Sign up for the Brownstoner daily email
« Starrett Buyer Pool Down to One Atlanta All The Way »

December 22, 2008

Austin, Nichols Sorta Landmarked Post-Renovation

184-Kent-Avenue-Brooklyn-1208.jpg
If we forget the fact that the Austin, Nichols warehouse at 184 Kent Avenue in Williamsburg should have been landmarked back in 2005 when the City Council shot it down, today's news that the current owner and redeveloper of the 1914 building (shown here mid-paint job last October) has formally donated a deed of easement to the Trust for Architectural Easements is a good thing, we guess. What does it mean? That the Cass Gilbert-designed warehouse can't be torn down, nor can its height and shape be altered. The center of the building can be hollowed out and a rooftop addition installed as per the developers plans. Still, in the grand scheme of the last building boom, this developer has shown more respect for history than most.
Warehouse in Brooklyn Is Formally Protected [NY Times] GMAP
The Conversion of 184 Kent Avenue Marches On [Brownstoner]
In Reversal, 184 Kent Cozies Up to Preservationists [Brownstoner]
Do or Die Time for Cass Gilbert's 184 Kent Avenue [Brownstoner]




Posted by Brownstoner at 10:01 AM | Comments (15)
Categories: Landmark, Williamsburg

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/7727

Comments

kudos to the developer for not demolishing it or building another northside tower in its place

Posted by: dittoburg at December 22, 2008 10:22 AM

This building was landmarked before any changes were made and David Yassky got the city council to DE-LANDMARK it. And when Mayor Bloomberg vetoed it, Yassky got the council to override the veto. So no kudos to the developer and Yassky set a dangerous precedent.

Posted by: Jebby at December 22, 2008 11:32 AM

Do any tax types out there know what the status is on the tax implications of these easements these days? I recall there was some rumblings that the IRS was cracking down on the value being assigned to such easements, at least where the building was in fact landmarked. The theory was that if the building was already landmarked, then the grantor of the easement was really giving up very little.

If that's the case, this might be a situation where the warehouse owner actually reaped a larger tax benefit by defeating the landmarking and then giving 80-90% of the public benefit to the Trust. Perhaps the owner realized that 2008 will be profitable but 2009 not so much, so decided that some of tax offsets now might be a good thing.

Posted by: Boerumresident at December 22, 2008 11:42 AM

Yes, I believe the developer did reap a big tax benefit. I did this on my home in Cobble Hill and myself got a big deduction. I was audited by the IRS and the deduction held.

Posted by: Jebby at December 22, 2008 11:46 AM

Jebby -- Very interesting. How painful was the audit?

Posted by: Boerumresident at December 22, 2008 12:13 PM

Jebby, also, as someone who has done the process, can you explain how the easement works as a practical matter when you have to do facade repairs, window maintenance, etc.? For example, does the owner have to seek permission from the Trust in advance for all work? If there are changes to be made, can the trust grant an exemption from the current facade in the same manner as the LPC (e.g., if after historical research the owner determines that a cornice should be added or removed)?

Thanks

Posted by: Boerumresident at December 22, 2008 12:17 PM

This is one of those buildings that is interesting because it is so hideous.
Why didn't the Brooklyn House of Detention move here?
That would have been perfect.

Posted by: sam at December 22, 2008 1:59 PM

Sam, back in its pristine white days it really wasn't hideous.

Posted by: dittoburg at December 22, 2008 3:02 PM

This is very interesting. Is the building in a State historic District,or is it on the National Register? IIRC those used to be requirements for donating a facade easement to the Trust for Architectural Easements. If this has changed, these facade easements might be useful for people in my neighborhood whose homes are outside the existing historic district who, thus far, have been unable to interest the LPC in extending the boundaries. [AND, I'd take back all the bad things I've written about the Trust for Architectural Easements in the past].

Posted by: Bob Marvin at December 22, 2008 3:19 PM

Re the easement tax benefit: If you want to do any facade changes, there is basically a second set of approvals on top of Landmarks. There is no approval for maintenance that doesn't change the facade.The tax audit took one letter from my accountant with a copy of the appraisal. If your appraisal is not crazy, it's no problem. Sam - please look at a picture of this building before the changes. From the architect that brought us the Woolworth bldg.

Posted by: Jebby at December 22, 2008 3:31 PM

I like the building, I just think it was designed in a weird Egyptoid prison style. The narrow windows and the battered walls are, you know, a bit uninviting. It is interesting in an "abandon all hope ye who enter here" sort of way.

Posted by: sam at December 22, 2008 3:54 PM

A building has to be on the National Register to qualify for easements and tax credits; it does NOT have to be a NYC landmark. Not being a NYC landmark eliminates one of the potential IRS audit issues (if a building is already landmarked, and lpc has control over anything you can do to the facade, are you really donating anything of value?). The other audit issue is typically on the overall appraisal (as Jebby says, if the appraisal is not crazy, its no problem).

TFAE is a private non-profit; that is not the same thing as lpc having jurisdiction over the building.

Posted by: WBer at December 22, 2008 3:59 PM

I thought all of TFAE's easements were being audited. Why would they donate an easement to that bunch?

Posted by: sam at December 22, 2008 4:24 PM

Sam - your comments are moronic - you simply don't understand the easement program and you don't understand the Architectural Trust. This is a fine program that has saved many bldgs that were at risk and the Trust is a fine group that has done many things in New York other than easements for the sake of Historic Preservation. The renovations of the Austin Nicholas warehouse were carefully reviewed and negotiated with the New York State Office of Historic Preservation and the National Park Service. The character defining features of the building has been restored and preserved. If you ever get down to the east river go for a stroll around the property - I think you will be very pleased to see the results.

Posted by: Chip_Dilbeck at July 13, 2009 8:52 AM

Oh and the IRS has lost every single audit review on "Landmarked and Eased" properties from 1976 to present. It seems - every now and then the IRS reviews a few easements to see if the program is being administered properly - so far - all is good.

Posted by: Chip_Dilbeck at July 13, 2009 8:57 AM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions