« AY Owners, Renters File Eminent Domain Appeal City Looks to Supersize the House of D »
April 1, 2008
What Will Become of the Remsen Wallflower?
Despite its prime location, 186 Remsen Street in Brooklyn Heights has been available for lease since its last tenant, an adoption agency, moved out more than five years ago. Locals say it's because "the building is a wreck" and is priced too high. Robert Oliver of the Joseph P. Day Realty Corporation said owner Larry Wohl is looking to lease the 35,000-square-foot, late-19th-Century building to a single tenant for $1 million annually. At $28 per square foot, that would place the building in the Class B market if it were well-maintained, but people who have been inside called it "raw space" and "garbage-looking." One real estate insider said 35,000 square feet is "stretching it," and that "the economics for renting it as office is very bad." Indeed, Property Shark said the building is 25,000 square feet.
The insider said neighboring St. Francis College unsuccessfully offered to buy the building. And another Heights resident thinks the building would be an ideal annex for P.S. 8, which recently cut its Pre-K program and is still overflowing with students. New condo development nearby such as One Brooklyn Bridge Park would only increase demand on the school, the worst-case scenario being trailers in the playground, said the resident. But the insider doubted bringing the building up to the strict elementary school code standards would be economically feasible at Day's price.
The Franklin Building [An Architectural Guidebook to Brooklyn]
186 Remsen Street [Joseph P. Day] GMAP
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/4346
Comments
interesting comments about PS 8. i think that you are going to see overcrowding at any good public school. for a buyer, this is something to consider. we looked for an under-utilized school when we bought a couple years ago. look for decent schools that still have room for more kids.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 10:36 AM
That's what happened to PS 8 over the course of just 4-5 years. Went from half-empty to overflowing.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 10:45 AM
The front entrance was recently covered with black plywood, because of the tenacious homeless people who have been using the vestibule as a sleeping area.
I also saw an outreach group talking to one of the said homeless persons yesterday on my way home from work.
Posted by: tscola at April 1, 2008 10:45 AM
Middle school in the area, in addition to more room for PS8 itself, is desperately needed. PS8 is becoming a victim of its own extraordinary success as it's now bursting at the seams with talk of having to use portable classrooms. This place be such an incredible alternative, but don't know how they would get the funding to do that.
Posted by: Biff Champion at April 1, 2008 10:51 AM
grim, grim, grim.
a piece of old Brooklyn (circa 1980)
yuk!
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 10:55 AM
your "resident" is sadly ill-informed. PS8 has doubled in size in recent years, but it's still not even at capacity. And many public schools go WAY over capacity. The city would never go for it.
I know that PS8 is looking for an annex (I'm very familiar on this one) and we looked at the old police bldg. But honestly, the next school issue that will be funded in the area is a middle school
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 11:04 AM
11:04, at least the younger grades at PS8 seem at full capacity, no? The three kindergarten classes each have the maximum 25 studens. And they're likely doing away with pre-K next year due to the increasingly packed classes in all grades. In any event, the middle school issue is by far the most crucial for the area so I'm hoping, if funding is going to come, it comes soon.
Posted by: Biff Champion at April 1, 2008 11:16 AM
"another Heights resident?" Is that code for Brooklyn Heights Association executive director Judy Stanton, who does indeed live in the heights, speaking for veiled attribution?
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 11:17 AM
I'm on the PTO at ps8 and nobody is talking about trailers/portable classrooms.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 11:20 AM
11:20, plenty of parents are talking about trailers/portable classrooms, but it could just be conjecture. It's interesting it was mentioned in the article when I've heard exactly the same thing. If you have insight and know it isn't happening, I'm pleased by that news. (Thanks for your work on the PTA, by the way. They do a great job).
Posted by: Biff Champion at April 1, 2008 11:32 AM
They are still more than 75 students BELOW capacity
Without the separate science lab, pre-k spaces, etc, there is room for 3 classes per grade. It's fine for a while. People taking about trailers, etc are just TALKING and clearly about something they don't know anything about. Listen, more space would be great, but as plenty of schools run way OVER capacity, this is just not an issue at this school as far as the city is concerend.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 11:47 AM
This was probably once a handsome building although you would not know it today. There was a really beautiful building next door to this that I always admired but the college tore it down for its new library about five or six years ago. If the landmarks people didn't mind the demo of that building, which was really unusually graceful, I can't imagine they would have any objection to the demolition of this one.
Posted by: sam at April 1, 2008 12:32 PM
The blocks east of Remsen St. (north of Joralemon St.) are mostly out of the historic district. Thanks in large part to the lobbying of St. Francis in the 60s.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 12:37 PM
Sorry, that should read, "East of Clinton St."
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 12:38 PM
The old college library building right next door was stunning and very historic. What kind of college would tear down its most histoic building to build something perfectly ordinary? It is a shame the landmark's commission or the community could not have stood up to the college. Now this building looks like a goner too.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 12:45 PM
12:45, since I live closeby, I was interested in the building you referenced that was demolished. I found this link. Definitely a shame it wasn't protected and I think 186 Remsen above has the potential to be restored to look quite attractive. I really hope it sticks around.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/28/realestate/28scap.html
Posted by: Biff Champion at April 1, 2008 12:53 PM
geeze you live every where.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 1:11 PM
All the talk about the turnaround at PS 8 never gets to the fact that the school has gone from being mostly non-white and mostly very poor to what it is today-a school where whites are the largest racial group and growing every year(as per DOE site-32 of 36 pre-k kids are white)and where today, less than 30% of children qualify for free lunch versus the vast majority just 4 years ago.
There was a tremendous infusion of resources into PS 8--public money, DOE personnel resources and lots of hard work by parents and administration. I do not believe that the children that need the most are sharing equitably in this "turnaround"
I think that it is great that there is another good public school option, but I think though it is necessary to reflect on what happened at the school and who benefited.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 1:15 PM
Why do you say that 1:11 (if you're talking to me)? I've never claimed to live anywhere other than BH.
Posted by: Biff Champion at April 1, 2008 1:23 PM
1:15, sorry, but I'm not sure what your point is? There's no question PS8's demographics have changed with the success, but who are you blaming? To me, as people realized the school was changing, many white families who may otherwise have sent their kids to Packer and Saint Ann's opted instead for PS8 once it became a viable alternative. I'm asking sincerely to what are you referring when you say we should reflect on what happened at the school, i.e., are you claiming non-whites are now shut out? I don't see how that is...the younger white kids at the school live in the area and have the right to go there, just as do kids of every race in the zone.
Posted by: Biff Champion at April 1, 2008 1:29 PM
1:15's genius thinking is what left the public school system in tatters for decades. As Biff said, no one is being shut out. The kids whose parents aren't BH millionaries are benefiting just as much as the rich kids. It's always been the case that strong parental support, whether directly to a school or through political pressure to get/keep resources allocated to a school, is what ensures a strong school. Are you saying they're draining resources from other schools? I don't see it.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 1:41 PM
I used to work in this building in the early 90s - the interior was quite ugly then, so I can only imagine how it must look after five years of vacancy.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 2:17 PM
what 1:15 is saying is that there wasn't that level of investment of resources in the past when the school had not yet received the influx of white students
it would be interesting to know if there was as much pressure put on by the parents back then. they may not have been as well connected, but were they as vocal and involved? Or as 'working class' parents were they more hard pressed to be at work than to be at all the school related activities that the white parents are carving out time for?
changing demographics can mean an increase of resources but a large enough core of parents can make a change - regardless of race
my mother had the sense to get me out of a underperforming Brooklyn public school and into private school through sheer force of will
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 2:28 PM
But 2:28, who's doing the investing? It got most of it's money, i.e., the magnet grant mostly before the demographics changed, did it not? From what I understand at the moment, it's even more in need of resources this year than last, so what does that say? If it's getting more attention now because parents are more involved, then that's great. It seems a combination of the magnet grant, parental involvement and the new principal turned the school around. In other words, I think the school turnaround brought more white students. I don't think more white students encouraged greater investment in the school.
As for private school, sure it's an option if one has "sheer force of will" and $32,000+ per kid per year.
Posted by: Biff Champion at April 1, 2008 2:47 PM
2:28, you are correct in describing what is the legitmate issue.
However, 1:15 wasn't (mostly) getting at that. 1:15 was bemoaning the fact that rich kids are benefiting from the improvements to this school, as if this was hurting poor kids in that school (not true at all) or poor kids in other schools (no evidence offered). To quote, "I do not believe that the children that need the most are sharing equitably in this 'turnaround'."
I strongly disagree with that line of thinking. I don't think public school funding is a zero sum game. Raising the bar at individual schools is going to have a positive effect on the system overall and especially for maintaining improvements to the city's well-being. Is 1:15 suggesting that the optimal solution would have been to allocate the same funding/resources to the school but keep having the rich kids (who could afford private schools) go to privates? The funding just doesn't work that way (see, for example, the city school system from 1960s-1980s) and the goal should be more mixed make-up in the public schools, not continuing the de facto segreation based on race and socio-economic status.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 2:55 PM
2:28 here
scholarship, baby. there aren't a whole lot of them, but private schools do offer them based on need if the student demonstrates they are up to the academic challenge. i wound up owing them a small amount, but nothing compared to the actual cost, and i was more than happy to pay it.
Biff thanks for the info, like i said i was just trying to clarify what 1:15 was getting at. this aint my fight so i dont have too much invested in the argument - just trying to keep things moving along.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 3:08 PM
2:28/3:08, no problem. I enjoy interesting discussions and courteous debate. It's an important issue. You (and 2:55) should consider signing in. It's always nice to attribute meaningful comments to people, even if they use a pseudonym.
Posted by: Biff Champion at April 1, 2008 3:15 PM
why would the board of education want to buy, or worse lease, such a POS? People in brownston Brooklyn are in la-la land half the time, they are either so rich or so out of the mainstream that they don't even know when they are talking nonsense.
The very last thing the Board of Ed will want to do is build a new middle school in the area, there are plenty of midle schools already in surrounding areas. the public schools here are nowhere near as crowded as in distrcits in Queens and other more affodable parts of Brooklyn, this is richie-rich-burg. Most parents send their kids to private schools and even those who swear they won't will end up being transferred by their firms to Dubai so forget it. Brooklyn Heights is not a real place it is money land and nobody in moneyland appreciates anything that is free.
Posted by: guest at April 1, 2008 7:51 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.