Public Hearing on Future of Admirals Row Tonight
Tonight the long-awaited follow-up to last December’s public hearing on the future of Admirals Row takes place at Borough Hall. All we can say in advance of the meeting is that we hope that the spirit of creativity and compromise can win the day. At this point, there appears to be strong political support for…
Tonight the long-awaited follow-up to last December’s public hearing on the future of Admirals Row takes place at Borough Hall. All we can say in advance of the meeting is that we hope that the spirit of creativity and compromise can win the day. At this point, there appears to be strong political support for including a supermarket on the site to address to current lack of options currently available to the residents of the nearby Farrugut, Ingersoll and Whitman Houses. There is also a large group of people who feel strongly that the Admirals Row houses deserve to be preserved, and a recent study commissioned by the National Guard gave weight to this view. (The report stated that the structures have a “high level of historic integrity.”) So what’s the answer? Find a way to create a supermarket while preserving most, if not all, of the houses. One such proposal has already been put forth by a team from Pratt. The one stakeholder that would be unhappy with that scenario would most likely be the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation, which wants to squeeze a new industrial building onto the site along with a massive parking lot for the market; the BNYDC has also said it does not want to assume control of Admiral’s Row from the National Guard if it comes with preservation strings attached. As with most thing, the real rub comes down to dollars and cents. It should be an interesting evening. The meeting takes place at 7 p.m. tonight at Borough Hall.
Pratties Have ‘Cake-and-Eat-It’ Design for Admiral’s Row [Brownstoner]
Guard Starts Talks ‘To Come Up With Alternatives’ For Row [Brownstoner]
James Opens Door to (Partial) Admiral’s Row Preservation [Brownstoner]
I was busy yesterday so I didn’t get to post the comments MMHTPH made, or tried to make since others just ain’t buying it. In any case, I agree, but at this point, I am just waiting for the Section 106 process to play itself out and then we’ll all know where we stand. Until then, much of the discussion is just bloviating.
A couple facts from another bean-counter: the BNYDC operates at a deficit, so KL, it is not in a position to subsidize a money-losing proposition. In fact, the development corporation has been charged with standing on its own feet financially, which is why it is pursuing profitable projects like the supermarket.
Also, federal base relocation laws require that the property be offered first to the city, so it is logical and appropriate that the BNYDC, which manages the rest of the former naval base, should be the only party being considered for redevelopment of Admirals Row. That may all change when the Section 106 review is complete, but it is reasonable at this point.
MMHTPH, don’t get all tied up in knots. I was not singling you out as head bean counter, but since you have volunteered to be the counterpoint to my point, let’s have at it.
I may not argue with the doctor when he tells me I’m sick, but I don’t lay down and die because of it, either. I’m going to investigate alternatives and do my best to beat the odds.
Kingstonlounge said everything I could ever say, and better, so I’ll just add an “amen” to his posts. Thanks for having facts and figures.
Everything is subsidized. No developer uses his/her own money, that’s not good business. The space taken up by the Row is miniscule compared to the entire Yard. Surely there is more than plenty of space for the furtherance of industry. It does not need to be at the expense of the Row. I would love to see some form of the Pratt plan happen. If the Yard can’t do it, then find someone who can. Our history is crumbling as we speak.
In that I apologize and offer you chocolates 🙂
Chill out bxgirl – it was a joke.
MMHTPH- what makes you think I’m going to get into another argument with you on this? Seems there are other people you can argue creativity vs beancounting with today so keep the snarky comments to yourself, thanks. Jeesh- and here I thought we managed to get past this crap.
That site is alot less valuable than you think it is. Far from subway, across the street from the projects, high renovation costs, and it’s zoned M1 – which means that you’d have to go through the ULURP process which will add at least another year to the development timeline. Not saying it’s not doable, but it’s not nearly the slam dunk that you are so glibly painting it as. Most greedy developers that I know would shy away from a site with so many issues and focus their energy and money on more compelling sites.
Also you are completely ignoring the very real need of the Navy Yard to use this land to help them with their mission. If you approach this problem as “how do I save the houses” then it’s pretty easy and yes, your solution would be one of the many that would work. But as I said in my earlier post, there are several other desirable goals to achieve with this land, and I’m not convinced that preservation goal is so much more important than the other goals. I have a soft spot for industry, and I think that the Navy Yard’s mission of providing safe haven for industry is more important. Especially since the folks at the navy yard have already done so much for preservation, including their announcement last year that they are restoring another historic house and turning it into a historic center.
But has anybody actually, you know, ATTEMPTED to subsidize this project? Nope!
Andrew Kimball and the BNYDC haven’t. It’s very transparent that they’d like nothing more than to demolish the structures. They’re not trying.
The National Guard? They barely even seemed cognizant of the fact that they were the titleholders until recently, and it’s not really what they do.
So what can be done?
It seems fairly simple to me. Allow other developers – other than the BNYDC – to make offers on the land, while making explicit the fact that the winning bidder will be expected to rehabilitate the structures, which ought by that point to be landmarked. This will encourage creative competition for a valuable parcel of land, and *somebody* will come forward with a plan that can save the Row whilst making the overall land (and, long-term, the Row itself) profitable. $40M – the high estimate for rehab – is a drop in the bucket next to land that valuable; offer the whole thing to the developer with the best adaptive reuse plan and there you go.
By ONLY considering the BNYDC as a recipient of the land, the National Guard has until now guaranteed that there is going to be no serious attempt for subsidies, and no reasonable plan for redevelopment. Doesn’t mean it can’t happen, just means the BNYDC should be considered only one of many possible owners for the land.
Yes – there are plenty of greedy developers. Also plenty of greedy doctors and interior designers. I, myself know one or two teachers who are jerks. So what? That doesn’t change the
economics of the situation.
I just want to be clear. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be subsidized. I’m not commenting on whether they are more or less worthy of subsidy than any of the of the hundreds of projects out there that are being publicly subsidized.
I’m just pointing out that it doesn’t work without subsidy and that even though this has been in the news for years – no one has stepped forward and said they were willing to subsidize it. That’s all.
Look, this is a pretty tough site. It’s got a lot of restrictions. You’ve got a relatively high renovation cost, crappy subway access, the Navy Yard’s mission of industrial development, the needs of the surrounding public housing community, and the desires of the preservationist crowd to balance. And you have to do it in a real estate market which is currently having a tough time finding financing for alot of other projects which are slam dunks compared to this.
Alot of the “solutions” put forth so far only focus on solving for one or two of those issues, but what’s really needed is a solution that is responsive to all of those issues.
Make My Heights the P Heights,
Yes, it *is* a profession. A profession which tends to define itself by greed, graft, and myopia, sadly.
Are you honestly telling me that over $200M in subsidies for an ugly basketball arena in Prospect Heights is reasonable, but the $20-40M it would take to FULLY restore Admiral’s Row is unreasonable?
Not to mention the fact that nobody has to lose their home to restore the Row.
Preservation through legislative mandate is often quite successful, and the Section 106 proceedings currently underway open the door to this. If the National Guard decides to mandate preservation in the revised MOA, then the Navy Yard can take the buildings or leave them. If they take them, fine – they will have to rehab them. If not, given their historic location, the quality of the architecture, and the fact that so much undeveloped land is attached – it is likely that somebody will take on the burden of rehabilitation for the structures with a long term goal in mind. And if not, NRHP listing is the first step towards legislated preservation – look what’s happening in Buffalo, NY, with the H. H. Richardson Complex. Preservationists sued for money, won, and now Buffalo is getting an Architecture and Visitor’s Center among other things, and some priceless buildings are being spared the wrecking ball or further demolition by neglect.
And Morris – yeah, I run a blog called “The Kingston Lounge” after the old jazz spot in Crown Heights; I have recent photos from the Lounge if you’re curious. And yes, it has been sold and work is going to begin on it at some point in the near future 🙂