Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MirthandMystery t1_je79oka wrote

Such a shame about this building being so disrespected. It’s enormously influential and famous, has a rich history, is in a perfect location yet seems to attract awful owners who hire useless building managers.

This building could easily be half for artists use on the middle floors, a jazz club on the ground floor, and upper section for boutique tech or business HQ offices, maybe a wedding venue on a floor or even a small artsy pre-K school for kids. And the rooftop could have a beautiful green space with a day coffee shop/lounge for nighttime use.

It could offer a wide variety of uses for creatives who’d be inspired and have the best view of the park across the street, as well as the best view of the gorgeous old neighboring corner brick building across from it at 186 Fifth Ave.

About 186th 5th ave: “The attractive red brick and terracotta building was originally erected in 1883 by Henry J. Hardenbergh, the architect who is also responsible for the Plaza Hotel. The landmark building once housed The Western Union Telegraph Co. and is now partially converted to house four residential condominiums.”

11

elNational t1_je7ejqq wrote

I don't think there's that many "creatives" that can afford the high price psf.

21

HonestPerspective638 t1_je7jivm wrote

if you pay 100Million and demo interor and reno will run tripple that.. its a massive investment.

15

spicytoastaficionado t1_je8aguk wrote

>This building could easily be half for artists use on the middle floors, a jazz club on the ground floor, and upper section for boutique tech or business HQ offices, maybe a wedding venue on a floor or even a small artsy pre-K school for kids. And the rooftop could have a beautiful green space with a day coffee shop/lounge for nighttime use.

What you're describing would be a complete renovation of the building where you gut and rebuild the entire interior, on top of the cost to buy it along with navigating the complexities of heavy renovation of a landmark status building.

Not sure anything that would require hundreds of millions of dollars in upfront costs could be described as "easily" done.

Also, anyone spending that kind of $$$ would want a ROI. I don't think the artists who could actually afford a space in Flatiron 2.0 are the type you have in mind.

And as far as office space, if a startup wanted Manhattan office space, they could do a lot cheaper than whatever it would cost to rent out space in a newly renovated Flatiron Building.

12

notreallyswiss t1_je8c8xk wrote

I mean similar things (at an admittedly smaller, but by no means minuscule price tag) are currently happening with the Jacob Riis Bathhouses. Some investors are eager for historic renovation tax right offs. And some people just have a vision for reimagining a cool building. One big difference is that the developers will only be able to lease the Boathouse from the National Park Service and someone would have to outright buy the Flatiron:

The development team behind renovations planned for the historic Jacob Riis Park bathhouse, following the extensive damages it suffered during Superstorm Sandy, has landed $47.5 million in financing to move ahead with the project. CBSK Developers, Brooklyn Bazaar and Aulder Capital closed on the money, split between a $32.5 million construction loan from Procida and a $15 million historic tax credit equity investment from Foss & Co. Work on the Rockaway Beach project began last month, and the developers expect to complete it by the summer of 2024. The bathhouse dates back to 1932 but had been underutilized for almost 50 years. It was hit hard during Superstorm Sandy, which destroyed its doors and window coverings and knocked down its courtyard wall. Jacob Riis Park became part of the National Park Service in 1972, and the federal agency selected events and concession company Brooklyn Bazaar to renovate the bathhouse following an RFP process. Brooklyn Bazaar and development partner CBSK inked a 60-year lease for the bathhouse with the National Park Service in October. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $65 million, and the developers will put up the remaining $17.5 million themselves. The overhaul is starting with a renovation of the building's facade, windows and turrets. The developers will also add a rooftop restaurant, a beachfront bar, ground-floor eateries and retailers selling beach supplies to the structure. The project will bring 28 hotel rooms to the bathhouse as well, along with a catering hall, event spaces, and a new pool and lounge areas to its outdoor courtyard. The renovations will preserve the famous Byzantine, Moorish and Moderne influences in the bathhouse's architecture. "The building has been an iconic landmark on the Queens waterfront for decades, and our restoration plan for the bathhouse will transform it into a modern beachfront hub complete with a full range of amenities for the public," CBSK Principal Scott Shnay said in a statement.

2

spicytoastaficionado t1_je8hrkn wrote

>One big difference is that the developers will only be able to lease the Boathouse from the National Park Service and someone would have to outright buy the Flatiron:

Which is a significant difference.

Even taking out Garlick's bids, the selling price for the Flatiron itself would likely be ballpark, or more, than the entire bathhouse project.

Don't get me wrong, I hope the Flatiron lands some owners who end up being responsible stewards of the property and do something productive with it.

But I think we have to be realistic about the very long, expensive, and effortful process involved to completely reimagine a landmark building like Flatiron.

3