The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York. London: Vintage Publishers, 1975. Schwartz, Joel. The New York approach: Robert Moses, urban liberals, and redevelopment of the inner city. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1993.
p 134 -139
Ballon, Hillary. Robert Moses and the Modern City: The Transformation of New York. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008.
JOURNALS, ARTICLES & PUBLICATIONS p 134-139
Pogrebin, Robin. “Rehabilitating Robert Moses “, The New York Times, January 23, 2007. Accessed April 9, 2013. http://www.nytimes. com/2007/01/23/arts/design/28pogr.html?pagewanted=all
p 136
Dolkart, Andrew. “Wallabout Cultural Resource Survey, Report prepared for the Myrtle Avenue Revitalization Project LDC.“ Myrtle Avenue BID. (2005). Accessed April 9, 2013. http://www.myrtleavenue.org/WallaboutCulturalResourceSurvey.pdf Gill, John “Where History Meets Industry“, The New York Times, January 20, 2012. Accessed April 9, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/realestate/wallabout-brooklyn-living-in-at-the-intersection-of-history-and-industry.html Huang, Menglin. “Former Chocolate Factory Houses Now Upscale Lofts“, Changing Neighbourhoods CUNY Journallism Blog Post, May 21, 2012. Accessed April 9, 2013. http://changingneighborhoods.journalism.cuny.edu/2012/05/21/from-industrial-to-residentialbrooklyn-upscale-loft-finds-chocolate-root/
p 150-151
Progrebin, R., “The Lords of Dumbo Make Room for the Arts, at Least for the Moment”, The New York Times, March 6, 2010, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/06/arts/design/06dumb.html?pagewanted=all. Marino, V., “David C. Walentas”, The New York Times, January 22, 2010, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/w/david_c_walentas/index.html.
p 152-153
Wilson, C. H., “The myrtle avenue revitalization project LDC”, LISC, 1999, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://www.lisc.org/docs/publications/LISC_Brooklyn_NY_Final.pdf.
p 154-155
NYCHA, “PLANNYCHA, a roadmap for preservation”, New York City Housing Authority, December 2011, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycha/downloads/pdf/plan-nycha.pdf.
p 160-163
Dailey, J., “WXY Architecture to Design Brooklyn Tech Triangle Masterplan”, Tech Cocktail, January 28, 2013, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2012/11/05/wxy_architecture_to_design_brooklyn_tech_triangle_masterplan.php. Kamping-Carder, L., “Brooklyn’s tech triangle group chooses WXY to spearhead infrastructure plan”, The Real Deal, November 5, 2012, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://therealdeal.com/blog/2012/11/05/brooklyns-tech-triangle-group-chooses-wxy-to-spearhead-infrastructure-plan/. Fung, A., “Team will plan rising Brooklyn tech triangle”, Crain’s New York Businesses, November 5, 2012, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20121105/ECONOMY/121109959. Newman, K. M., “BrooklynTech Triangle hoping to attract more startups to Brooklyn”, Tech Cocktail, January 28, 2013, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://tech.co/brooklyn-tech-triangle-hoping-to-attract-more-startups-to-brooklyn-2013-01.
IMAGES p 124
Anon, “Eastern view (1851)”, picture, 2010. Accessed April 9, 2013http://www.whitmans-brooklyn.org/maps-and-views/.
p 125
Adapted From: Ratzer, Bernard, “Plan of the city of New York in North America : surveyed in the years 1766 & 1767“, Map, 1776. New York Public Library Digital Gallery. Accessed April 9, http://digitalgallery.nypl.org/nypldigital/id?434801 Adapted From: Burr, David H., “Map of the City and County of New York with the adjacent country“, Engraved Map. 1832. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection. Accessed April 9, http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/s/hs1tv5
p 126
Anon, “1879 Artist rendering of the Navy Yard with Cob Dock”, picture, 2005, Accessed April 9, http://www.brooklynnavyyard.org/ history.html.
p 127
Adapted From: Breese, Samuel. “New York and vicinity“, Engraved Map, 1845. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection. Accessed April 9, http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/s/5vrt14
p 128
McEnery,
D.,
“Cars
Parked
in
front
of
four
Navy
Yard
Uniform
Stores
on
Sand
Street”,
photograph,
2013,
Surrounding tissue
207
Accessed April 9, http://theworldofphotographers.com/2012/12/23/andreas-feininger-1906-1999-photographer/nyc03/. Anon, “Vanderbilt Avenue about 1950”, photograph, 2008, Accessed April 9, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/realestate/11streets html. Aumuller, A., “Wallabout Market, Brooklyn”, photograph, 1940. Museum Syndicate. Accessed April 9, http://www.museumsyndicate.com/ itemphp?item=64507. p 129
Adapted From: McNally, Rand. “Commercial Atlas of America. Rand McNally Standard Map of Brooklyn“, Atlas Map, 1924. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection. Accessed April 9, http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/s/3vd5hd
p 130
708718, “Looking Out Into Brooklyn On This Lovely Winter Day.. And The Sun Was Setting...”, photograph, 2012. Flickr.com. Accessed April 9, http://www.flickr.com/photos/708718/6906071123/. Sulfan, S., Screenshot from ”The BQE”, Video. New York City: Legacy Studios, 2007.
p 131
Adapted from: Shell Oil Company, “Shell Greater New York City (Eastern Section). To and Through Manhattan“, Atlas Map, 1956. David Rumsey Historical Map Collection. Accessed April 9, http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/s/2xq7pn
p 134
Schwartz, Joel, “The New York Approach”, Columbus, The Ohio State University Press, 1993, p.240.
p 146
Clark, R., “Ariel view of the Brooklyn Navy Yard”, photograph, 2012, http://urbanomnibus.net/2012/09/urban-industry-redefined-the-brooklyn-navy-yard/.
p 148
Anon., “Brooklyn Academy of Music”, Photograph, 2013, http://nyclovesnyc.blogspot.be/2013/01/the-brooklyn-academy-of-music.html. Google, “google street view Flatbush Avenue Extension”, photograph, 2011, https://www.google.com/maps.
p 150
Anon., “Hand-Written DUMBO Art Garage Sign”, photograph, 2010, http://www.heartfish.com/2010/09/30/found-type-dumbo-arts-festival-2010/. Anon., “Buildings on Dock street and now York Street”, photograph, 2009, http://dumbonyc.com/category/then-and-now/.
p 152
Anon., “Elevated Railroad on Myrtle Avenue”, photograph, http://www.mosholu.mysite.com/. Stolarik, R., “A murder scene”, photograph, 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/nyregion/19murder.html. Anon., “Pratt Institute Myrtle Hall”, photograph, 2011, http://learchitecture.wordpress.com/2011/01/31/pratt-institute-myrtle-hall-has-modern-twist/.
p 154
Stephen, L., “Projects Stuyvesant”, photographs, 2011, http://www.flickr.com/photos/stepheniliffe/5998809234/. Google, “google street view 622 Bedford Avenue”, photograph, 2011, https://maps.google.com/.
p 156
Johnwilliamsphd, “Satmar Family Brooklyn”, photograph, 2008, http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnwilliamsphd/3296890420/. Google, “google street view Farragut housing”, photograph, 2011, https://www.google.com/maps.
p 157
Le Brigand, C., “Hasidic Jews in Williamsburg” photograph, 2009, http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephanemissier/3392858939/in/set-72157616047968851.
p 158
Google, “google street view 622 Bedford Avenue”, photograph, 2011, https://maps.google.com/. Katz, K., “Brooklyn Navy Yard tashlich ritual”, photograph, 2002, http://www.brooklynmuseum.org/exhibitions/click/highlight.php?id=231.
p 162-163
Kensinger, N., “Drydock 1 on the Navy Yard”, photographs, 2010, http://kensinger.blogspot.be/2010/06/life-in-navy-yard.html. Kazis, N., “Central Business zone of Downtown Brooklyn”, photograph, 2010, http://www.streetsblog.org/2010/07/23/movement-afoot-to-drop-downtown-brooklyn-parking-minimums/. Bryn, “[view on Dumbo]”, photograph, 2012, http://papertastebuds.com/?cat=7&paged=2.
INTERNET
208
p 124
Morris, Montrose. “Building of the Day: 24 Evans Street.“ Last modified April 26, 2012. Accessed April 9, 2013. http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2012/04/building-of-the-day-24-evans-street/
p 128
Anon, “A 1920s poet haunts a Brooklyn red-light district.” Accessed April 9, 2013. http://ephemeralnewyork.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/ a-1920s-poet-haunts-a-brooklyn-red-light-district/.
references
| Surrounding tissue
References
p 130-132
NYC Roads by Eastern Roads “Brooklyn-Queens Expressway.“ Accessed April 9, 2013. http://www.nycroads.com/roads/ brooklyn-queens/
p 142
Brooklyn Jewish Historical Initiative, The. “Williamsburg.“ Accessed April 9, 2013. http://brooklynjewish.org/neighborhoods/ williamsburg/
p 146-147
New York City, “Business Improvement Districts”, April 7, 2013, http://www.nyc.gov/html/bkncb2/html/district/bids.shtml.
p 148-149
New York City, “Downtown Brooklyn”, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://www.nycedc.com/program/downtown-brooklyn. Anon., “Downtown Brooklyn Partnership”, April 7, 2013, http://downtownbrooklyn.com/. Anon., “NYCBID association”, April 7, 2013, http://www.nycbidassociation.org/.
p 150-151
Anon., “About DUMBO”, April 7, 2013, http://dumbonyc.com/about/. Anon., “DUMBO”, April 7, 2013, http://dumbo.is/home.
p 152-153
Anon., “Welcome to myrtle avenue”, April 7, 2013, http://www.myrtleavenue.org/.
p 154-155
New York City, “New York Housing Authorities”, April 7, 2013, http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycha/html/home/home.shtml.
p 156-159
Anon., “A life apart, Hasidism in America”, 1998, Accessed April 7, 2013, http://www.pbs.org/alifeapart/resources.html.
p 160-163
Anon., “Brooklyn Tech Triangle”, April 7, 2013, http://brooklyntechtriangle.com/.
Surrounding tissue
209
SiXtH BorouGH BookS p 180-181
nordenson, Guy; Seavitt, Catherine; yarinsky adam, On the Water: Palisade Bay, new york: the museum of modern art, 2010.
p 182-183
Bergdoll, Barry; oppenheimer, michael; rodin, Judith (foreword), Rising Currents: Projects for New York’s Waterfront, new york: the museum of modern art, 2011.
p 186-187
nordenson, Guy; Seavitt, Catherine; yarinsky adam, On the Water: Palisade Bay, new york: the museum of modern art, 2010. 132-139
p 192-193
Bartelstone, John, The Brooklyn Navy Yard, u.S.: powerHouse Books, 2009, 67
JournalS, articles & PuBliCationS p 178-179
Blumberg, alan F.; ali khan, liaqat; John, John P. St., “three-dimensional Hydrodynamic model of new york Harbor region.”, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, august (1999): 799-816.
p 180-181
Goulder, Cindy, “the cove between the bridges at Brooklyn Bridge Park.”, roo l n ri ge ar onser anc new york, (2012).
p 184-185
Croghan, Lore, “Brooklyn Navy Yard businesses drowned in five feet of floodwaters struggle to survive.”, New York Daily News, november 5, 2012. Spector, dina, “watch Hurricane Sandy live From every Corner of new york!”, Business Insider, ocotber 28, 2012.
p 192-193
anon, “dry dock walls Caves in. Section Falls into wallabout Channel at Brooklyn navy yard.”, The New York Times, may 11, 1902. Anon, “WW2 Era-Slingshot planes-bomber floods.”, Popular Science, may, 1943.
p 194-195
Bonanos, Christopher, “Secrets of the deep”, New York Magazine, may 10, 2009.
p 196-197
adams, kenneth, “new york Harbor - agreement with the Port authority of new york and new Jersey (“Pany&nJ”) for Funding with regard to the Joint dredging Plan.”, Empire State Development, october 20, 2011.
imaGeS p 184-185
emmons, Chase, “[destroyed apiary at the Brooklyn navy yard.]”, Photograph. 2012. BG Bees. accessed october 30, 2012. http://www.brooklyngrangefarm.com/hurricanebees/. Matthews, Bebeto, “[car in flooded Brooklyn during Superstorm Sandy.]”, Photograph. 2012. Associated Press. Accessed October 30, 2012. http://www.nrc.nl/inbeeld/2012/10/30/sandy-neemt-new-york-in/?utm_campaign=rss&utm_source=syn dication#. Mcmillianfurlow, “[flood marks on building at Navy Yard.]”, Photograph. 2012. Flickr.com. Accessed January 3, 2013. http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcmillianfurlow/8147769800/sizes/l/in/photostream/. Platt, Spencer, “[residual debris in dumbo, Brooklyn in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy.]”, Photograph. 2012. Associated Press. Accessed October 30, 2012. http://www.nrc.nl/inbeeld/2012/10/30/sandy-neemt-new-york-in/?utm_cam paign=rss&utm_source=syndication#. weisberg, Jackie, “[debris in the Brooklyn navy yard in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy.]”, Photograph. 2012. Flickr.com. Accessed February 25, 2013. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jackiew/8231162346/sizes/o/in/photostream/.
p 190-191
e. Belcher Hyde map Co. inc., “Brooklyn 1929 vol2. Plate 029.”, map. 1929. http://www.historicmapworks.com. accessed February 19, 2013. http://www.historicmapworks.com/atlas/uS/681/Brooklyn+1929+vol+2/.
p 192-193
Bartelstone, John, “[drydock 1, Brooklyn navy yard]”, Photograph. 2009. The Brooklyn Navy Yard, u.S.: powerHouse Books, 67.
210
references
| Sixth borough
References
internet p 178-179
New York Department of Environmental Conservation, “The Hudson Estuary: a river that flows two ways.” accessed February 19, 2013. http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/4923.html. uS army new york district, “the conquest of Hell Gate.” Historical report, January, 2008. accessed march 21, 2013. http://www.nan.usace.army.mil/Portals/37/docs/history/hellgate.pdf.
p 180-181
dlandStudio, “Gowanus Canal Sponge Park.” accessed February 23, 2013. http://www.spongepark.org.
p 182-183
Horton, radley; o’Grade, megan, “Climate risk information: new york City Panel on climate change.” report, February, 2009. Accessed January 17, 2013. http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2009/NPCC_CRI.pdf. national oceanic and atmospheric administration, “tides and Currents Prediction wallabout Bay.” accessed January 2, 2013. http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/noaatidepredictions/viewmonthlyPredictions.jsp?bmon=12&b day=15&byear=2012&timelength=monthly&timeZone=2&dataunits=1&datum=mllw&timeunits=2&interval=highlow&format=Sub mit&Stationid=8517732.
p 184-185
Center For urban research, “[Coastal Storm impact Zones.]” map, oasis maps, accessed January 19, 2013. http://www.oasisnyc.net/map.aspx.
p 188-189
national oceanic and atmospheric administration, “[nautical Chart of new york - new Jersey Bay.]” map Coast Survey, u.S. department of Commerce, accessed February 21, 2013. http://www.charts.noaa.gov/onlineviewer/12327.shtml.
p 190-191
NYC Storm Water Infrastructure Matters Coalition, “Tier 1 Combined Sewer Overflow Outfalls - NYC.” Map, Accessed February 19, 2013. http://habitatmap.org/profiles/287. Center for urban research, “[Coastal Storm impact Zones.]” map, oasis maps, accessed February 22, 2013. http://www.oasisnyc.net/map.aspx. department of environmental Conservation, “region 2 - environmental remediation Project information.”, accessed February 19, 2013. http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/37550.html. department of environmental remediation, “record of decision: Brooklyn navy yard 13-acre Parcel Site: operable unit no.1, Brooklyn, kings County, new york, Site no. 224019a.”, march 2009 Accessed February 23, 2013. http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/remediation_hudson_pdf/224019aroc.pdf. department of Health, “[environmental Facilities and Cancer map.]”, map, Accessed February 19, 2013. https://apps.nyhealth.gov/statistics/cancer/environmental_facilities/mapping/map/#.
p 194-195
anon, “water Quality.”, nyC Storm water infrastructure matters Coalition, accessed February 19, 2013. http://www.nycswim.org/templateview.aspx?ttyp=quality. anon, “water Quality.”, river to the people - the east river Blueway Plan, accessed February 20, 2013. http://www.eastriverblueway.org/category/follow-our-progress/water-quality/.
Sixth borough
211
Contributors
Tom Thys is an engineer-architect and the owner of the practice tom thys architecten. He is a design assistant at the k.u.leuven department of architecture, urban design and regional Planning since 1997.
Ward Verbakel is an engineer-architect and co-founder of plusoffice architects. He taught urban design studio at GSaPP Columbia university and is currently an adjunct professor at k.u.leuven department of architecture, urban design and regional planning. From 2006 to 2010 ward verbakel worked as adjunct professor for the post graduate urban design studio for the european master of urbanism. He has lectured at schools from leuven to nyC to Bangladesh and is a regular guest design critic for architecture schools
Mojdeh Baratloo is an architect and an associate professor of architecture at Columbia university Graduate School architecture Planning and Preservation, leading the design studios in architecture and urban design. For her professional practice she has received numerous awards and recognition for different projects. She is a recipient of several research grants and support by internationally recognized organizations such as national endowment for the arts, australian research Council and new york State Council on the arts. She also founded the urban research Group in 2004 and helped establish the Store Front for art and architecture in 1981. Heidi Bullinga is an architect and urban designer. She graduated from GSaPP and rice university and has her own practice in Brooklyn, ny. Joachim Declerck is an architect and urban designer. He is the co-founder and program director of architecture workroom Brussels. He graduated from the university of Gent and the Berlage institute. He has curated several exhibitions at the international architecture Biennale, BoZar, and the Berlage institute. From 2007 till 2010, he was the director of the Centre for architectural research and development at the Berlage institute, where he also served as an assistant professor beforehand. Erik De Deyn is an engineer-architect, urban planner and researcher at the k.u.leuven. His study focusses on regional infrastructure in Flanders. He studied engineer-architect at the k.u.leuven and landscape design at the universitat Politecnica de Catalunya.
Goedele Desmet Goedele desmet is an engineer-architect and an assistant professor at the department of architecture, urban design and regional Planning at the k.u.leuven since 2006. She co-founded BoB361 architectes. She is also the president of the editing council of the magazine a+ Belgian review of architecture. Francis Dewolf is an engineer-architect and urban planner and graduated from the k.u.leuven He has worked with Stefano Boeri and Gruppo a12 in milan and now works as an urban planner at Brut. Founded in 2005 Susanne Eliason is an architect and urban planner. She graduated from l’ecole nationale Superieure d’architecture de versailles and the uiC Chicago school of architecture. She is a partner at Grau, founded in 2010, a lecturer at l’ecole d’architecture de Paris-Belleville and was a master tutor at the Brussels international masterclass Lars Fischer is an architect. He is a founding member of the office Common Room and also operates an individual design practice. He is a teacher at the new york institute of technology. lars Fischer previously worked in the berlin office of Daniel Liebeskind and in the New York offices of Marble Fairbanks and leslie Gill. Christophe Grafe is trained as an architect and architectural historian at the tehcnical university of delft and the architecture association School in london. He is founder and director of Heritage consultants architects. in 2011 he was appointed director of the Flemish architecture institute in and in 2013 he received the call for the Chair of architectural History and theory at Berg university of wuppertal. He also is an editor of oase Journal for architecture and the Journal of architecture
Joseph Haberl Joseph Haberl is an architect and urban designer, trained at Columbia university and the university of milwaukee-wisconsin. He has been working with leeser architecture since 2002.
Dongsei Kim an architect an urban designer. He has studied architecture and urban design at Columbia university and design studies at Harvard. He curently is adjunct assistant professor at Columbia university and teaches urbanism studios at Carleton university, ottowa. He has taught at kyunghee university in korea and victoria university in wellington, nZ. He is a regular design critic at several universities.
Kaja Kuhl kaja kuhl is an architect and urban planner. She is the founder of youarethecity, a research and design practice in Brooklyn. Before founding youarethecity, she was an urban designer at the new york City department of City Planning. kaja kuhl is an adjunct professor of architecture at the new york institute of technology and has taught and lectured in new york and internationally. at Columbia university, kaja teaches studios and seminars in urban design and urban Planning. Andre Loeckx is doctor engineer-architect. He is a professor emeritus at the department of architecture, urban design and regional Planning at the k.u.leuven and was responsible for all the architecture theory, Housing and urban development, architectural aspects of Planning and Cultural Antropology classes at this department. He is a member of the editorial office of the Architectural yearbook from Flanders and of the task Force urban Policy of the ministry of the Flemish Community. Jan Mannaerts is an engineer-architect trained at the k.u.leuven. He is one of the three founders of 360 architecten bvba, since 2004. His office is in search for design assignments which need a research-oriented design approach. He regurlary visits the k.u.leuven as a mentor for several master theses. Justin Moore Justin G. moore is an urban designer and city planner for the City of new york department of City Planning. His remit includes involvement in the redevelopment of the city’s waterfront and high-density areas and this for a number of programs containing affordable housing, cultural and commercial centers, mixed-use industrial areas, and parks and open space. He also works as an adjunct assistant Professor of architecture at Columbia university in the graduate urban design and urban Planning programs. Justin moore is a leed accredited Professional, but also an active member of the new york urban league, the SuPeFront advisory Board, and the Brooklyn Greenway initiative’s technical advisory Committee. He has been awarded with the department of City Planning’s Barney rabinow Service award and the michael weil urban design award.
Benoit Moritz is an architect and urban planner. He was trained at iSaCF la Cambre and uPC Barcelona. He currently works as an associate at MS-A, office for urbanism and architecture.
Christiaan Nolf Christian nolf is a Phd researcher at the research Group urbanity & architecture (oSa) and teaching assistant at the department of architecture, urban design and regional Planning at the k.u.leuven since 2008 Nina Rappaport nina rappaport is an architectural critic, curator, and educator. She is publications editor at yale School of architecture. Her current research and projects focus on the intersection of urban design and infrastructure, innovative engineering, and factory spaces. She recently published ‘Support and resist: Structural engineers and design innovation’, ‘Connecting the arts’, exploring long island City’s vibrant arts-and-industrial community. Her exhibitions include “the Swiss Section” at the van alen institute, 2003, and “Saving Corporate modernism,” yale School of architecture, 2001, among others. She also is a chair member of docomomo new york.
Michael Ryckewaert michael ryckewaert is an engineer-architect and urban designer. He is a researcher in the department of architecture, urbanism and Planning, k.u.leuven, since 1998, where he also teaches design studio and seminars on housing. He is a researcher at the research Group urbanity & architecture (oSa) since 2007, also at kuleuven. He has done research on housing, social exclusion, and the position of these phenomena in the urban landscape. in 2008, he was awarded with the three-yearly prize of Science and technology of the academic Foundation leuven.
Giovanni Santamaria Giovanni Santamaria is an architect and urban designer, trained at the i.u.a.v of venice. He earned a Ph.d at the Polytecnic university of milan. He is an adjunct professor of architecture at the new york institute of technology. Prior to this, he was a contract professor and researcher at the Politecnico de milano from 2004 until 2008.
Kris Scheerlinck is an architect and urban designer living and working in antwerp, Barcelona and new york City. He studied architecture at the Sint lucas School of architecture Gent and urban Planning in the university of Gent. He obtained the title of master in the universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (uPC, etSaB) in Barcelona, and his doctoral degree at the universitat ramon llull, la Salle architecture School, under Prof. manuel de Solà-morales.
Kelly Shannon is an doctor professor at the k.u.leuven. She was trained at the k.u.leuven, the Berlage institute and Carnegie mellon university. She teaches landscape architecture, and her research topics focus on water urbanism. She has published ‘landscape of contemporary infrastructure, next to several other publications.
David Graham Shane is adjunct professor of architecture, Planing and Preservation at GSaPP, Columbia university. He was trained at architecture association and earned his master and Ph.d. at Cornell univeristy. He has taught design at the architectural association, rice university, Cornell university and Columbia university, Cooper union and City College ny, and has given lectures all over the united States, europe and asia. He has been pubilshed widely in architectural journals and is the author of ‘recombinant urbanism: Conceptual modeling in architecture, urban design and City theory’ and ‘urban design since 1945’ Maarten Van Acker is an engineer-architect and urban planner. Since 2005, he is a lectureron the urban design theory course, part of the master’s program on urbanism and Spatial Planning run by the antwerp university association at the artesis Hogeschool antwerpen. He is conducting a post-doctoral research at Parsons, the new School For design, on urban (infra) structures. He has been a Phd researcher at the research Group urbanity & architecture (oSa) , k.u.leuven from 2007 until 2011. He also worked from 2004 until 2007 for the Planning department of the City of antwerp. He contributed as an author or (co-) editor to several books and publishes regularly in professional journals. Kiki Verbeeck is an architect. She co-founded the office URA in 2002. URA consciously works on basis of spheres and programmation. it never starts a project on an aesthetic basis, but creates architectural puzzles out of a deep-going study. She was a teacher at Sint-lucas Hogeschool in 2006.
Joke Vermeulen Joke vermeulen is an architect and a design assistant at the department of architecture, urbanism and Planning, K.U.Leuven. Together with Francis Catteeuw, she founded the office Compagnie o in 2008. it is a multidisciplinary design studio for architecture, urbanism and landscape design.