Tuesday night I went to the South Brooklyn SIRR meeting at Lincoln High School in Coney Island. The SIRR representatives gave a quick presentation with an overview of how the area was affected as well as opportunities and challenges for the area in rebuilding. Nate Bliss, president of the Coney Island Development Corporation, gave part of the presentation. He showed a historical map of the area showing the familiar pattern of damage and historic shoreline. He noted that the Army Corps of Engineers Beach Nourishment project was successful in breaking the wave action, but most flooding came from what they termed "backdoor inundation". He highlighted the area's key concerns as: oceanfront exposure, "backdoor inundation," vulnerable housing stock, and local economic vulnerability. Neil Kittredge from architectural firm BBB then gave a short overview of design interventions that have been implemented around the world intended to provide protection against storms and sea-level rise. He emphasized that what works elsewhere would not necessarily succeed in New York. These optioned ranged from sea walls, to wetlands revitalization to the relocation of mechanical systems to higher elevations.
The meeting then broke out into our table groups for discussion to brainstorm a list of strengths and vulnerabilities and to draw them on a map provided to each table. The discussion was lively highlighting what residents enjoyed about the area (the beach, sunshine, public transportation, sense of community) and where there were problems (poor drainage, hospitals & nursing homes affected, high-rise residential problems). Some residents described the area "Treasures" as being the aquarium, amusement areas, boardwalk and the overall seaside environment. Overall the residents wanted to see more natural interventions like beach nourishment and dune regrowth. The residents at my table also wanted to emphasize the work of FEMA and other groups, specifically Occupy Sandy, that did a good job at getting immediate emergency relief to the area like food and clothing. While all of the topics discussed are too numerous to list, the themes are familiar.
Overall the SIRR meeting seemed very productive in gathering community input for possible resiliency interventions. I think it is a great program and the interaction between city and residents was more positive than I would have expected . However, I did not hear much mention about historic resources other than the landmarked amusement rides, nor did I get the impression that this was the proper forum to discuss the topics of our specific concern. While a fascinating meeting, the themes were familiar and I think outside the scope of our project.
Any thoughts?
The parallels between the session I attended and this one are interesting. The residents in my group also identified the work of community groups (like Red Hook Initiative) as being a positive outcome, and identified the issues of medium/high rise, high density buildings as problematic. Like you, I heard little mention of historic resources (other than what I threw into the conversation), but I do think that since this is the forum for recovery and prevention there is definitely a place for bringing historic preservation into the discussion. I think this across the board lack of its prevalence shows that there is a big opportunity for outreach, not so much in terms of prioritizing preservation over other recovery issues, but in terms of using it as a tool to aid recovery (as we have discussed in class in terms of tax credits, designation, documentation, etc.).
ReplyDelete