Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov

Page created by Perry Daniel
 
CONTINUE READING
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
i                                                                          3X3 DESIGN US LLC

REPORT

Shared vision for 70
Mulberry Street

Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS)

Submitted by
3x3 Design
196 State St., Floor 3
Brooklyn, NY 11201
December 2020
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
ii

Abbreviations

5G					Fifth Generation Mobile Network
ADA					Americans with Disabilities Act
Advisory Committee 70 Mulberry Street Advisory Committee
C.B.J. Snyder			   Charles B.J. Snyder
COVID-19			        Coronavirus Disease 2019
CP					Chinese-American Planning Council
CMP				Chinatown Manpower Project
DCAS				           New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services
DDC					           Department of Design and Construction
DOB					           New York City Department of Buildings
FAR					Floor Area Ratio
Gym					Gymnasium
JACCC				          Japanese-American Cultural and Community Center
M					Million
MoCA				           Museum of Chinese in America
NYC					New York City
OACC				           Oakland Asian Cultural Center
PhD					Doctor of Philosophy
PS 23				          Public School no. 23
QR					Quick Response
UEAA				           United East Athletic Association
ULURP				          Uniform Land Use Review Procedure
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
iii                                                                      3X3 DESIGN US LLC

Table of
Contents

      01 02 3A
      Background                   Community           Findings: General
                                   Visioning Process
                                   Design

      A community anchor           Objectives          Essence of time

      Current 70 Mulberry Street   Lines of inquiry    Multifaceted opportunity for the
      tenants                                          future of Chinatown
                                   Methods
      Collective cultural                              Potential transfer of ownership
      heritage                     Limitations
                                                       Possibility of reduced budget
      Tragedy turned to                                allocation
      opportunity
                                                       Loss of unique character
      The City’s commitment
                                                       Negative impact of a high-rise
      Project timeline                                 on the neighborhood
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
3B 3C 3D 04
Findings: The Role Findings: Building                Findings: Service            Recommendations
of 70 Mulberry     Design and                        Offerings and
Street             Considerations                    Programming

Community anchor    Architectural legacy and         Community needs              Guiding principles and role
                    design dimensions
Cultural Heritage                                    Existing cultural and        Program and service offerings
                    Preservation versus full         multipurpose spaces
Learning            demolition                                                    Building design and
                                                     New programs and offerings   considerations
                    Adaptive reuse versus new
                    space planning                                                Community space management

                    Building height and floor area

                    Current versus extended
                    programming

                    Additional community
                    concerns
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
01                                                                                                                  3X3 DESIGN US LLC

01                   Introduction

70 Mulberry Street is a historic           A community anchor                             to hereafter as 70 Mulberry Street tenants)
landmark that holds memories of                                                           that, through their program and service
generations and a history that is          70 Mulberry Street was designed by             offerings, have continued the building’s
deeply woven into the community it         influential architect Charles B. J. (C.B.J.)   legacy as an anchor of activity and source
                                           Snyder to operate as a 31-classroom            of pride of the community.
serves. Designed and operated as
                                           elementary school with capacity for nearly
Public School (P.S.) 23 in the late        1,700 students.3 Designated as Public          Current 70 Mulberry Street tenants
1800s, generations of community            School no. 23 (or PS 23), and later The
residents were taught at 70 Mulberry       Columbus School by the New York City           –   Chen Dance Center: “Established
Street in its early days. In its more      Board of Education, the newly constructed          in 1979, Chen Dance Center
recent history, the five-story red brick   school was meant to serve as a model for           has been dedicated to serving
building was home to non-profit            future public schools creating students with       the Asian-American community
community groups, and as such,             a safe and healthy learning environment.           and the New York City dance
                                           Snyder saw school buildings as “civic              community. This commitment is
served as an anchor to its community
                                           monuments for a better society,” and in            demonstrated through arts education
within and beyond Chinatown.               his designs he was particularly focused            at the School, opportunities and
In January 2020, 70 Mulberry Street        considerations related to fire safety,             production services at the Theater,
was severely damaged by a five-alarm       ventilation, lighting, and classroom size.4        and a modern dance Company
fire that destroyed the top three          Among Snyder’s innovations in PS 23 was            known for moving presentations
floors and displaced its five tenants.1    the basement auditorium, the provision             of Asian-American experiences.
                                           of which marks a critical step in the              The Center is also dedicated
In July 2020, the City of New York
                                           movement to provide community centers              to presenting a robust annual
announced $80 million in funding           and neighborhood meeting halls within New          educational programming to schools
to rebuild 70 Mulberry Street. As          York City public school buildings.5                in the metropolitan area.”6
a part of its commitment, the City                                                        –   Museum of Chinese in America
also launched a 90-day community           In the mid-1970s, PS 23 was                        (MOCA): “Founded in 1980, the
visioning process to develop a shared      decommissioned as a school and the                 Museum of Chinese in America
vision for 70 Mulberry Street.2            building was subsequently converted to             (MOCA) is dedicated to preserving
                                           serve as a community center for Chinatown.         and presenting the history, heritage,
                                           In the more than 40 years since, 70                culture and diverse experiences of
                                           Mulberry Street has been the home to five          people of Chinese descent in the
                                           community-based organizations (referred            United States. The greatly expanded
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
02

    70 Mulberry Street during and after the fire (from left to right)
    Source: Gardiner Anderson, New York Daily News, and Jeenah Moon, New York Times

      MOCA at 215 Centre Street is a                originally the CPC was a grassroots       National Register of Historic Places “due
      national home for the precious                community-based organization in           to its national significance stemming from
      narratives of diverse Chinese                 response to the tremendous influx of      its association with immigration from
      American communities, and strives             Chinese immigrants after the change       1800–1965.” It is located in a 38-block
      to be a model among interactive               in immigration laws, and in the midst     area of lower Manhattan roughly bounded
      museums.”7                                    of the Great Society movement.            by Baxter Street, Center Street, Cleveland
–     United East (UEAA): Established by a          With some 50+ programs, today             Place, and Lafayette Street to the west,
      handful of sports enthusiasts in 1976,        CPC services over 8,000 people            Jersey Street and East Hudson to the
      the United East Athletics Association’s       daily through the provision of social     north; Elizabeth Street to the east and
      “initial goal was to offer recent             services reaching from child care         Worth Street to the south.11
      immigrant youths and youths from the          services, youth services, community
      Chinatown area constructive sports            services, workforce development,          A majority of mid-nineteenth century
      programs whereby they can develop             and senior services.9                     buildings remain intact in the district,
      physically and mentally as well as        –   Chinatown Manpower Project                contributing to the neighborhood’s historic
      help them integrate into mainstream           (CMP): Established in 1972,               context, feeling, and readily identifiable
      America. As the organization grew,            “Chinatown Manpower Project,              sense of place. Particularly, “the range of
      UEAA was recognized as a solid                Inc. (CMP) provides vocational            vernacular and nationally-popular styles
      component of the Chinese community            training, employment services,            has produced a multi-textured and visually
      in addressing the developmental               educational programs and economic         appealing streetscape composed of
      needs of our young people. With               development opportunities to              buildings that are typically brick, four bays
      the support of the community, UEAA            disadvantaged immigrants and              wide and three to seven stories in height.
      expanded from offering strictly               refugees throughout New York City.        There are no setbacks or front yards;
      sports-oriented programs to include           With assistance from both private         therefore articulation in the streetscape
      community services and activities,            and public funding sources, CMP           comes from the variety of styles of
      such as leadership development,               helps individuals take full advantage     buildings and often elaborate wrought
      summer youth recreational and                 of all opportunities to succeed in        or cast iron fire escapes mandated after
      educational programs, and host                their new environment.”10                 1867.”12 As such, beyond the services and
      cultural events around the Chinese                                                      programs offered, the 70 Mulberry Street
      traditions and arts.”8                    Collective cultural heritage                  building holds architectural and cultural
–     Chinese-American Planning Council                                                       significance to the local Manhattan
      (CPC): Founded in 1965, the               In 2010, Little Italy and Chinatown were      Chinatown community and New York City.
      Chinese-American Planning Council,        listed in a single historic district on the
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
03                                                                                                                   3X3 DESIGN US LLC

  Figure 01: Project Timeline

                  July 2020                                 September 2020                            December 2020
               Announcement of                          Initiation of community                      Recommendations
                   funding                                  visioning process                             report

Tragedy turned to opportunity                  The City’s commitment                        Project timeline

On January 23, 2020 a devastating fire         As a part of its commitment, the City        Following the July 2020 announcement
significantly damaged 70 Mulberry Street,      also assured the return of all five tenant   of funding and process goals, the
which led the New York City Department         organizations to the building upon           community visioning process was jointly
of Buildings (DOB) “to issue a vacate          completion of the rebuilding process. The    initiated in September 2020. An initial
order that required the New York City          City also committed to a three-month-long    phase of preliminary research and
Department of Citywide Administrative          community visioning process to help          planning was followed by a series of
Services (DCAS) to demolish a portion of       ensure that public input about the future    community meetings and workshops, a
the building.”13 The five community-based      of the site would be gathered to inform      survey, and an ongoing document review
tenant organizations have since relocated      the rebuilding process. To that end, DCAS    conducted over a period of 90 days.
and begun to offer some of their services      formed an advisory committee consisting      The drafting of this report marks the
in a reduced capacity at interim locations.    of building tenants and representatives      conclusion of the process, culminating in
However, this disruption and alteration        appointed by elected and community           a set of findings and recommendations
of services has potential impacts both         officials including Congresswoman            for the future of 70 Mulberry Street
on the recipients of services and on the       Nydia Velázquez, Manhattan Borough           including its programming, design, and
organizations themselves, as nonprofit         President Gale Brewer, State Senator         future role within the community.
fundraising efforts often rely on consistent   Brian Kavanagh, State Assemblywoman
track records for service provision. On July   Yuh-Line Niou, Councilmember Margaret
2, 2020 the City of New York announced         Chin, and Manhattan Community Board
a commitment of $80 million in funding         3. 3x3 was selected as an independent
to redevelop 70 Mulberry Street with a         consultant to co-lead and facilitate
goal of ensuring that it will continue to      the community visioning process with
serve as a community resource for future       the intent of ensuring inclusion and
generations, breaking with a narrative of      transparency.
historic disinvestment in the area.
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
04

02 Community Visioning
                     Process Design

3x3 employed a mixed-methods               Objectives                                     the following lines of inquiry through the
approach to the community                                                                 methodology described below. Informed
visioning process. The scope of the        In consultation with the Advisory Committee    by a complementary document review,
engagement initially focused on            and DCAS, 3x3 established the following        and further refined based on stakeholder
                                           set of objectives for an inclusive community   feedback provided through the visioning
community meetings with different
                                           visioning process for 70 Mulberry Street:      process, the methodology and lines
stakeholders including residents,                                                         of inquiry guided the design of the
small business owners, and property        –   Identify and evaluate existing             community meetings and the analytical
owners that live or work in the vicinity       and future community needs and             process.
of 70 Mulberry Street, in addition to          aspirations from the perspective of
community and industry stakeholder             community members.                         Aspirational role of 70 Mulberry Street in
groups and service recipients of the       –   Identify and assess existing concerns      its community
five non-profit tenants.                       about the 70 Mulberry Street               Explore the roles that 70 Mulberry
                                               rebuilding process.                        Street fulfilled in the past, learn
To triangulate and validate qualitative    –   Surface, consider, and evaluate            about community visions and values,
findings from the community                    the pros and cons of proposed              and identify where viewpoints are in
meetings, the scope was adjusted               strategies.                                opposition and where they align:
to include a survey and a review of        –   Steward and foster trust and dialogue      – What roles has 70 Mulberry Street
                                               among diverse stakeholder groups.               fulfilled in the past from different
additional documents. One hundred
                                           –   Combine different ideas into one                stakeholder perspectives?
thirty community members registered            feasible vision for the future of the      – What values are surfacing through
for the community listening meetings,          site.                                           these roles?
172 registered for the virtual town        –   Increase process transparency, and         – What are stakeholder visions for the
hall, 128 registered for the workshop,         ensure efficiency adhering to the               future of 70 Mulberry Street? What
and 551 community members                      90-day timeline.                                roles do community stakeholders see
responded to the survey.                                                                       the building and its tenants playing in
                                                                                               the future?
.                                          Line of Inquiry                                – What community values are
                                                                                               surfacing through desired,
                                           To achieve the established objectives,              aspirational roles for the rebuilt 70
                                           the community visioning process pursued             Mulberry Street?
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
05                                                                                                                3X3 DESIGN US LLC

    Figure 02: Key thematic areas

                                                       Aspirational   Programming
                                                         role of 70   and Service
                                                    Mulberry Street   offerings

                                                           Building
                                                        design and
                                                     considerations

–     Where do community stakeholders        –   What are the widely perceived               those offered by the tenants of 70
      hold opposing viewpoints, where do         trade-offs of each dimension/               Mulberry Street?
      they align?                                scenario?
                                             –   What are the areas of alignment         Methods
Building design and considerations               across stakeholder groups?
Explore the building design considerations   –   What other concerns does the            Defining the methods—the approach and
for the rebuilding process, surface and          community hold about the design of      specific processes associated with data
understand concerns, desires and                 the building?                           collection and analysis—might be one of
aspirations, opportunities, and potential    –   What other concerns does the            the most defining tasks of a community
trade-offs associated with different             community hold about the rebuilding     visioning process. Detailed below is
building scenarios:                              process broadly?                        an overview of the methods employed
– What building design aspects should                                                    for this visioning process, as well as
     be considered for the rebuilding        Service offerings and programming           constraints and limitations such as those
     process?                                Identify the most pressing priorities       introduced in response to COVID-19
– What are community priorities in           related to community needs and desires      health and safety considerations. The
     relation to different building design   and how they might be addressed             visioning process was conducted using a
     dimensions, namely:                     through service offerings and programs at   mixed-methods approach carried out via
     – preservation versus new               70 Mulberry Street:                         four phases over a three-month period
         development                         – What are the most pressing needs          between September and December,
     – adaptive reuse versus new space            and desires across community           2020.
         planning                                 stakeholders?
     – retaining current building height     – How might these be addressed              Phase 1 focused on establishing the
         and floor area versus expanding          through service and programs           infrastructure of the process, including
         building height and floor area           offerings at 70 Mulberry Street?       the formation of the working mode
     – retaining current programming         – What are existing offerings within        with the Advisory Committee, a review
         versus expanding current                 the community? How might these         of existing documents and reports
         programming                              be harnessed in the context of the     concerning the past, present, and
– What are notable opportunities for              rebuilding process?                    future of 70 Mulberry Street to inform
     each of these dimensions/scenarios?     – How might any new service offerings       the objectives and strategies of the
– What are stakeholder concerns about             and programs complement existing       process, and format of the first round of
     these dimensions/scenarios?                  services and programs, including       community meetings.
Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
06

  Figure 03: Community Visioning Process Design

                                 Community Meetings                               Community Meetings
                                     Round 1                                          Round 2

                Project       Research               Preliminary    Building    Survey                Synthesis    Report
                Kick-off                              Analysis     scenarios

                                         Listening                                        Listening
                                         Sessions                                         Sessions

                           DISCOVER                     DEFINE                 DESIGN                     REFINE

Phase 2 included the first round of              foster discussion across stakeholders.          the 130 people who registered for the
community meetings, continued review             There were a total of 430 participant           listening sessions, 48.5% belonged to
of additional documents submitted by             registrations for the community meetings        the community and industry stakeholder
process participants including, among            (130 for the listening sessions, 172 for        group, 27% belonged to the resident and
others, letters, reports, and proposals          the town hall, and 128 for the workshop,        service recipients stakeholder group,
for the future of the site. A mid-term           respectively). The registrations do not         12% belonged to the small business
synthesis of the findings from the initial       include Advisory Committee members              owner group, and 12% belonged to the
community meetings informed the                  and other people who might have                 property owner group. Twenty-five people
development of a survey to complement            received the meeting information through        requested Cantonese facilitation.
the engagement process.                          participants who registered. A sampling
                                                 overview of each meeting is provided            Town hall
Phase 3 included dissemination of the            below.                                          3x3 conducted a virtual town hall with
survey and a second round of community                                                           no break out room for all stakeholders
meetings in addition to ongoing meetings         Listening sessions                              on November 9, 2020. The session was
with the Advisory Committee.                     3x3 conducted five virtual listening            facilitated on Zoom using a slide deck
                                                 sessions with one to four breakout rooms        and with a real-time virtual whiteboard
Phase 4 included a thematic analysis of          per session for different stakeholder           space (via the platform, Mural) to support
findings from previous phases, including         groups from October 13 through 16,              a free flow open mic forum and enable
a quantitative analysis of survey results,       2020 using Zoom, a digital video                all stakeholders to express, listen, and
synthesis conducted by the 3x3 project           conferencing platform. 3x3 facilitators         discuss their concerns and needs.
team, and a synthesis session with the           used Zoom breakout rooms to facilitate
Advisory Committee and DCAS to review            small working groups through a set of           One hundred seventy-two people
findings.                                        visual, prioritization, and discussion          registered and approximately 140
                                                 prompts focused on three themes:                participated in the town hall, although
Methodology and sampling                         the role of 70 Mulberry Street, design          a precise number of participants
                                                 considerations, and needs.                      cannot be captured due to the nature
3x3 applied a set of design-led methods                                                          of registration on the Zoom platform. Of
and digital convening formats to probe           A total of 130 people registered for            the total registrants, 51.2% belonged to
the lines of inquiry, elicit explicit as         the listening sessions and more than            the community and industry stakeholder
well as tacit knowledge, challenge               150 people participated in the session          group, 10.5% belonged to the resident
assumptions, deepen understanding, and           including the Advisory Committee. Of            stakeholder group, 15.7% belonged to
07                                                                                                                     3X3 DESIGN US LLC

     Figure 04: Number of community participants

               150                                 140                           100                           551

                    Listening Meetings                   Town Hall                      Workshop                    Survey

service recipients stakeholder group,         belonged to the participants who did not        Survey
3.5% belonged to the small business           register and representatives of Advisory        3x3 administered a digital and
owner group, 4.7% belonged to the             Committee. Twelve people requested              paper-based survey from October 23
property owner group, and the remaining       Cantonese facilitation and five requested       through November 15, 2020. The main
belonged to the participants who did not      Mandarin facilitation.                          purpose of the survey was to triangulate
register and representatives of Advisory                                                      and cross-validate qualitative findings
Committee. Twelve people requested            Document review                                 from the community meetings and assess
Cantonese facilitation and six requested      The chosen formats of the community             priorities and concerns about the future
Mandarin facilitation.                        meetings and synthesis were informed by         of 70 Mulberry Street. Survey questions
                                              the history of 70 Mulberry Street, current      were informed by a document review (see
Workshop                                      data and trends, community needs and            below) and findings drawn from the first
3x3 conducted a virtual interactive           concerns, and aspirations for the future of     round of community meetings.
workshop with five breakout rooms for all     the site. To do so, 3x3 conducted an ongoing
stakeholders on November 10, 2020. The        review of documents including letters,          3x3 administered and monitored the
session was facilitated on Zoom using a       proposals, and reports regarding the history    multilingual survey rollout in English,
slide deck. 3x3 facilitators used Zoom        and future of the site submitted by different   Simplified Chinese, and Traditional
breakout rooms to facilitate small working    stakeholders through email and survey.          Chinese through SurveyMonkey, an
groups through a set of prioritization,       The facilitation team added the option to       online survey platform. 3x3, DCAS, and
visuals, and discussion prompts.              upload documents through survey to expand       the Advisory Committee promoted the
                                              outreach by opening up an additional            digital survey link and Quick Response
One hundred twenty-eight people               channel for members of the community to         (QR) code on their social media
registered and approximately 100 people       provide context to the process and express      channels. The Advisory Committee, which
participated in the workshop. Among           their needs, concerns, and ideas.               included tenants and elected officials,
those who registered, 53.7% belonged to                                                       disseminated the survey through existing
the community and industry stakeholder        A total of 21 documents were submitted          connections into the community to
group, 7.4% belonged to the resident          by different stakeholders, among which          increase access and expand outreach.
stakeholder group, 13.9% belonged to          seven were letters, five were proposals,        DCAS collected the completed paper
service recipients stakeholder group,         and the remaining were research                 surveys via a physical dropbox installed at
3.7% belonged to the small business           documents and book chapters that spoke          70 Mulberry Street.
owner group, 3.7% belonged to the             to the history and needs of Chinatown.
property owner group, and the remaining                                                       Of the 551 people who responded to the
08

  Figure 05: Community meetings participants, by stakeholder group

                                                                                                         Advisory Committee
                                                                                                                       5.8%
                                                                                                       Small Business Owner
                                                                                                                       6.0%

                                                                                                              Property Owner
                                                                                                                        6.7%

                                                                                                                       Other
                   Community Groups                                                                                    6.7%
                   49.3%

                                                                                                           Service Recipients
                                                                                                                       14.9%

                                                                                             Residents and Service Recipients
                                                                                                                       10.6%

survey, 27.7% belonged to the community         Cantonese Chinese, and Japanese.                Data Analysis Methods
and industry stakeholder group,
35.6% belonged to service recipients            With regard to household income, 42.1%          A number of methods were used to
stakeholder group, 13.7% belonged to            of the respondents reported their annual        synthesize and structure findings
the resident stakeholder group, 10.1%           household income as under $50,000,              associated with the previously defined
belonged to the small business owner            which is less than the median household         data sources:
group, 3.4% belonged to the property            income in New York City $60,372 (U.S.
owner group, and 0.4% belonged to               Census Bureau 2019). Thirty-one percent         Tagging
the Advisory Committee. Nine percent            of participants reported income between         Key phrases from qualitative research
of respondents did not identify their           $50,000 and $100,000, and 19.4% of              were tagged, or coded, to identify broad
stakeholder group.                              participants reported income between            themes and patterns across the different
                                                $100,000 and $200,000.                          modes and audiences. Attention was paid
With the exception of individuals under                                                         to context, consistency, contradiction
19 or over 80 years of age, there was           The majority of the respondents reported        of views, frequency, intensity, degree of
a relatively even distribution amongst          engaging regularly with the services            specificity across groups.
respondents. The majority of the survey         offered at 70 Mulberry Street prior to the
respondents had at least some college           fire in January. Of the 533 people who          Statistical Analysis
education, with 64.9%of the 532 survey          responded to a question regarding their         The survey questionnaire was structured
participants who responded to the               previous level of engagement, 36.2%             to collect quantitative data related to
education question indicating they had          reported visiting the building or engaging      community preferences. The quantitative
some college education or a higher level        with services at least once per week,           data were analyzed to interrogate the
of educational attainment.                      18.6% reported two to three times per           validity of previously collected qualitative
                                                month, 9% reported one time per month,          data. This effort was undertaken via
The majority of the survey respondents          18.8% reported every few months, and            descriptive statistics such as percentage
identified as Asian non-Hispanic. Of the 519    only 17.4% reported rarely or never             scores and weighted averages.
participants who responded to the question      visiting the building or engaging with the
about racial and ethnic identity, 83.2%         services and programs offered at 70             Triangulation
identified as Asian non-Hispanic. More than     Mulberry Street.                                Data from all available sources were
half of the Asian non-Hispanic respondents                                                      triangulated to validate findings,
reported their ethnicity as Chinese, followed                                                   conclusions, and recommendations.
by Chinese American, Asian American,                                                            Preliminary findings were validated and
09                                                                                                                                                                                     3X3 DESIGN US LLC

 Figure 06: Survey participants, by demographics

     Advisory Committee                                                                  Property Owners                                                                                     10 to 19 years
     0.4%                                                                                           3.4%                                                                                              2.6%

                                                                                                                  30 to 39 years                                                           80 years or older
                                                                                                  Other           17.9%                                                                                3.5%
                                                                                                  9.0%
                                                                                                                                                                                             20 to 29 years
     Service Recipients                                                                                                                                                                              11.4%
     35.6%
                                                                                 Small Business Owner
                                                                                                10.1%

                                                                                                                  60 to 69 years
                                                                                                                  17.5%
                                                                                                                                                                                             50 to 59 years
                                                                                                                                                                                                     13.8%

                                                                                              Residents
                                                                                                 13.7%

                                                                                                                  40 to 49 years                                                             70 to 79 years
     Community Groups                                                                                             17.0%                                                                              16.2%
     27.7%

                          Stakeholder group affiliation                                                                                                          Age
                                                                                             Non-Binary
                                                                                                  0.4%            Vocational or Trade School                                                           Other
                                                                                                                  0.9%                                                                                 1.3%
                                                                                  Prefer not to disclose                                                                                     P.h.D or higher
                                                                                                   2.5%                                                                                                2.3%
                                                                                                                                                                                           Prefer not to say
                                                                                                                                                                                                       3.0%
                                                                                                                                                                                          Some High School
                                                                                                                                                                                                       4.1%

                                                                                                                                                                                                 No Degree
                                                                                                                  Bachelor’s Degree                                                                  9.0%
                                                                                                                  34.0%

     Female                                                                                        Male
     55.4%                                                                                        41.7%
                                                                                                                                                                                              Some College
                                                                                                                                                                                                     9.8%

                                                                                                                                                                                                High School
                                                                                                                  Master’s Degree                                                                    14.5%
                                                                                                                  21.1%

                                    Gender                                                                                                                    Education

                                                                                         Over $400,000
                                                                                                  1.4%

                                                                                $200,000 - $400,000
                                                                                               5.8%
                                                                                                                                                                                              Once a month
                                                                                                                                                                                                      9.0%

                                                                                                                  Once a week or more
                                                                                                                  36,2%

                                                                                 $100,000 - $200,000                                                                                          Rarely/Never
     Under $50,000                                                                             19.4%                                                                                                 17.4%
     42.1%

                                                                                                                                                                                          2-3 times a month
                                                                                  $50,000 - $100,000                                                                                                  18.6%
                                                                                               31.3%              Every few months
                                                                                                                  18.8%

                          Annual Household Income                                                                                                 Engagement with 70 Mulberry Street

                                          Native Hawaiian & Pacific Islander nonhispanic                                  Some Other Race nonhispanic
                                          0.2%                                                                                                  0.4%
                                           American Indian & Alaska Native nonhispanic                                             Black/African American
                                           0.2%                                                                                                     0.4%
                                                                                                                                          Hispanic Origin
                                                                                                                                                    1.0%
                                                                                                                         Two or More Races nonhispanic
                                                                                                                                                 1.7%

                                                                                                                                       White nonhispanic
                                                                                                                                                  12.9%

                                           Asian nonhispanic
                                           83.2%

                                                                                                           Race
10

confirmed with the Advisory Committee            Project scope                                     stakeholders, including, among others,
through an online presentation and               The original project design included in           developers, construction managers, and
discussion at the end of each community          the request for proposals and allocated           others otherwise relevant to a rebuilding
meeting round to synthesize and                  resources limited the scope to a series           process.
determine recommendations.                       of community meetings. 3x3 added a
                                                 survey and a pathway for the community
Limitations                                      to upload documents to provide additional
                                                 data points to validate and triangulate
This visioning process encountered               findings from the community meetings.
constraints and challenges that impacted         The scope did not include a needs
process design, methodology, delivery,           assessment of the neighborhood.
and overall project outcomes, which
required 3x3 to plan and adjust project          Digital and language barriers
management strategies accordingly and            Set in the community of Chinatown, this
on an ongoing basis. These, among others,        project faced challenges concerning
included:                                        language and digital access. While
                                                 facilitation was offered in multiple languages,
Project timeline                                 and efforts were made to reach those with
With a set project duration of 90 days           no or limited access to the internet, these
for completion from launch to the report         factors should still be considered reviewing
delivery, the project schedule was               the outcomes of the process.
predetermined, necessitating an expedited
outreach, engagement, and analysis               Outreach barriers
process. A time period of at least 10 days       In the context of the pandemic,
was allowed for outreach to ensure the           community outreach methods were
fast execution would not limit outreach          limited to flyering, digital communications
activities.                                      methods, and virtually facilitated
                                                 community meetings. Additionally, a
Data collection challenges                       paper-based survey was disseminated
Conducted between September and                  with the intent to reach those with no or
December 2020 in the midst of the                limited digital access.
COVID-19 pandemic, data collection
methods were required that minimized             To support outreach in the community,
physical interaction in the interest of public   the 70 Mulberry Advisory Panel was
health and safety. Community outreach            established as part of this visioning
was limited to majority digital methods.         process. Members of the Advisory
For example, under circumstances that            Panel played a key role in the outreach
would have allowed for meetings to be            and dissemination of process- related
conducted in-person, the community               materials raising potential concerns that
engagement process might have been               the process risks biasing panel members
approached through a hybrid online/              and affiliated groups’ needs over broader
in-person approach rather than being             community needs. Several strategies
solely conducted via Zoom. Conducting            aimed to address this risk through, such
all community outreach meetings online           as. publicly available press statements,
limited participant access to a certain          open access meeting formats, and
degree, particularly for those with              expansion of outreach through
lower levels of digital literacy or access.      organizations beyond the Advisory Panel.
To address this issue, 3x3 added a
paper-based survey to be disseminated            Limited group of stakeholders
throughout Chinatown, with the intent of         This process was designed to prioritize
reaching those with limited or no access to      the input from community members
digital technologies.                            regarding the rebuilding process
                                                 and emphasized their inputs rather
                                                 than convening an extended group of
11                                                                                                              3X3 DESIGN US LLC

3A                 Findings: General

This section introduces findings       Essence of time                                Multifaceted opportunity for the future
derived from the community visioning                                                  of Chinatown
process. It comprises a range of       Opportunities are time-sensitive. Across
concerns and sentiments shared         stakeholder groups and meetings,               The uniqueness of this opportunity
                                       participants expressed a desire to move        raises expectations about an exceptional
across different stakeholder groups
                                       forward quickly with the process, and          outcome resulting in a newly built facility
concerning the rebuilding process      had strong concerns about possible risks       that can serve and inspire many future
of 70 Mulberry Street. Furthermore,    associated with losing momentum with the       generations. The notion of the rebuilding
it speaks to underlying expectations   project, including a potential (a) extended    process being a once-in-a-lifetime
and hopes regarding process’           duration of the rebuilding process (coupled    opportunity also manifested the expressed
governance moving forward that were    with an inability to address pressing          hope to take advantage of it and rebuild
expressed at the different community   community needs via vital services while       70 Mulberry Street as a building with the
meetings, and further evaluated and    the building is out of commission), (b) loss   ability to adapt and serve the needs of
                                       of the associated funds via reappropriation    future generations of Chinatown. As such,
validated through the survey.
                                       and changing political priorities and          the rebuilding process of 70 Mulberry
                                       administrative change, (c) cancellation of     Street is perceived as a multi-faceted
                                       the rebuilding process altogether, and (d)     opportunity that:
                                       loss of economic and other opportunities
                                       while the process is ongoing. Forty-two        (a) recognizes and honors Chinatown’s
                                       percent of survey respondents indicated        heritage,
                                       that a lengthy rebuilding process was          (b) acknowledges and manifests its
                                       their top concern, indicating that reducing    community’s contributions to Asian
                                       rebuilding time was a top priority for many.   American identity,
                                       Among the five nonprofit organizations         (c) ignites a reconciliation and healing
                                       and their service recipients, there was        process, and
                                       an urgency to return to the building as        (d) spurs local economic activity.
                                       quickly as possible to restore the services
                                       at 70 Mulberry Street in order to serve        Potential transfer of ownership
                                       community needs as soon as possible.
                                                                                      Participants across stakeholder groups
                                                                                      shared an interest for the building to
                                                                                      remain publicly owned and accessible.
12

  Figure 07: Rebuilding concerns
  What are your biggest concerns about the rebuilding process of 70 Mulberry Street? Choose up to 3. (N = 551) Source: 70
  Mulberry Street Community Visioning Survey

Many community members expressed             community. The inability to see proof of      frequently requested information and
concerns that privatization of building      the budget allocation fueled community        voiced concerns about future building
ownership would be coupled with a            fears about whether the City will uphold      management, which is perceived as a
loss of community services and a             the previously established budget in          determining factor in the nature and
misalignment between public interests        the context of the pandemic crisis and        quality of future services of the building.
and private management entities.             administrative change following the 2021      “There is lack of information on issues
Thirty-four percent of survey respondents    election.                                     raised prior, we are feared that this will
selected ‘the building might be sold to                                                    continue…”
a private developer’ as one of their top     “Whatever you are going to build it’s not     “...The City’s unwillingness to allow
three concerns.                              going to work; another construction in my     access and evaluations by qualified
                                             neighborhood has been going on for three      outside experts on the building deprives
“The building should be maintained as a      years…”                                       the community of the right to make
community building—the only nonprofit        “Is $80 million guaranteed? Where can         informed choices on the future of this
building serving the community.”             we see it?”                                   important site.”
                                                                                           “Even if the money is in as a line item, we
“The site should go back to being a          While the City provided evidence for          are in a pandemic…”
community center and provide arts and        the budget allocation over the course         “We do not know where that number [$80
community programs, not turn into a          of the community visioning process,           million] is coming from.”
massive building with homes, nor turn        which partially addressed the concern,
into a private real estate development.”     skepticism remained high, particularly in     Loss of unique character
                                             relation to a perceived lack of information
Possibility of reduced budget allocation     concerning trade-offs related to different    Another frequent concern among
                                             building scenarios as well as whether         participants relates to the degree to
Thirty-four percent of survey respondents    results of this visioning process would       which the rebuilding process could be
selected $80 million might not be            ultimately be upheld or incorporated into     responsible for stripping 70 Mulberry
added in the next budget, confirming         the City’s decisions about the future of      Street of its unique character and
the presence of a sense of skepticism        the site.14 The skepticism highlights the     symbolism within the community. This
and mistrust in the City’s commitment        importance of continued engagement            finding emerged in the first round of
to the project, which may stem from a        and information transparency, as well as      community meetings and was further
long-perceived lack of investment in,        an avenue for community members to            confirmed when 32.3% of survey
and public support of, the Chinatown         follow the rebuilding process. Participants   respondents expressed concern that 70
13                                                                                                                   3X3 DESIGN US LLC

                                                                        “A 20 story building will be an absolutely insensitive
                                                                        use of this cultural heart of chinatown. Tenants need to
                                                                        re-establish their homes at 70 Mulberry as quickly as
                                                                        possible. However, with that said, there does not need
                                                                        to be a choice between expediency of rebuilding and
                                                                        preservation of our community’s history. Both can happen
                                                                        with a sensitive architectural design of this space. This
                                                                        needs to be addressed and not pushed to the side.”

Mulberry Street was at risk of losing its    well as reflect its distinctive and evolving
unique character. The community saw          narrative. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of
the building’s uniqueness and pivotal        survey respondents expressed concerns
role in the community as a function of       about the potential negative impacts of a
many factors including the programs and      20-story building on the neighborhood.
services associated with the nonprofit
tenants, historical architecture, and        “Maintain the skyplane. For the light onto
storied historical connection to the         the street, if you are building any higher
neighborhood.                                that would impact the sunlight of others.”

“A place for immigrants coming to the        “Please do not make a 20-Story building!
community and a place where they can         That would hurt the heart of Chinatown,
build friendship, sense of community,        my hometown.”.
interest and appreciation for arts and       “Build up the max height as soon as
culture.”                                    possible.”
“70 Mulberry Street is very important to
the heart of culture in Chinatown. It was    “A 20 story building will be an absolutely
devastating when it burned. Please keep      insensitive use of this cultural heart of
the spirit of that building alive and make   chinatown. Tenants need to re-establish
it stronger.”                                their homes at 70 Mulberry as quickly as
                                             possible. However, with that said, there
Negative impact of a high-rise on the        does not need to be a choice between
neighborhood                                 expediency of rebuilding and preservation
                                             of our community’s history. Both can
More than just hoping the outcome of the     happen with a sensitive architectural
rebuilding process would be compatible       design of this space. This needs to be
with the neighborhood, participants          addressed and not pushed to the side.”
expressed hopes that the rebuilt 70
Mulberry Street will fit the character of
the neighborhood, and simultaneously
represent a connection to the past as
14

3C Findings: The Role of 70
                     Mulberry Street

This section focuses on perspectives     Community Anchor                              to a community that supports them
related to the historical connection                                                   through their connection to the building.
between 70 Mulberry Street and           Many participants shared a historical and     Consequently, participants expressed the
the communities it has served. With      cultural narrative that defines 70 Mulberry   importance of the need to regain that
                                         Street as a multifaceted site of gathering    community in the wake of the loss spurred
this foundation, this section explores
                                         and connection, whether for learning or to    by the fire. Several themes related to this
community visions for the future         find a community and sense of belonging.      shared longing for community emerged:
through identification of sometimes      It was also seen as a space to learn about
conflicting and aligned values and       Asian American heritage and culture, and      –   New building, old spirit: Participants
associated viewpoints.                   there was a strong expressed desire for           expressed that the new building will
                                         the building to continue playing this role.       have to balance the past and the
                                                                                           future, and that doing so will require
                                         A majority of participants agreed with            memorializing yet continuing the
                                         the sentiment that 70 Mulberry Street             spirit of the old public school and
                                         should function as a community anchor,            service center while expanding to
                                         with 71.7% selecting community as the             reach new community members
                                         top value associated with the building.           and meet new needs. For example,
                                         Many perceived the building as playing            one of the participants said, “as
                                         an important role for community                   you enter the building, you kind of
                                         members across different age groups,              know what the building is and what
                                         new immigrants, and multi-generation              it symbolizes.” Another said, “we
                                         Asian Americans. Respondents desired              need a place to celebrate our cultural
                                         the space to serve the dual functions of          heritage, therefore build a cultural
                                         providing a space for social interaction          center for all Chinese citizens and all
                                         across ethnicities and serving as a site of       are welcome.”
                                         resource aggregation for the broader Asian    –   Unite the old and the young:
                                         American community.                               Participants also saw the building
                                                                                           as space where young people
                                         Many service recipients and alumni of             can learn about Asian American
                                         the former school expressed experiencing          culture and unite with the older
                                         immersion in Asian American history               population groups to heal trauma
                                         and culture and a sense of belonging              caused by xenophobia and racism.
15                                                                                                                    3X3 DESIGN US LLC

      One participant expressed hope            culture and heritage, providing a place        “It’s important that there is a space
      that 70 Mulberry Street could be          to express Asian American identities           in Chinatown that welcomes all
      rebuilt as a “place to provide various    and serving as a home for arts and             generations, and allows the community
      services for our next generation’s        cultural programming. Many see the             to express pride in its Asian American
      and community’s development,”             rebuilding of 70 Mulberry Street as an         identity and humanity.”
      while another said, “Chinatown as         opportunity to reflect upon, express,
      a community has quite a wide age          and contribute to an emergent Asian            “Keeping traditional Chinese traditions
      spectrum. I think it’s important that     American consciousness through a               alive … engaging Chinese Americans of
      if the space is used as a community       range of programming and connection of         all ages to participate in festivities”
      gathering place, it’s used to unite the   artists at different scales, from local to     “My grandfather arrived in Chinatown
      elderly in the area with young folks      global. With many participants advocating      in 1903. And for nearly 120 years since
      and be inclusive to both.”                for the preservation of 70 Mulberry’s          then, my family and I have been a part
–     Learn and support: Community              cultural heritage as represented in a          of this community. Throughout all this
      members saw bringing people               diverse range of identities—including,         time, 70 Mulberry Street has been
      together to make new connections          among others, Chinese American,                a cornerstone in the neighborhood,
      and support and learn from each           Asian American, Immigrant, and New             whether as a beloved public school, or
      other as a critical part of the 70        Yorker— an opportunity emerges for the         community cultural hub, or an entry
      Mulberry Street community. One            building to play a role in bridging across     point for generations of immigrants and
      participant referred to the building      cultures within the larger Asian American      I, myself, have worked in Chinatown
      as “a space where generations             community and serving as a center of           for over 40 years and participated in
      meet and interact with each other,”       cultural education for young people.           numerous programs there. We are the
      and another participant stated                                                           current guardians of a neighborhood
      that rebuilding 70 Mulberry is “an          “I think it is vital that the arts,          legacy.”
      opportunity to serve more people            particularly the performing arts, [the
      more appropriately,” referring to the       organizations could] still have a home     Immigrant neighborhood : For many, 70
      large number of groups that have            at 70 Mulberry. Organizations like Chen    Mulberry Street is strongly related to the
      expressed interest in sharing the           Dance Center provide dance training        immigrant experience in New York City.
      space at 70 Mulberry Street.                and performance opportunities to           Built in 1971, multiple generations of
                                                  thousands of Chinatown residents and       immigrants in Chinatown have gathered
    “[My mother] is a member of the               NYC public school students and draw        at the site to receive education, seek
    Chinatown Senior Center, which has            in people not just from the Chinatown      a sense of belonging, or participate
    been there for about 40 years and             community but all over NYC.”               in community activities. Former PS
    used to take up the entire ground floor.                                                 23’s rich immigrant history was made
    She wants to remind everybody that it         “Keeping traditional Chinese traditions    famous by an article in the New-York
    was a very important gathering place          alive, engaging Chinese Americans of       Tribune in 1905 that noted the building
    for about 300 seniors. Each and every         all ages to participate in festivities.”   as the “school of 29 nationalities.” PS
    day, five days a week, it was a gathering                                                23 had an extremely diverse student
    place for lunch. On top of that, the        Chinese and Asian American identity:         body, including students with ethnic and
    other uses were musical performances.       Many participants expressed sentiments       cultural identities from modern-day Italy,
    There were dance classes, Tai Chi           of the building as a shared resource—-a      Germany, Poland, Ireland, Russia, Turkey,
    classes, drawing classes, computer          cultural common—-that holds significance     England, Scotland, Greece, Syria, Austria,
    classes and English classes. So there       to Chinatown’s Chinese and Asian             Egypt, Switzerland, and Lithuania, among
    were a lot of uses in there that we         American community including alumni of       others.15 Participants noted its rich
    would like to see restored.”                PS 23, service recipients of the nonprofit   immigrant history:
                                                tenants, and residents and cultural
Cultural heritage and identity                  organizations of Chinatown. Alumni of          “It remains as a physical reminder of
                                                PS 23 who participated in the meetings         the collective history and generations
Heritage was selected by 39.6% of               discussed their deep cultural and              of residents who attended that school,
survey respondents, ranking second              emotional attachment to the building,          and have fond memories of that
amongst values associated with 70               some still walking by the building almost      school and received an education that
Mulberry Street. The community widely           every day.                                     impacted the rest of their lives.”
understands the building as central to                                                         “Now we are at the point where we
Chinatown and New York City’s Asian                                                            more or less the Asians are Chinese
16

 Figure 08: Values
 What are your biggest concerns about the rebuilding process of 70 Mulberry St.? Choose up to 3.(N = 551) Source: 70 Mulberry
 Street Community Visioning Survey

 Figure 09: Cultural identity
 To what extent do you agree with the following statements, on a scale of strongly disagree = -2 to strongly agree = 2. Source: 70
 Mulberry Street Community Visioning Survey

 Figure 10: Cultural identity and Chinatown
 To what extent do you agree with the following statements, on a scale of strongly disagree = -2 to strongly agree = 2. Source: 70
 Mulberry Street Community Visioning Survey
17                                                                                                                        3X3 DESIGN US LLC

                                                                          “When my family escaped the violence out west in the
                                                                          nineteenth century, they found refuge in New York’s
                                                                          Chinatown. And the first generation of Americans and
                                                                          my family were educated at 70 Mulberry. These were my
                                                                          grandparents, my parents, my aunts, my uncles. They
                                                                          learned English; they learned American values; they
                                                                          learned civic engagement and the importance of voting.
                                                                          This building is historic, and it means a lot to my family. But
                                                                          it’s also part of the cultural fabric of Chinatown. And I would
                                                                          hate to see it become torn down like the old Penn Station.”

     and pretty much dominate Chinatown,        participants spoke about the deep impact
     but let’s not forget about those people    of the learning experience associated
     who came before because 70 Mulberry        with the building had on their lives.
     also means something to them as well.      Suggestions from participants ranged
     So it’s not just the Chinese, but as for   from opening a learning center to a
     our neighbors.”                            center for vocational training and cultural
                                                archives.
     “When my family escaped the violence
     out west in the nineteenth century, they     “It is a place for immigrants coming
     found refuge in New York’s Chinatown.        to the community and a place where
     And the first generation of Americans        they can build friendship, sense of
     and my family were educated at 70            community, interest and appreciation
     Mulberry. These were my grandparents,        for arts and culture.”
     my parents, my aunts, my uncles. They
     learned English; they learned American       “I highly support vocational training for
     values; they learned civic engagement        this new building. Especially with the
     and the importance of voting. This           impacts of COVID, Chinatown and the
     building is historic, and it means a         Chinese community continues to suffer
     lot to my family. But it’s also part of      economically…”
     the cultural fabric of Chinatown. And I
     would hate to see it become torn down
     like the old Penn Station.”

Learning
Thirty-six percent selected Learning as
a value associated with 70 Mulberry
Street underpinning the hope expressed
by many during the community meetings
that the educational legacy of the building
will be continued once the rebuilding
process has been completed. Many
18

3C Findings: Building Design
                     and Considerations

This section describes aspects of          I. Architectural legacy and design                and Renaissance Revival brick walls,
the building design under review           dimensions                                        corner tower design, and ornamented
during the visioning process, the                                                            and rusticated brownstone ashlar
community preferences for each of          As mentioned in the introduction, 70              base; and,
                                           Mulberry Street, former Public School         –   long-standing cultural and emotional
those dimensions, including notable
                                           23, was designed and constructed by the           connection with the community not
opportunities, concerns, perceived         architect Charles B. J. Snyder in 1891.           just because of the services provided
trade-offs, areas of alignment, and        Snyder was Superintendent of School               by the nonprofit tenants but also
other concerns that the community          Buildings for the New York City Board of          because it had served the community
holds about the design of the building     Education between 1891 and 1923. PS               for decades as a public school.
and rebuilding process.                    23 was Snyder’s first school building
                                           design among many other eclectic school       In January 2020, a five-alarm fire
Overall, participants prioritized          buildings that are designated as New York     destroyed most of the brick walls
preserving the building legacy and         City landmarks such as the Erasmus Hall       and corner tower, but the community
heritage and desired an expedited          High School and Morris High School. The       expressed a desire to explore
Preservation Assessment to determine       last class of PS 23 graduated in 1976,        preservation options for the remaining
                                           after which the building was converted        structure. Given the desire of the
which building elements to restore.
                                           into a community center. 70 Mulberry          community to continue the legacy and
A majority of the participants wanted      Street, though not classified as a New        heritage of 70 Mulberry Street, the
to speed up rebuilding time and            York City landmark, is currently one of       following building design dimensions
were concerned about the potential         Chinatown’s notable historical buildings      were listed for consideration under the
negative impacts of a 20-story building    and is listed as a contributing building to   community visioning process:
on the neighborhood. There was a firm      the Chinatown National Register Historic      – preservation versus demolition of
agreement on the need for modern           District. The building owes its historical         the remaining building structure and
interiors while restoring the building’s   and architectural significance to multiple         architectural elements;
                                           factors, including its16:                     – adaptive reuse versus new interior
shell, specifically the stone facade and
                                           – prominent location in the historic               space planning of the building;
some architectural elements such                 core of Chinatown;                      – retaining current building height and
as the stairwell. Some participants        – important history as renowned                    floor area versus extending building
urged the design process to inbuild              school architect Charles B. J.               height and floor area; and,
adaptation and flexibility for future            Snyder’s first public school design;    – retaining current programming
technologies.                              – unique fortress-like Romanesque                  versus extending current
19                                                                                                                    3X3 DESIGN US LLC

  PS 23 building and classroom
  Source: NYC Department of Records and Information Services

     programming.                              the building’s rich immigrant history,       in Renaissance Revival style. 65.8% of
                                               long-standing historical connection,         the survey respondents agreed for 70
II. Preservation versus full demolition        and architectural legacy and difficult to    Mulberry Street building elements to
                                               replicate details.                           be preserved to a great extent, most
After the fire destroyed the top three                                                      importantly the structural safe parts of the
floors of the five-story building in January   Architectural legacy: Charles B. J. Snyder   building that might be identified through
2020, the City cleared the roof and            introduced an innovative aspect in the       a preservation assessment (derived from
flooring sections deemed unsafe and            design of PS 23 through the inclusion        figure 11).
in danger of collapsing. Tenants were          of an auditorium that established the
allowed access to artifacts and personal       school’s capacity for hosting community        “If it is a hot summer day, you come
belongings.17 As the City weighed next         events and public lectures. This               into the stair, and it is kind of a cool
steps, some community advocates                community-oriented feature became a            stone. The building produces an
pressed for a preservation assessment          hallmark of Snyder’s school designs.           experience that you connect to going
for the building, while other groups in        Another feat was the remarkable fusion         there. And you go up through the stairs,
Chinatown advocated for full demolition        of Norman Romanesque Revival with the          and then you see different people who
and construction of a taller building. As      Renaissance Revival architectural styles       are coming and going from different
a result, the City facilitated the creation    that is reflected in the brownstone base       programs that you may or may not be
of an advisory committee of community          paired with arched doorways and carved         kind of associated or familiar with.”
leaders to undertake a community               medieval motifs, the corner tower, and the
visioning process.                             brick façade.18                                “It is the physical aspect of the building,
                                                                                              the beautiful brownstone, arches to the
Aspirations and Priorities                     Many participants remarked on the unique       entrance, the pattern of the windows,
During the community meetings and              architectural features of the building,        the beautiful color of the brick corner
town hall, polarities continued to surface     including the stairwell, columns, and door     tower that towers over Columbus Park
on the topic of preservation—between           knobs. Others noted the complex nature         and was this community’s version of
preserving part of the building, including     of the building rooted in Italian design       a new Italian Campanella. It is the
its foundation and brownstone ashlar           heritage but experienced by Chinese            quality of the masonry. It is the physical
base, and full demolition. Several             American students in its later years.          presence in the heart of Chinatown.
practical, tangible, and intangible benefits   Those with expertise in preservation and       It is the long connection to the
of preserving the building elements of         architecture remarked at the difficulty        community, and is the crucial services
70 Mulberry Street were mentioned              and expense of replicating the building’s      provided by the tenants in that building
during the meetings spanning from              masonry work and architectural details         for tenants who deserve to be back
You can also read