Admiral's Row: The Projected Costs of Preservation
Another little birdie emailed us with some of the costs that the consultants hired by the Feds are projecting for restoring the Admiral’s Row houses. As you can see from the chart, there were some later additions to the original 19th Century houses that are generally in worse condition and not considered worth saving, hence…
Another little birdie emailed us with some of the costs that the consultants hired by the Feds are projecting for restoring the Admiral’s Row houses. As you can see from the chart, there were some later additions to the original 19th Century houses that are generally in worse condition and not considered worth saving, hence the two square footage numbers. The Rehabilitation numbers refer to restoring what’s currently there, bringing existing details back to life and replicating missing portions; The Reconstruction numbers refer to a scenario in which remaining details are salvaged and incorporated into newly-constructed replicas. In addition to being cheaper, the Rehab approach sounds preferable to us. How do these numbers look to you?
Admiral’s Row: “Extremely High Level of Historic Integrity” [Brownstoner]
Officers’ Row: Let’s Have Our Cake and Eat It Too [Brownstoner]
Officers’ Row Preservation Coming to a Contentious Head [Brownstoner]
For Officer’s Row, Supermarket All But Certain [Brownstoner]
Admiral’s Row Fixup to Cost $20M [NY Daily News]
Real Estate Round-Up [Brooklyn Eagle]
2:48 – there is only one perspective on this issue. We can all dream great dreams, but at the end of the day someone has to do the work. How will the rehabilitation of these properties be handled?
You might fancy yourself a king who can go to the projects and enslave some of the unemployed to do your bidding (and that might not be a bad idea) but in the end, you have got to do this by the numbers. Someone will either provide goods and services to rehabilitate these properties for money, or you will take it from them by force. As I’m sure you find the concept of slavery reprehensible, I assume you will look to do this by paying people.
If that is the case, this project is just not financially feasible. What that means is you will have to find some way of funding this project that won’t involve someone actually wanting to pay money to either buy or rent these properties. Perhaps you’ll be able to get the taxpayers to pay for it, or find some one to donate money to your cause. I’d read Ella’s comments regarding the construction costs though – she is spot on.
You remind me of a rich liberal who has never had to worry about not having money to do what he wants and somehow thinks the government can just magically create or do anything to help humanity.
It isn’t so. There is only one reality when it comes to work: You either pay people with money, goods, or services or you enslave them. You might get some charity, but at the end of the day, the peasants have got to put food on the table.
So, good luck figuring out how to get other people to fulfill your dreams… I suggest you take off the funny glasses and check out how the world looks for regular folks who actually do the work you’d like to have done.
The restored buildings do not have to be used as bakeries or fancy boutiques. They can be used as a library, children’s center or even a navy yard museum. The Lefferts House in Prospect Park is regularly used for children’s programs, and teenagers from local youth groups man them and give tours to the public on weekends. I think this would be an excellent resource for the local community. Something that broadens a child’s scope of the world, and sffords social responsibility (which a parking lot does not) is the best way to better a community.
Preservationista,
From inside the gates, the navy yard looks like what it is: an industrial park.
The Steiner studios are off behind their own gates, a gated enclave within a gated enclave.
There are some very nice Victorian industrial buildings here and there. The most interesting thing is the drydock, made of solid granite. It is very interesting especially if there is a ship being repaired. But all in all the place is not really pretty, or romantic, or even photogenic. It is gritty and workaday. You see the dockyard workers walking past the Hassidic bussinessmen who rent factory space. I don’t think it would be a huge draw and the occupants would not want people traipsing through anyway. The water views are nice, but the water views anywhere in Brooklyn are nice. The modern buildings are super-ugly. That’s about it.
preservationista at 2:22 says it all.
She draws just the right future pix of this whole neglected botched morass of brix.
Polemicist suggests a myopic approach to this issue. Within the confines of that perspective, the conclusion reached is accurate. With a broader perspective, many other possibilities emerge and become pertinent to the value equation.
Pls be aware that there are often multiple prisms through which to see reality. And, all are imperfect.
The Brookyn Navy Yard, as a whole, probably has more historical provenance than any other place in the borough. It has been a part of our city’s history for over 200 years. These houses are a part of that history. Frankly, I’m glad the fence is there, and the site has been inaccessible. Had it not, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, as the only thing left of the entire Yard would be photographs and memories, and a plaque on the side of a building.
The Yard is HUGE. There is more than enough space for Steiner Studios, light manufacturing, retail opportunities and historic preservation and appreciation. If plans previously reported go through, where Steiner Studios can expand, and the historic buildings such as the hospital, morgue, etc can be restored and used, why not include the Row in this historic use? These houses are the only part of the historic legacy of the Yard that is easily seen from the street. For that reason alone, they are an enormous draw, and elicit queries whenever anyone goes down Flushing Ave.
Why not incorporate them into a destination? People complain there is “nothing thereâ€. That’s not true – the Yard is there, and could be marketed as a huge tourist attraction. It’s not far from the Brooklyn and Manhattan Bridges, it’s easy to get to. It’s close to Manhattan. Those double decker tourist buses would have no problem getting there.
What would they be going to?
Steiner Studios – movies, tv, stars, need I say more? They could very easily put together some kind of studio tour. Especially if they get the additional space they want.
WWII era Yard – when the Navy Yard was one of the most important ship building and staging areas in the US. If people line up for the Intrepid, they will line up for this, if done imaginatively and correctly.
!9th Century Yard – the hospital and morgue, Commander’s House, other period buildings and the Row: a museum, interactive stuff, one restored house tour, gift shop, restaurants, a bar, ice cream shop, yeah, even a b&b in one of the larger Row houses. The rest of the Row is leased to non-profits, community groups, or commercial tenants like architects, print shops, traditional furniture makers, any kind of business that would benefit from an historical location or a destination. Perhaps there would still be room for a program that trains people in historic restoration techniques, and other programs geared toward lifting up the lives and income levels of many in the surrounding neighborhood.
The Yard faces the Wallabout neighborhood, which could easily become the next vibrant community of loft spaces, small businesses, restaurants and entrepreneurs. Further down is planned affordable housing and existing suburban type housing, and then a park. The Flushing side of the Yard does not face the projects, and the part that does – well, that’s the end that the Supermarket is supposed to serve. A revitalized Navy Yard shouldn’t have the impound lot in it anyway, and that is a perfect place for a market/shopping complex.
This is just my off the cuff idea. I have never been inside the Yard, and don’t know how close or far apart any of these things really are, and I’m sure Ella, and others, will shoot it down as “a bad idea masquerading as a good idea, but is really a bad idea, and we already thought of that, and it won’t work.†Still haven’t heard why it won’t work. The red herring of funding is just that. Have they pitched a similar proposal to anyone? I can’t believe that in this vast country of wealthy risk takers, there isn’t someone who would want to see something like this work. Maybe they just need to go farther afield. Get some new and different marketing done, some celeb endorsement, a starchetect to sign on. (one who understands history, preferably)
It certainly beats watching the status quo, as the Row slowly sinks into the ground, and the Navy Yard goes on about its business. Kudos to them for revitalizing as much as they have, kudos for bringing in businesses like Steiner and all of the light manufacturing that is there, and big kudos for spending the money to stabilize the other historic buildings. But now is the time to perhaps go outside the box, and find new ways to grow in the future. As has been said for the last week, on this topic, it doesn’t have to been all or nothing, bulldozer or useless pile of 19th C. bricks.
Preservationista
Thanks for your concerns about me getting work done – I have to say that yesterday was not that productive a day for me. But today, it seems like the polemicist has made most of the points I was going to make, so I should be ok. But just to throw in my $0.02:
1) Those hard costs seem a bit low to me. According to my research and construction people, you’re probably looking at a hard cost number of about $550/SF.
2) Keep in mind that that is just the hard costs. There will be significant soft costs associated with this project (architecture and engineering fees, insurance – lots of insurance, etc). That will easily add several million to the price tag.
3)THere will also be significant site costs. These buildings are not currently connected to any infrastructure or utilities (electric, sewer, water, telecom)and if you’re ever been in those 6 acres after a heavy rain, you’d know that there is no drainage on the site at all. THat will also add several million dollars to the development costs.
3) The market rent you could get from either office or retail re-use of the site is nowhere near what it would be to justify costs to redevelop. Even if you just used the feds numbers and didn’t add in the very real additional costs I just outlined.
4)If you want to redevelop these houses you have to assume that they are either going to get seriously subisidized by the feds or be done as a purely market rate deal. If you assume it’s market rate – it will need to earn enough profit in order to attract a private developer to invest the money. And as I said before, it doesn’t come close. If you run the numbers and use real costs and rental assumptions, you come up with a negative IRR. A developer would want an IRR of around 20% to make it worth their while. Also, if you’re looking to a market rate deal, then all those comments about aesthetics are irrelevent since the aesthertic value created would be recaptured by the developer who invested the money. It would be a positive externality. If you assume that it would be sibsidized by the gov’t then the aesthetic issue matters, since the gov’t should place a value on that. However, as I’ve tried to point out before, there have been attempts to raise those fund from every level of gov’t and they aren’t there – so it’s not really a feasible option here. Maybe this will be a watershed event that will force gov’t to make more preservation funds available for projects like this, but in today’s world, it’s not there.
Have a good weekend everyone.
-Ella
Sorry, I slipped a digit in my earlier post; I meant to express a cap’ rate of 5 percent. I agree with The Polemicist’s points; how’d that happen? — 11:03
The houses were never part of the community’s context. They were situated behind a huge brick wall. They were the original gated community. All that was missing was cannon pointing at Clinton Hill.
If the wall comes down and the houses are restored, they will have lost all their original context. They were never accessible from the street, they were never part of the neighorhood. In the 1950’s through 70’s they were the homes to white Navy officers who probably thought of the neighborhhod beyond the wall with trepidation and considered it “terra incognita”. Cars and ships brought them in and out of their compound. Had the officers remained another ten years, they would have probably petitioned the Navy to increase the height of the wall and add razor wire. Instead, the Navy just walked away. Some wonderful legacy.
Hey – I’m already taxed to pay for the projects.