Report Estimates Houses Would Cost
$18M to Renovate, Could Be More
By Sarah Ryley
Brooklyn Daily Eagle
NAVY YARD — One of the few remaining patches of undeveloped land in the Brooklyn Navy Yard is a row of dilapidated houses and tennis courts reclaimed by forest, where packs of wild dogs roam.
The Navy Yard, for more than a decade, has sought to acquire these ruins from the federal government, raze them, and use the six acres to create more jobs and industrial space. But a group of preservationists want the homes, built during the Civil War but vacant since the 1970s, restored and reused. Portions of the structures, known as Admiral’s Row because officers once lived there, are still intact, albeit seriously worn, while in other parts roofs and floors are completely caved in.
The National Guard Bureau will hold a public meeting on the homes next Tuesday, where a draft report will be available for viewing that is expected to estimate the homes would cost $18 million to repair. Andrew Kimball, president of the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation, said he thinks the number is much higher, and doesn’t want the property if the homes must be restored.
“Whether it’s $18 million, $30 million or $50 million, the question is who’s going to pay for it? What are you going to do with the structures once they’re rebuilt from the ground up? And is this the most responsible, economically viable approach to the site? And how does the community benefit?” said Kimball. “We’re not interested in the site if there’s restrictions put on to rebuild from the ground up.”
Simeon Bankoff, executive director of the Historic Districts Council, one of the many groups pushing to preserve the homes, said he’s disturbed by Kimball’s position. “He is really positing that a public agency does not wish to live up to its obligations … to look at mitigating the demolition of intact historic structures with public funds.”
Following the hearing, the National Guard Bureau would make the ultimate decision on whether the homes need to be preserved in some fashion. Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke cited several laws the agency must adhere to, including the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act.
“If the city of New York was to decide that they are no longer interested in purchasing the property, [the National Guard Bureau] would work toward transferring the property to another interested party through alternate means,” said Krenke.
Kimball said the Development Corporation has already invested $200 million in preserving historic structures within the Navy Yard, including a recently announced historical center that would contain exhibits and archived material. The Navy Yard recently announced it would rehabilitate the 19.5-acre Naval Hospital Campus, which also has historic structures but no running water or electricity.
If the National Guard’s report is accurate, at 47,000 square feet, Admiral’s Row would cost $382 per square foot to rehabilitate before outfitted for reuse. Kimball, backed by the Ingersoll, Whitman and Farragut tenant associations, wants to build two new buildings totaling 265,000 square feet that would house a grocery store similar to Fairway Market in Red Hook, a new jobs center (the current one is located deep in the yards), industrial space and studios. A 300-car parking lot would be at corner of Flushing Avenue and Navy Street.
Kimball estimated the project would create 500 jobs.
“We don’t have a decent supermarket where we can shop,” said Mary Andrew, president of the Farragut Tenants Association. “The handicap and seniors, they have to pay to go out of the community … or we have to spend enormous fees at these little bodegas.” She said that while some bodegas have a small selection of fruit and meat, it’s often spoiled.
“I think that with some creativity, [the Navy Yard] can still put in a supermarket with enough parking, and retain these buildings,” said Bankoff. “I don’t think the Navy Yard has ever seriously contemplated what they could do while retaining these buildings.” He suggested building a supermarket in place of the tennis courts, and reusing the homes for live-work space, medical offices and the jobs center.
“Why would you spend $5 million to renovate a building to put an employment in center there, when you could require a developer to make space for it in a new building that would also house industrial jobs?” Kimball retorted.
Krenke said the National Guard Bureau, under the Historic Preservation Act, is required “to consider multiple and viable alternatives prior to the transfer of the property.”
Despite an agreement signed in 1997 between the city and federal government that would allow the city to raze the homes, it seems their fate is far from a done deal. “This might end up an issue for the courts to decide,” said Bankoff.
© Brooklyn Daily Eagle 2007
All materials posted on BrooklynEagle.com are protected by United States copyright law.
Just a reminder, though -- It’s not considered polite to paste the entire story on your blog. Most blogs post a summary or the first paragraph,( 40 words) then post a link to the rest of the story. That helps increase click-throughs for everyone, and minimizes copyright issues.
So please keep posting, but not the entire article. arturc at att.net
Main Office 718 422 7400
