Superficial Sustainability at Duke : Garden Street Store demolished rather than moved
Former Garden Street Store, 09.06.09
With 'Green' and 'Sustainable' being tossed around so casually these days by the marketing department of every institution and corporation, it's hard to get a sense of whether there is any substance behind the rhetoric. When you can get a solid view of a group/institution/corporation's actions, behind the press releases and eco-parties, you can see how the decision-making really plays out.
Because preservation is not part of the hip, green, shiny-solar-panel fad that is going on in the moment (which will inevitably fade away) but does represent the most sustainable re-use of building resources, it's a good barometer of whether sustainable decisions are made outside of the marketing department.
Duke tore down the most significant historic structure remaining in the western portion of the West Durham mill village last week - the Garden Street Store - in order to build a new faux-historic store on the spot. It appears that they are preparing to demolish at least one of the adjacent mill houses as well. The most bizarre aspect of this is that Duke assured members of the community several years ago that they would allow the community an opportunity to move the structures, and contribute a token amount towards the moving costs.
After Central Campus plans went into deep freeze for awhile, the only indication that something was happening here was the astute community pickup of a site plan submission to the planning department, which detailed the impending demolition of the structures. Calls to Duke regarding the moving of the structures elicited disinterested responses.
Former Garden St. Grocery in its upright state, 04.04.09
Why? Even ignoring the best option, which would be to reuse the structures on site, why not allow the community to move the structures? How much sweat off the back of Duke does that involve? The structures get gone, and Duke gets some decent PR in the community. Instead, the structure highlighted by the historic survey as the most significant structure remaining in the entire Central Campus area (aside from the already-moved-for-a-parking-lot Blacknall House) is just a pile of useless rubble.
I understand that there may be costs involved in doing the right thing, in making sustainable environmental choices - and companies/institutions can't always take additional costs on the chin and stay viable - tough choices must sometimes be made. But here the costs to Duke were neutral, and it becomes clear that Duke's commitment to sustainability is absolute - unless it is inconvenient. Is that Bleeding Blue, Living Green?
Posts
16 comments:
Over and over again, one-two senior administrators at Duke have shown they can not be trusted. Last month, we asked Duke to place the Garden Street Store on beams. We'd then go down the long list of people who expressed an interest in one of the mill village buildings -- and have it moved.
University officials knew the store was a priority to save. Instead, Duke neglected the store and demolished it over the weekend.
One-two Duke administrators can not be trusted.
Look at Duke's attempts to close Maxwell Street. On December 1st, Duke folks (working for Tallman Trask) testified to City Council that the university had no plans to block Maxwell. Yet, Trask already had a 10-day old Site Plan on his desk -- showing three gates across Maxwell.
He knew. And he didn't try to set the record straight.
Another broken promise. Another example of why you can't trust Duke.
Trask won't hesitate to mislead "partnership" neighborhoods, other Duke administrators and elected officials. Trask is deliberately undermining genuine efforts at the university to improve town-gown relations.
For an institution that's so worried about its image, one wonders why Trask is still calling the shots. Duke can do better. Much better.
This is utterly disgraceful. I sent an email to President Brodhead asking how he could let this happen.
I'll post his answer, but in the meantime I suggest that other people (particularly Duke alums) fill up his inbox.
That's a damned shame. I never knew about it until you posted a highlight on it back in the spring. I ventured out to see it shortly after, and went by it again in early August. The 'rent-a-fence' was up at that time.
Seth
seth@realtor.com
Follow up:
I love how they put cones and tape around the trees! Don't do anything to piss off the tree huggers! Even though the trees will grow back and the store will not!
Seth
How about dropping Broadheads email addy here so we can all flood his inbox??
Brodhead's email address is
president@duke.edu
You might also try sending an email to his wife who is a member of Preservation Durham, and has the title, "Senior Advisor for External Relations."
(It doesn't appear that she advised on this.) Her email is
cynthia.brodhead@duke.edu
Below is information from Duke's Site Plan. As you can see, Duke does not even list the Garden Street Store. Nor does Duke list 1923 Yearby. Yet, both historic structures are located inside Duke's construction fence.
Duke submitted incorrect addresses and vague information on its Site Plan...
> Application # D0900172 (DRB)
> Application Type Simplified Site Plan Small
> Project Name Duke Mill Village
> Physical Address
> 1919 YEARBY Avenue
> 1913 YEARBY Avenue
> 1921 YEARBY Avenue
> 1907 ERWIN Road
Cynthia Broadhead is also on the board of Preservation North Carolina:
http://www.presnc.org/About-Us/Preservation-NC-Board
i dont guess i have to say that it is a more expensive option to save the place, saving it cant fit into any short or long term plan, and i dont know if any of you "alums" actually work there but when one of the wealthiest and most philanthropical organizations in the state starts giving people early retirement- maybe you could cut them some friggin slack. This might have saved a career or two. And on another note, you all ever thought that if you were not trying to save every little dump in Durham that people wouldnt feel rushed to tear down the ones with meaning before you all drop a boatload of restrictions all around the property and thwart another possibility to combine parcels and clean up this dump.
Oh and if you care so much- why didnt you all move the place?
Please done tell me that no one here knew this was going to happen. How could you not.
Its bittersweet- I hope you all learn to pick your battles from this.
Anon
Reading the article and the previous comments regarding Duke's assurance that they would allow the community an opportunity to move the structure would be a good start before making comments like this. I can never convince people with less construction experience that 'new construction is cheaper' is not a truism. Beyond that, you can't really make a logical argument that someone else moving the structure isn't cheaper than Duke demolishing it.
I'm not sure what salaries have to do with anything in that light. As I said in the post, moving the structure was cost-neutral for Duke. As an alum of both Duke-as-school and Duke-as-employer, I seriously doubt the capital project budget is mixed with wages. If it is, why do this project at all right now? Why demolish a bunch of buildings and then build new ones for a new campus grocery store and restaurant? Why not leave the buildings alone and notearly retire someone?
GK
GK
Dear Anonymous September 8, 2009 at 1:58PM:
Why no name? Anonymity = no credibility on sites like this. Either write your name after an entry, or go find some health care rally to protest.
Myers Sugg
lots of assumptions Gary. I read the "above comments" and I also had 10 years of experience in this field when you were checking prostates and talking about leaving medicine and fulfilling your dream of rehabilitating and protecting Durhams crackhouses.
From what I have read here, there was no viable alternative plan for the building- John Schlep asked them to put it on beams? then he would find a place to put it? anyone with project management experience would be all over that opportunity.
you all are actually emailing Trask about this!? I cant WAIT to see his reply. I am going to email George Bush about Guantanamo too and will let you all know what he says.
So Gary you are telling me that impeding Duke's progress for making use of this space, which is very well located for a number of different uses, and therefor its ability to staff up new programs, relocate other ones, move operations around while there is a billion dollar hospital medical center development underway etc. does not put any hiring at risk? The possibilities of what could be on this land in 5 years are limitless... and you think you can put a price on it. Perfect example of the arrogance it takes to walk in your shoes
Just a quick glance of this parcel and the ones around it including the parking lot by the freeway, offers all sorts of ideas of how this property could be used. Your notion that its less expensive to save existing buildings in their current location is CRAZY when it could prevent a fairly large piece of land from being assembled that would border campus, the proposed rail line, and and existing residential area that will likely be redeveloped as a much higher-density residential area eventually. There is no way this building can stay, and if you want to be able to move these buildings before they get smashed, then you folks need to come up with something a little better than "hey Duke, use your people, time, and money to put that building on beams- oh and do it carefully... while you are doing that let me try and figure out if I have somewhere I can put it- im not sure how long it will take for me to get it removed but ill get back to you".
brilliant.
Dearest Anon
You've still ignored the fundamental point that moving the structure, at the expense of the structure-taker, would be cost neutral for Duke. And that Duke stated to the community, Preservation Durham, et al, that they would not only give the community an opportunity to move the structure, but that they would contribute money towards the cost.
Duke has stated that they plan to build a new small convenience/grocery store on the footprint of the old one to house the replacement for Uncle Harry's. They are planning some cafe replacement for the Pub as well. This isn't thousands of medical center jobs on a big structure constructed on a newly cleared chunk of land. Lots of assumptions, anon.
Arrogance is making such assurances, and then blowing them off, because Duke is too big for their commitments to the community to matter. People took them at their word - if they'd said "hey we plan to demolish this instead in x months - you have that time to come up with a plan" people would have done so - rather than happening upon the plan in a site plan submittal.
I'd appreciate it if you are going to get personal with your vitriol and invoke details about my life if we were properly introduced. Seems fair to me.
GK
Anon is clearly a troll, and is best ignored.
The article below provides a summary of what Duke promised. Duke officials emphasized that the time-frame was not immediate. Later, university officials put all their Central Campus plans on hold.
The community held up its end by developing a list of people who had a site to move the mill village buildings. (Our track record of facilitating the house-move from Markham to Edith speaks for itself.)
Duke did not hold up its end of the deal. (Anon, if you don't like what Duke agreed to do -- your dispute should be with Duke.)
~John
Duke to give away historic Central houses
Duke Chronicle, 5 Feb 2007
so, no one has received any email responses from Duke administrators yet?
Post a Comment