Local Assemblyman

Today I received a sympathetic reply from Assemblyman Steven Cymbrowitz to my letter regarding the house and the larger architectural/historical issues in Manhattan Beach. I feel very encouraged which is nice, even though demolition continues. So far, the workers have knocked down the second garage (the northern one). I will try and stop by the Sheepshead Bay office some time soon and perhaps meet him in person.

I never provided an update on the information I found last week at the City Register and the Department of Finance. The City Register, as you may know, has records of the transferring of deeds. The red books only went as far back as the 1940s.

But the purpose of my visit was to go back a step further, from 1946, to see whether there was a previous owner from whom Joseph P. Day Inc purchased the property or whether it originated as a lot under his company or Austin Corbin's. (Corbin Place was a later addition to the selling of Manhattan Beach property).

Older records were kept in another set of books (like the one below):

Block 7516 was divided into an alphabetized series, as it included roughly half of the entire Manhattan Beach. The image is 7516-O.

Much to my dismay, only 1/3 of the alphabet is there in the stacks. Two workers there had no information about where the rest might be and suggested that they may have been stolen even. What a shame.

Of course, the west side of Corbin Place belongs to one of the missing books so any trace to discover the house's history during the 1910-30s is lost to me. One interesting thing was to see how orderly the older books were. Typed on pages better preserved than the 1940s-1960s red block book that was hand-written.

Afterward, I ventured upstairs to the DoF with the 1946 entry's reel number to look at the actual Joseph P Day/Herman Field deed transfer. As the attendant was reading the deed aloud at the microfilm station, a man two stations away overheard and said,
"Herman Field? I knew Herman Field."
I felt I was in a mystery movie, (the Agatha Christie kind). He continued,
"Yeah, his wife was my elementary school teacher."

It turns out that this man, (maybe an expediter since he seemed so friendly with the workers there), has been living in Brighton Beach and went to school at PS 225. He explained that Herman Field was a photographer and took pictures of old Manhattan Beach and of various events or parties. He also said that Herman had a photo studio near the Lincoln Savings Bank back when stores were there and that he still has one of the photos. I was tempted to ask the man for his name but figured I could always return and ask the DoF staff. (They let him go around the counter and pull his own microfilm too.) My last question was whether he thought anyone knew of Herman Field. He waved his hand and said no, probably not.
"Not even the older Manhattan Beach residents?," I asked.
"Yeah, probably."

and so it is.

This 1911 notice doesn't mention house numbers or which side of the street the purchase was made on. The lots may still have been empty at that point.

1908 map

I'm not sure who the author is from but it's a small portion of a 1908 map from page 81 from Merlis & Rosenweig's Brooklyn's Gold Coast: The Sheepshead Bay Communities.

My efforts, even if unappreciated, are at the very least a case study of what is lost with demolition.

If others did not believe in the same there wouldn't be historical districts, historical societies stocked with photos of ordinary street scenes nor would the city be making a profit by offering pictures of houses from 1940s. Why would they if only a handful cared?

These pictures barely show much context. By chance, there may be a person or car in view, from which you can get a sense of the time. But the point is the house. It's existence.

Dept of Buildings/City Register

Yesterday's trip to the Municipal Building requires a follow-up visit. The Department of Buildings has no folder on 230 Corbin and if they had, it would have been located off-site in a New Jersey storage box which is the case for my family house.

My quest to find the architectural plans was to discover the actual date it was constructed, by which architect, and for whom exactly. Since I did not have the original owner's name I was told to look through these antiquated red Block books. They are filled with hand written entries, similar to the format St. Margaret Mary Church had for its records of the baptisms and deaths of its parishioners in the early 1900s.

The entries are chronological, but that is the only form of organization I could tell in my 5 minutes of research. The first page started with Coleridge St. The other difficulty is that the entries do not always list a house number. For instance, they state "Coleridge Street, 480 x 60, 300 feet from Esplanade. I'm not sure exactly where the distance markers would be taken since the Esplanade is pretty much gone. Google Earth shows that 230 Corbin is roughly between 555 or 590 feet away from the edge.

I skimmed quickly through it and happened upon a 1945 entry where 230 Corbin was transferred to Herman Field from Joseph P. Day. This transfer came after the tax photo was taken. I still want to see if there are any previous owners listed next time and when the house was actually built. But regardless, my findings show that the Fields owned the property for 63 years. I also spotted an entry that showed that the property that Washington Mutual (previously Lincoln Bank) was also owned by Joseph P. Day.

Bay News May 8th article

Bay News Article online

In response I just wanted to say that Mr. Brodsky's statement that Corbin Place is without context is somewhat subjective. There is a historical context regardless simply by its location. For instance, the Shrine of St. Elizabeth Seton across from Battery Park is out of context among the tall office buildings.

I don't expect everyone to see the house's significance immediately. On a microcosmic scale, the house is linked to the rest of Manhattan Beach's eclectic style: wood framed houses recessed within the lot, stained glass windows, an appreciation for green space. On a macrocosmic scale, the house is a placemark on the boundary line of Manhattan and Brighton Beach.

Brooklyn Historical Society

I went to the Brooklyn Historical Society on my quest to find even more reason to preserve 230 Corbin Place but was not completely successful. Mapping done in the early part of the 20th century either seems incomplete as you get close to the shore or missing, most likely due to the changing shoreline or fact that the community was summer vacationing spot, not fully residential. I'm not sure.

The 1929 Sanborn Map is the only set BHS on file that showed something of the area. Even by the 1966 edition, Manhattan Beach had not been updated to reflect any construction. Weird. Only a few neighborhoods like Carroll Gardens were revised. Anyway, the 1929 map only detailed addresses/properties for the west side of Corbin Place not the east which is what I need. The west side have many vacant lots, one of which was being used as a tennis court. What I did learn, however, was that the shoreline behind the house did extend more than halfway up the length of Brighton Beach today, similar to the photo I've already posted. I also read that due to overcrowding on the Coney Island and Brighton beaches, the boardwalk was hydraulically lifted and moved northward to widen the beach.

Below is a portion of a map by E. Belcher Hyde Map Co. in 1913.

I believe the curvy line was the shoreline (?). I can't tell. But there appears to have been no houses built below the south side of Oriental Boulevard. This contradicts, of course, the estimation that 230 Corbin was built circa 1910.

The only other document of interest at BHS was correspondence regarding R. Moses' plan for re-constructing the esplanade to connect Brighton Beach and Manhattan. In a 1952 photograph of the southern end of Corbin, the apartment building can be seen. By 1955, the house closest to the water along the west side of Corbin (directly across from the apartment building) was under construction.

Department of Records 1940s tax photo

I received this today. How eerie it is to not see the apartment building behind.

Message to Tierney

As simple minded as this letter may be, below is a message submitted through LPC's contact Tierney page. They only allow 150 words. I'll write something more formal once I get through my last final exam tomorrow.

Dear Mr. Tierney,

I am an architecture student and life long resident of Manhattan Beach and I am asking for your support in getting Manhattan Beach recognized as a historical district. I have been told by community members that it has been tried but that we do not qualify for our low number of historic houses. 230 Corbin Place is one home that has been unaltered in its 100 years of life and the DOB has processed demolition paperwork for it. This house is a representation of Manhattan Beach's vernacular architecture of the 1900s. If the city continues to allow these structures to be torn down, we may never qualify.

Please help us allow the LPC determine the historical significance of our homes and whether the city owes it to my generation and those that follow to ensure that physical records of our constructed accomplishments remain.

Sincerely,

Valerie Landriscina

Historic Districts

This is an excerpt from The Historic Districts Council website:

PRESERVING YOUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD
MYTHS against historic designation

Property owners often complain, "You can't tell me what to do with my property!"

New York City landmarks designation does place additional restrictions on historic properties, which most often involve exterior changes. Designation is designed to protect and preserve properties and neighborhoods. This can be beneficial to a property owner by preventing undesirable changes to neighboring buildings that could take away from property values and the ambience or enjoyment of the property.

Changes and alterations to properties will require approval by the Landmarks agency over and above Department of Buildings permits.

Once designated, properties may require a permit from LPC for proposed changes. Most changes reviewed by Landmarks are for exterior work done to the site.

Historic buildings incur higher maintenance costs.

Although there can be an additional expense for historically appropriate repair and maintenance of historic buildings, property owners generally find the additional costs offset by higher revenue and property values.

If my property is designated, Landmarks will make me restore the building.

False. The LPC does not require restoration for designated properties. Landmarks can make recommendations for restorative treatment when other work is being done to the property.

Historic designation hurts real estate and development values of designated properties.

This is often a double-edged sword. Development is permitted in historic districts. Developers are subject to the same approval process by the LPC as are other property owners. Even though development may be reviewed in terms of aesthetics, height, and bulk, developers may very well benefit from the prestige and association with the historic district, as well as corresponding higher values.

Developers can benefit from tax credits when renovating income- producing historic properties that have National Register designation.

The real estate community markets historic properties in a way that places emphasis and greater value on the building’s and neighborhood’s special character. Higher property values often accompany historic designation.

In 2003, the Independent Budget Office of New York published a study that definitely showed that properties within designated New York City historic districts raise more in value over the long-term than identical properties not in historic districts.