BOARD & BATTEN THE LEGACY OF KIRKBRIDE AND THE THERAPEUTIC LANDSCAPE

BOARD & BATTEN THE LEGACY OF KIRKBRIDE AND THE THERAPEUTIC LANDSCAPE

1

2

BOARD & BATTEN THE LEGACY OF KIRKBRIDE AND THE THERAPEUTIC LANDSCAPE A Mixed Graduate Studio Project – Fall 2019 University at Buffalo School of Architecture & Planning

Nicholas Aja | Nicholas Anto | Sarah Donohue | Joshua Fraass | Ryan Hill | Yingjin Huang Paul Martucci | Joseph Quinn | Brandon Redmond | Brenna Reilly | Siera Rogers | Nirupama Stalin Sarah Waski Professor: Kerry Traynor

3

4

Table of Contents Executive Summary

.........................................

6

Introduction

.............................................

15

Methodology

.............................................

19

..............................................

23

...........................................

27

.............................................

43

...............................................

67

The Big Idea

Historic Context Site Analysis The Barn

Recommendations Conclusions

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 .............

141

...............................

191

Appendix 1 - Buildings 38, 39, 40, & 41: A Case Study in Adaptive Reuse Appendix II - BOTE Destination Retail Appendix III - BOTE Fitness Center References

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205

5

6

Acknowledgements

The in-depth study of the Richardson Olmsted Campus that was undertaken could not have been accomplished without the following individuals who were so giving of their time and support. We are deeply thankful to them for being willing to share their insights and information on this incredible place.

Christine Krolewicz Richard Olmsted Corporation Eric Ekman McGuire Development Jonathan Morris Carmina Wood Morris

7

8

Executive Summary 9

Executive Summary

The adaptive re-use and rehabilitation of cultural

resources involves the collaboration of many different disciplines and professionals, including historic preservation, real estate development and urban planning. This study brings together these disciplines to look at both the macro Figure 1: View from the Barn looking south across the north lawn Source: Joseph Quinn

and micro of the Richardson Olmsted Campus (“ROC”). This is done through an analysis of the entire ROC and through an exploration of the historic barn (“Barn”) and potential future uses.

The Richardson Olmsted Campus is a unique piece

of social and architectural history located in Buffalo, NY. The 1973 entry into the National Register of Historic Places secured the site’s preservation and protection, but not until after it had already been dramatically impacted by changes in the Buffalo State Hospital’s choices for expansion. 1 Because of its status, any plans for work on the property must follow the Secretary of Interior guidelines. While this is the case, compliance is generally only monitored through the influence of Historic Tax Credit programs, offered at both state and federal levels.

Originally known as the Buffalo State Asylum, the

buildings were designed by Henry Hobson Richardson, using the Kirkbride plan.2 The Kirkbride plan, created

by Dr. Thomas Kirkbride, utilized light and therapeutic landscaping, and work-therapy to treat the mentally ill. The grounds, designed by Frederick Law Olmsted incorporated many of the features that can be seen in his other landscape Figure 2: Example of Richardson’s building design Source: Joseph Quinn

designs. His focus on paths within the landscaping, water features, and integration of agricultural work-fields strengthened the connection with the Kirkbride plan.3

The Secretary of Interior guidelines dictate the work

of rehabilitation projects, ensuring that they do not disrupt the character defining features of the exterior, interior, or the 10

site.4 The rehabilitation of the Richardson Olmsted Campus will require developers to integrate these features into their plans to maintain compliance, and ultimately to receive the tax credits that are much needed to fund the project.

An evaluation was conducted to understand the history of the site, which included the

evolution of the site over the years up until the current conditions. A focus was put on the historic defining features created by Kirkbride, Richardson and Olmsted.

The current condition analysis looked at the interaction with the surrounding neighborhoods

and features, such as Richmond Avenue, The Elmwood Village, Chandler Street, Rees Street, and Grant Street. Further, other off-site amenities are explored including, the Albright Knox Art Museum, The Burchfield Penny Art Center, Buffalo State College, and more. These off-site amenities are explored in order to provide a full picture of the campus, and what can be provided for the proposed users. The site is further analyzed in order to weigh the strengths and weaknesses of current conditions, how the campus itself works for the proposed users, and how the actual Kirkbride Buildings connects to the Barn, which is a structure at the most northern part of the ROC.

The current site analysis was used to guide the recommendations for future development

on the campus. These recommendations are grounded in building upon current conditions and historic conditions including the pathways already on campus, the underutilized green space and parking lot space surrounding the Barn, and the signage and entrance locations to the campus. The site recommendations include moving the main entrance, reintroducing historic features on the campus in the green space (water features, agricultural land and therapeutic gardens), incorporating way finding signage for all features, connecting the south lawn to the north lawn and therefore to the Barn, and finally improving the site’s overall connectivity within and to the off-site amenities with enhanced pedestrian/bike paths, roads, and parking.

The ROC is currently advertised as an urban resort, therefore the incorporation of these

features will enhance this urban resort status, as well as generate greater traffic to the site, all the while connecting back to the important history of the ROC and once again becoming a prominent feature of the City of Buffalo.

The Barn reuse was fully evaluated to determine the best use that could accomplish a

multitude of goals. These included a use that would integrate well with the current ROC uses, the adjacent amenities and institutions, the surrounding neighborhood, and the larger region. A market analysis was conducted and a commercial retail use was determined to be the best fit for this 9000 square foot space. The tenants would include a bar/restaurant with an attached tasting room which will focus on locally sourced craft wine, spirits and beer so as to pay homage to the past agricultural history of the site. The two adjacent retails spaces will house destination retail stores in order to draw in customers looking for unique items. These will include a home goods store, and a specialty tea, oil and vinegar store. All of the spaces will share a courtyard space that can be fully activated for outdoor 11

events and as a seating area.

A financial analysis showed that this rehabilitation

of the Barn is highly feasible. Through the use of Historic Tax Credits along with a federal grant for roof repairs, conventional financing and minimal developer equity the project can be fully financed and completed.

Through this thorough and complete analysis of the

entire ROC this report has been able to identify clear and feasible recommendations for both the campus and the Barn.

The evidence and reasoning laid out in this report show that the ROC is an important piece of Buffalo history that is primed for the implementation of these recommendations that will help to better activate the whole campus and work to draw in visitors from both the adjacent neighborhood but Figure 3: The historic Barn structure Source: Joseph Quinn

Figure 4: Iconic towers of the main building Source: Joseph Quinn

12

the entire region.

Endnotes 1 NY State Historic Trust, National Register of Historic Places Inventory- Nomination Form, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973).

2 NY State Historic Trust, 1973 3 Lee H. Skolnick Architecture + Design Partnership, Buffalo Architecture Center: Richardson Center Corporation Institutional, Operational and Pre-Development Planning Report (Lee H. Skolnick Architecture + Design Partnership, 2011) 4 National Park Service, Rehabilitation Standards and Guidelines (US Department of the Interior, 2019)

13

14

Introduction

1 15

16

Introduction

During the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Buffalo was a city on the rise.

Philosophies on the treatment of mental health prompted the building of the Buffalo State Asylum, currently known as the Richardson Olmsted Campus. Influenced by the Kirkbride Plan, which focused on the healing influence daylight and work-therapy, Henry Hobson Richardson was commissioned to develop on a piece of land in Buffalo, New York. In collaboration with Frederick Law Olmsted, he established a 203-acre, park-like environment, meant to increase one’s mental well being during their stay.

The majority of the original sandstone and brick buildings remain, adjacent to its current

counterpart, a mid-century spatially efficient building, representative of how the attitudes towards the treatment of mental health patients evolved beyond the use of the Kirkbride plan. The dismemberment and sale of land from the campus throughout the twentieth century, coupled with decades of vacancy, left the Richardson Olmsted Campus (ROC) a far cry from its original glory. This said, the significance of the buildings and surrounding site are recognized on a national level for both the importance of its story, as well as for being an architectural masterpiece.

Presently, the campus sits on the 42.8 remaining acres. The Hotel Henry and its 100 Acres

Restaurant and Bar have been creating a buzz around the buildings and the opportunities for redevelopment and reuse. This report peels away at the layers that make up the Richardson Olmsted Campus. The exploration into the history of the property governs any and all current and future plans.

A comprehensive understanding of the site, in tandem with the guidelines for rehabilitation

of National Register listed properties, allow for recommendations for the handling of physical changes at the Richardson Olmsted Campus. Market studies, research and analysis into the City of Buffalo’s current needs, especially in the area of the site, have guided decisions and recommendations for the future landscaping and use of the Barn, which sits along the border of the Richardson Olmsted Campus and that of Buffalo State College.

17

18

Methodology

2 19

Methodology

When approaching the redevelopment of a project site as distinctive, yet diverse, as the

Richardson Olmsted Campus (ROC), it is important to understand first what was, before resolving future use and development. In preparation, to unfold the story of this site, a multi-week research phase was undertaken, integrating on-site investigation with historic research. This involved multiple visits to the site, touring the interior and exterior of the unfinished and fully rehabilitated buildings and walking the grounds and neighborhood. It is difficult to fully take in such a large-scale site in just a few visits. Through repetitive visits to the site it allowed the team to see and understand the site without being overwhelmed by the magnitude of the project. Concurrent with these physical visits was the exploration of the documented history of the site, which allowed the team to understand the creation and evolution of the place. This included historical documents from the past operations of the Buffalo State Asylum and modern reports on the campus.

This effort was followed by in-depth interviews and discussions with key stakeholders in the

redevelopment of the site. This included individuals who played a role in the development of Hotel Henry and the future development of buildings 38-41, Buffalo State College students, Richardson Center Corporation Staff, Hotel Henry staff, a ROC historian and neighborhood residents.

Extensive research was conducted to understand the physical construction of the buildings and what are the historic character defining features that would be a part of the historic preservation analysis.

The team became familiar with the Secretary of Interior and State Historic Preservation Board’s standards for the treatment and redevelopment of historic structures.

Consideration was given the entire site and how it interacts with the adjacent institutions and

neighborhoods, provides access and wayfinding, and the general draw that it provides to potential visitors and users. Analyses of the gateways, access points and visual connections were done to understand the opportunities and constraints of the current site.

With informed perspectives, potential redevelopment plans were introduced, and analyzed

with the understanding that Historic Tax Credits would be utilized as a financial component. The redevelopment of buildings 38, 39, 40, and 41 were thoroughly analyzed through market studies, financial feasibility models, use analysis, historic renovation costs, and a supply demand analysis of the intended use.

The analysis of the development of buildings 38-41, lead into the consideration of how to

redevelop the Barn site, located on the north lawn. A similar analysis was completed with all of the same considerations and modeling.

Throughout the entire process there was a consistent questioning of “what has been missed?”;

“what has not been thought of?”; “what is missing?”; “is what has been proposed, truly the best use and path forward?”. It was through this questioning process that created an iterative process and 20

allowed the team to continually hone the final design recommendations and conclusions that follow herewith.

21

22

The “Big Idea”

3 23

The “Big Idea”

The University at Buffalo School of Architecture and Planning houses the three disciplines

which have come together for this project. The overlapping yet unique disciplines of Urban Planning, Real Estate Development, and Historic Preservation are all well positioned to analyze and weigh in on a complex project such as this. The historic reuse and renovation of the Richardson Olmsted Campus draws on the skills of each of these disciplines and when brought together have a depth of knowledge that could not be achieved by a single discipline.

The graduate students in each of these fields of study bring a distinct toolset to this project.

The Urban Planning students are well equipped to consider the entirety of the Richardson Olmsted Campus and how it functions. They are also considering the physical interaction, gateways and connections with the surrounding community and institutions. There are a multitude of thriving institutions that abut the campus but those connections are not yet leveraged to enhance each other. The Planners are equipped to think in broader terms to understand the long term and short-term impacts that the project can have on the site, the surrounding community and the region.

The Real Estate Development students are considering the wide scale impact on the region but

also more narrowly looking at the project itself and how it can be both financially feasible and have a positive impact on the community. The Development students utilize data from market studies to predict the best proposed use and if that use can be supported in the long term. They also use financial estimations and long -term projections to determine how a project can be financed and if it can maintain a positive cash flow once operational.

The Historic Preservation students have the most defined focus of the disciplines as they are

looking specifically at the physical structures and improvements to the site, considering how those structures came to be, and what can be done to maintain the history that brought them into existence and to their current state. Their work, while precise in the scope, still must consider the broader context of the site. It must take into account the history of a site and with the Richardson Olmsted Complex there is a deep, complex history and evolution that must be fully understood by the Historic Preservation students. That knowledge is leveraged to inform how the site can be revitalized and adapted for a modern purpose and they bring the tools to understand how to do that work within the stringent confines of the Secretary of the Interior Historic Preservation Standards. Those standards must be adhered to and navigated in order to obtain historic tax credits, which have a major impact on the financial viability of a project.

The “Big Idea” of this studio is to tap into the deep knowledge of these three disciplines and

magnify and leverage that knowledge to create something greater than what could be achieved by one discipline alone. The interaction with other disciplines has allowed the graduate students to 24

push further and explore topics and ideas that they may not have otherwise considered if not for that direct and repetitive interaction with students from other disciplines. Most importantly, this studio has closely simulated a real-world, large-scale project which would bring together the expertise of many fields and get them all collaborating and thinking communally about how to tackle a project.

With a site like the Richardson Olmsted Campus, it is immensely helpful to have this diverse set of ideas and opinions because any work done on this site is inherently difficult and solutions are not straight forward. The historic reuse of these structures do not easily translate to modern uses and the construction costs are very high. That combination demands creative and innovative solutions that can only be garnered through the collaboration of a team such as this.

25

26

Historic Context

4 27

Overview Introduction to Buffalo NY: The nineteenth century

The City of Buffalo, NY was established in 1832, but

had already been growing for some time at that point.1 The completion of the Erie Canal in 1825, connected Buffalo to Albany for the first time, and became a gateway for the Atlantic Trade to the west.2 In 1842, the first steam-powered grain elevator in Buffalo was developed, and with this, Figure 4-1: Muth of the Erie Canal in Buffalo, NY Source: Keystone View Company

unlimited access to grain at the Port of Buffalo, leading to an industrial and economic boom lasting into the 20th Century.3 By 1860, Buffalo had become the tenth largest city in the country with over 80,000 residents, and growing rapidly.

With the country’s eyes on Buffalo, the likes of the nation’s most profound city planners, designers, and architects found themselves commissioned on planning projects in the city.4 Well known landscape architect, Frederick Law Olmsted left a significant impact on the City of Buffalo, designing an extensive park system of six different parks throughout the city, each of them connected by a series of parkways. He also described Buffalo as being “one of the best planned cities in

Figure 4-2: 1901 Pan American Exposition in Buffalo, NY Source: United States Library of Congress

the United States, if not the world.”5

The 1901 Pan-American Exposition was held in

Buffalo from May 1st to November 2nd. Buffalo, in 1901 was the eighth largest city in the United States, with a population of 350,000 residents, and well-connected railways, and because of this, was chosen to host the 342-acre Exposition.

The Exposition showcased the latest advancements in electricity, notably hydroelectric power, which was generated in nearby Niagara Falls, and hosted the top engine manufacturers. The Exposition also provided visitors with entertainment, called the Midway, where exhibits included attractions like the “House Upside Down.” The Exposition is perhaps most famously known for the place where President McKinley was shot on September 6, dying later 28

of an infection from his wounds. This happened just to the

northeast of the Buffalo Insane Asylum grounds.

Mental Health in the United States

During the 18th century, new ideologies on the

treatment of the mentally ill became popular, and increased numbers of hospitals were commissioned. As the number of individuals with mental illnesses began to increase around the world, there needed to be a place where they could go

Figure 4-3: The York Retreat Source: Gemälde von Carve

to be “cured” of their aliments. Europe saw some of the first hospitals for the mentally ill. These hospitals were created based on the “moral theory” of treatment. A famous example is York Retreat in England.6 This model included a location in a pastoral setting with a central administrative structure and wards with double loaded corridors. Being in a pastoral setting, there was the opportunity create a small community that was the hospital. Patients at York Retreat were treated using a daily routine of rest and work, along with outdoor experiences and connecting to nature.7 This asylum was used in a curative way and did not use any harsh experimental treatments on the patients. The asylum was not meant to be punitive to the patients, it was instead made to help them

Figure 4-4: Image depicting the layout of the Kirkbride Plan Source: Goody Clancy

heal.

The United States took many ideas from European

models for the treatment of the mentally ill. The moral treatment theory and its relation to hospital architecture shaped many of the hospitals for the mentally ill that were created through the second half of the 19th century. There was a significant increase in the mentally ill population in the United States, and there was a need for institutions to house these patients. There were over 150 state insane asylums built in the 1800s in the United States.8 The maximum capacity for these new institutions was raised from 250 patients from 600 patients.9 There also was an increase in medical professionals to treat the growing number of patients. The hospitals at the time followed the Kirkbride plan, characterized by a central administrative tower and wings of wards spanning out from

29

the center.10 The hospitals reflected the ideals practiced in Europe and new adaptations to fit the newly constructed hospitals. The design of the buildings was imperative into providing treatment for the patients. As time went on, the traditional Kirkbride plan was modified into the cottage plan, where wards became increasingly more separated and became communities within themselves.11 Patients worked, experienced the environment around them, and followed a strict routine to help cure their ailments.

Dr. Thomas Kirkbride Figure 4-5: Dr. Thomas Story Kirkbride

Thomas Story Kirkbride was born in Bucks County

Pennsylvania, in 1809, on a one-hundred-and-fifty-acre farm,

Source: Institute of the Pennsylvania Hospital

who descended from a very old and distinguished Quaker

Gallery

family. At an early age, he and his father decided that he would not take over the family farm, but rather, the young Kirkbride to go into medicine. In preparation for a medical career, Kirkbride’s father provided him with an expensive secondary education – an education few were privileged to receive. During the early to mid-1800s, entry into the medical field required no formal schooling. Most doctors possessed only a common school education, and even fewer, a college degree. Even prior to his medical degree, Kirkbride was amongst the best-educated doctors of his day.12

Figure 4-6: Friends Asylum for the Insane Source: Historical Society of Pennsylvania

After his secondary education, Kirkbride began his

medical training with an apprenticeship to a physician in private practice where he learned the basics of traditional medicine. It was common for aspiring doctors to apprentice themselves to a practicing physician, which was sufficient to earn a medical license, prior to entering medical school.

Kirkbride entered the prestigious medical school at the University of Pennsylvania in 1828 where he learned a more sophisticated intellectual framework for understanding diseases and its treatment; however, he learned very little about the nature of mental diseases and their treatment in medical school.13 After graduating medical school in

30

1832, and not getting his first choice of residency at the Pennsylvania State Hospital in general medicine, he accepted a residency at the Friend’s Asylum, outside of Philadelphia, where he gained his first practical experience with the treatment of the mentally ill, which was based on the European system of moral treatment.14 After learning the basics of asylum care of active treatment at Friend’s Asylum, he left in 1833, when he was admitted to the residency of his

Figure 4-7: Interior of a Kirkbride Plan building

liking in general medicine at Philadelphia.15 The basics that

Source: Peabody Institute Library of Danvers

he learned as an apprentice of traditional medicine – that is, diagnosis, therapeutics, and regimen, in addition to his good-natured, country boy, Quaker values, he attained as result of his agrarian upbringing of hard work, pragmatism, and moderation – would go on to help shape his life’s work in designing the conception of asylum treatment.16

In 1841 the Pennsylvania Hospital for the Insane

opened two miles outside Philadelphia, located on one hundred acres, specially designed to provide intense, regimented treatment for the mentally ill.17 Kirkbride, being chief physician at the time, had complete control over every aspect of its operation, and followed well known European precedents that reflected the idea of moral treatment based upon minimal physical correction, incentives to self-control, and firm paternal direction.18 In other words, if treated like rational beings, the mentally ill would behave like rational beings.19 Kirkbride presided over the Pennsylvania Hospital for the Insane until his death in 1883, and during his tenure, it was considered one of the finest insane asylums in the United States, laying the groundwork for the Kirkbride Plan.20 The Kirkbride Plan was the preeminent design for insane asylum’s in the United States from 1841 to 1880.21

The general layout of the 1854 Kirkbride plan

consisted of two major components: the interior environment of lighting and ventilation, and the classification of patients. The wings radiated off the central building, in a staggered pattern, so that each ward, with

31

no less than eight in each wing, had good ventilation, its own staircase, and views of the grounds while allowing for maximum separation of the wards. At the end of long halls, the wings had bay windows to allow light and air to enter. The worst patients were in ground-floor ward farthest from the center building and best in top-floors, closest to the center. The interior had to maintain the cheerfulness Figure 4-8: New York State Lunatic Asylum in Utica, NY Source: “History of Oneida County, New York”,

by Durant

of its grounds, landscaped gardens, fountains, and summer houses, designed to hide the custodial appearance of the insane asylum. The carefully landscaped exterior grounds contributed to the healing of patients as much as the interior spaces because it was thought that one’s own environment contributed to one’s mental health.22

Because of the work of Kirkbride, the idea of

landscape gardening as a restorative measure to one’s mental health, was evolving. Andrew Jackson Downing, a proponent of rural landscapes, was at the forefront of this movement with his design of therapeutic landscapes first incorporated into hospital grounds at the New York State Asylum in Utica, New York, in 1842. This rural, or pastoral landscape, consisted of open lawns, water features, trees, curvilinear walks, carriage drives near the center of the buildings, and panoramic overlooks. This informal pastoral landscape was asymmetric, curvilinear, and naturalistic, rather than formal and geometric, which was soothing to the viewer. Downing’s views in naturalistic landscape gardening influenced the later works of landscape architect, Frederick Law Olmstead.23 Frederick Law Olmsted

Frederick Law Olmsted was born in 1822 in Hartford,

Connecticut.24 His father, who was a great influence in his life, often took Frederick on horseback throughout the countryside around Hartford, before he was old enough to sit on a horse, to admire the scenery.25 These short rides turned into annual tours that took Olmsted through the Connecticut Valley, White Mountains, up the Hudson River, 32

west to the Adirondacks, lake George, and finally to Niagara

Falls.26 Reflecting on his youth, it was not what he studied that he best remembered, but what he did.27 As a child, Olmsted’s countryside wandering was encouraged and most the time he was busy helping on neighbors farms, and happy outdoors.28 The earliest lessons in aesthetics came from the American landscape that Olmsted experienced in his youth. Late in his career he said, “The root of all my good work is an early respect for, regard and enjoyment of scenery…”29

Olmsted participated in the design of five asylum landscapes and believed that the workings

of the sane mind were not so different that the insane.30 The pastoral landscape at the Buffalo State Hospital that Olmsted designed was incorporated into the therapeutic program that the hospital offered to the patient’s mental health and healing. Olmsted’s pastoral design was soothing, informal, asymmetrical and naturalistic rather than formal and geometric. Consistent with this design and the Buffalo State Hospital was open view across the landscape, gentle topography, round headed trees, broad lawns, reflected water surfaces, curving drives and walks, and broad patterns of sunlight shaded by deciduous trees.31 The effect of this landscape came in such a way that the viewer was unaware of its workings, designed to affect the viewer, with the absence of distractions and demands of the conscious mind.32

Figure 4-9: The ponds originally located next to Elmwood Avenue Source: Cultural Landscape Report

Frederick Law Olmsted did not consider landscape architecture for his profession until later in

his life, at age 43 to be precise.33 It all started in 1857 when he secured the position of Superintendent of Central Park in New York City.34 As superintendent, Olmsted was director of labor and police, and would be responsible for enforcing the rules related to public use of the park.35 The following year, he and his partner, Calvert Vaux, a trained architect whom he was acquainted with, won the design competition for Central Park.36 They explained in their winning plan, dictated by nature and the popularity of the English school of landscape design, that their intention was to create

33

contrasting scenery to suggest to the imagination a great range of rural conditions.37 Within two years of starting the work on Central Park, Olmsted and Vaux had a growing architectural landscape practice.38 Olmsted considered his responsibility for the park’s artistic success equal to that of Vaux, but regarded himself as a better manager and organizer of the work, as he was architect-in-chief and in charge of construction from 1859 to 1861.39 However, when Vaux and Olmsted were working on Central Park, the term “landscape architecture” was not yet in use, and the practice itself, as a profession, was in its infancy.40

There were very few practicing landscape gardeners when Olmsted and Vaux won the Central

Park competition. Andrew Jackson Downing was perhaps, one of the most influential early pioneers of what would become known as landscape architecture, in modern terms. A native of Newburg, New York, Downing accepted a partnership with his older brother in the nursery business in 1831, and spending his spare time roaming the countryside admiring scenic landscapes.41 Downing published, to great success, A Treatise on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening in 1841, which laid out his ideas, that were based on his travels, experiences, and views.42

At the dawn of industrialization, at a time when cities were beginning to see larger urban

centers, Downing believed that cultivators should not be underestimated, because it was not solely for the wealth, which they produced, but the moral virtues associated with agriculture that should be valued.43 Horticulture, Downing believed, “more than any other art, brought men into daily contact with nature, giving simple, pure pleasure…”44 Downing contributed to the idea that people surrounded by rapid industrialization of the time, prefer, and need to see, or be emerged in scenic rural landscapes for relaxation – that the pressure of capitalism caused mental stress. He promoted the idea of a simplistic rural life. Downing incorporated his ideas into the design of the New Jersey State Lunatic Asylum grounds in 1848.45 The basis for Olmsted’s ideas came from experiences of his youth and earlier practitioners like Downing.46

Figure 4-10: Map published in 1872 showing the original site plan for the Richardson Olmsted Complex and how much larger in scale it was at its completion. Another point of interest is the lack of owned property directly surrounding the site.

34

Source: 1872 Hopkins Atlas, Eleventh Ward, Buffalo, NY

Buffalo State Hospital

In 1870, the Buffalo State Hospital for the Insane was commissioned in Buffalo’s 11th

Ward, and brought in Henry Hobson Richardson to design the campus, along with Frederick Law Olmsted to design the grounds. The hospital opened in 1880. Designed in what is now known as the Richardson-Romanesque style, and was based on the Kirkbride Plan.

Kirkbride’s ideas for the regimental treatment of the insane and Olmsted’s ideas for effects

of a rural landscape on the unconscious mind of both the sane, and insane, converged to help heal patients at the Buffalo State Hospital. Asylum reformers and park enthusiasts believed that environmental factors could shape human behavior, nature was curative, exercise therapeutic, and that cities psychologically draining.47 Kirkbride based his model on his European predecessors, and further refined the system according to his experiences as a well-trained doctor, as well as influences from his childhood that shaped his character. Olmsted, too, refined the movement of landscape gardening that was already established, based on the influences of his childhood, where he learned the value and the beauty in rural scenery, and further specialized the profession. They both were merely fuel to the fire – not spark that lit the fire.

Figure 4-11: Buffalo State Hospital Source: Richardson Olmsted Corporation

35

Timeline 1870-1890

Historical maps show the area to be largely agricultural in use prior to the development of

the hospital. The data shows that in the immediate surrounding area, there were only 21 properties owned from 1870-1880. The majority of the owned land was owned by Buffalo Iron and Nail and DW Clinton for manufacturing uses for the most part.34 Adjusted for inflation, the assessment values of the properties averaged only $13,000 which shows how the area was not yet an attractive area for purchasing land. From 1880-1890 however, we can see a substantial uptick in both property ownership as well as assessed property value. The key property which now shows up on the assessment rolls is State Insane Asylum. DW Clinton and Buffalo Iron and Nail both still own a considerable amount of property in the area, but there is now a high volume of property ownership by other people. The amount of owned property increased from 21 properties in 1870 to 45 and the adjusted for inflation assessed property value more than doubled to $36,000. It is clear that the neighborhood began blooming as the hospital opened. Many would argue that the park system is one of the biggest attractors. Frederick Law Olmsted was implementing his parks system in Buffalo and they would be extended to this neighborhood via the new hospital.

1910-1930:

Up into the late 19thcentury, the neighborhood surrounding the hospital has shown steady

and promising growth, which is a sign of a growing city. However, from 1910-1930, the area saw unprecedented growth. Both property ownership and property values grew considerably again as they did in the previous decades. In this span of years, property ownership shifted from a few players owning the majority of the 45 properties, to a large volume of different Buffalonians owning their own piece of the 90 registered properties in 1910. The adjusted for inflation property assessments over doubled again; the average hovering over $73,000. The uptick in property purchases is likely due to the Pan American Exposition that took place in Buffalo in 1901. The Expo highlighted Olmsted’s parks system and made property near the parks much more attractive. Given the hospital is now part of the system, it would only be natural that property values would spike near it.

1950-1970:

This period coming after the sudden boom of the early 20thcentury was followed by the

Great Depression, an economic collapse that affected the entire nation. Buffalo was hit especially hard. Buffalo had long been a thriving manufacturing city but due to the sudden economic collapse, the Buffalo economy was struck by businesses and manufacturers closing their doors. This in turn 36

caused property values in the city to drop, including the neighborhood surrounding the hospital.

Property values dropped considerably from their height of $120,000 down to $42,000 after being adjusted for inflation.3 It is also important to note that during this time, the hospital was in a state of decline and dilapidation until its eventual closing in the 1970’s. From a close lens, the hospital and neighborhood’s declines are connected, but one could argue that they are both on trend with the City of Buffalo. It is well known that the city faced a substantial decline in the mid-20thcentury and it would make sense for older properties and neighborhoods to experience some form of decline.

1970-Present: It has been well documented that Buffalo in the 20thcentury faced both population as well as economic decline. However, the neighborhood surrounding the Richardson Olmsted Complex saw a different trend starting in 1970. From 1970-1990, property values adjusted for inflation increased from $42,000 to $65,0003though the hospital had already been closed for decades and a large portion of it being now owned by Buffalo State. If you compare the 1990’s values with the values in 2014, you can see another significant increase, signifying a neighborhood again on the rise.3 To a Buffalonian, this is not a surprising statistic in that Elmwood Ave and the surrounding neighborhoods has become a very popular area. It is not surprising to see consistently rising property values in an improving area.

Conclusion

The neighborhood surrounding the Richardson Olmsted Complex was one of much

turbulence from 1870-2014. There was slow but steady improvement followed by skyrocketing home values into the late 1920’s. The question whether these changes are caused by the creation of the Richardson Olmsted Complex still remains. This is because the landscape designed by Frederick Law Olmsted made the neighborhood more attractive, being highlighted by the Pan American Exposition.

However, the city faced a well-documented decline in the following years as well as the Richardson Olmsted Complex.

37

Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines

The Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines say that in

rehabilitation “historic building materials and characterdefining features are protected and maintained as they are Figure 4-12: Brick damage and temporary repairs on building 40 Source: Siera Rogers

in the treatment Preservation. However, greater latitude is given in the Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings to replace extensively deteriorated, damaged, or missing features using either the same material or compatible substitute materials. Of the four treatments, only Rehabilitation allows alterations and the construction of a new addition, if necessary, for a continuing or new use for the historic building.” The main guidelines are to identify, retain and preserve historic materials and features; protect and maintain historic materials and features; repair historic materials and features; replace deteriorated historic materials and features; design for the replacement

Figure 4-13: Roof Damage on Building 38 that needs repairs Source: Siera Rogers

of missing historic features; alterations; code required work; accessibility and life safety; resilience to natural hazards; sustainability; and new exterior additions and related new construction.

Preserving the masonry of the buildings is important

to retaining their historic character. To protect the masonry, existing historic drainage features should be intact and functioning properly. Cleaning should be done with soft bristle brushes or a low-pressure hose and detergent. Repointing deteriorated mortar joints may be necessary.

Replacement in kind of any masonry that is too damaged to repair is allowed by using physical evidence to recreate the damaged element.

Retaining the existing roofs, their structural and

decorative elements is vital to retaining the historic character Figure 4-14: Image of original window and framing in Building 40 that will need to be preserved and restored Source: Siera Rogers

38

of the buildings. The form of the roof is significant, as are the roofing materials. Downspouts and gutters should be cleaned to ensure proper drainage so damage to the roof does not

occur. Roof repairs may be done if the original or compatible non-historic roof is sound and waterproof. Replacement in kind of a roof that is too damaged to repair is allowed by using physical evidence to recreate the damaged element.

Original historic windows should be maintained

and retained because they are elements that are vital to the buildings historic character. Repairing damaged window frames, including replacing materials with in-kind materials, is allowed. A window that is too damaged to repair may be replaced by using physical evidence to determine what was original.

Original porches and entrances should be retained

and preserved because their functional and decorative features are important to the overall character of the building. The original materials are also significant. Any entrances that will no longer be used still need to be preserved in order to keep the character of the building.

Figure 4-15: Original porch on the west side of Building 38. The temporary boards that are in place should be removed in order to keep the character of the building Source: Siera Rogers

Existing porches and entrances should be repaired and removed and any porches and entrances that are too damaged to be repaired should be replaced in kind.

Interior spaces, features and finishes are important

in defining the historic character of a building. Significant special characteristics including corridor size are important to retain. Protecting and maintaining interior elements such as plaster, wood and masonry are necessary. Any extremely damaged material may be replaced in kind or with another

Figure 4-16: This fireplace in Building 40 is a character defining feature Source: Siera Rogers

compatible material.

The features of the site the building is on should be

maintained and preserve. These features include fences, circulation systems, vegetation and landforms. The land should be surveyed and documented before any terrain alterations will be done. Repairs should be made to any features that have been damaged, deteriorated or have missing components. In kind replacement of any feature or element that is too damaged to be repaired is allowed.

Figure 4-17: Features on the site such as the foundation remains of the greenhouse should be maintained and preserved Source: Siera Rogers

39

40

Endnotes 1 The Buffalo Evening News, A History of the City of Buffalo Its Men and Institutions, (Buffalo: The Buffalo Evening News, 1908) 2 http://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/collection/LIB005/ (accessed 20 November 2019) 3 (Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor 2019) 4 (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1995) 5 Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy, “Our History: Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy - His Legacy. Our Inheritance.,” Buffalo Olmsted Parks, accessed December 5, 2019, https://www.bfloparks. org/history/) 6 Historic Structures Report the Richardson Olmsted Complex. Goody Clancy for the Richardson Center Corporation. July 2008. Page 19.

7 Historic Structures Report the Richardson Olmsted Complex. Goody Clancy for the Richardson Center Corporation. July 2008. Page 19.

8 Historic Structures Report the Richardson Olmsted Complex. Goody Clancy for the Richardson Center Corporation. July 2008. Page 24.

9 Historic Structures Report the Richardson Olmsted Complex. Goody Clancy for the Richardson Center Corporation. July 2008. Page 23.

10 Historic Structures Report the Richardson Olmsted Complex. Goody Clancy for the Richardson Center Corporation. July 2008. Page 22.

11 Yanni, Carla. The Architecture of madness: Insane Asylums in the United States. University of Minnesota Press. 2007.

12 Ibid, 45-53 13 Tomes, 57, 60.

14 Ibid., 60.

15 Ibid., 65-66.

16 Ibid, 45-53.

17 Ibid., 37.

18 Ibid., 20-22.

19 Ibid., 5.

20 Ibid., 41.

21 Ibid.

22 Ibid., 141, 142.

23 CLR 6,8,9.

24 Tatum, 1.

25 Beverage, http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/olmsted-theory-and-design-principles/ olmsted-his-essential-theory 26 Beverage, http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/olmsted-theory-and-design-principles/

olmsted-his-essential-theory 27 Tatum, 9.

28 Ibid, 9.

29 Beverage, http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/olmsted-theory-and-design-principles/ olmsted-his-essential-theory 30 Yanni, 9.

31 Patricia O’Donnell, Carrie Mardorf, Sarah Cody, Cultural Landscape Report (Heritage Landscapes: 2008), Part II, 9.

32 Yanni, 9.

33 http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/frederick-law-olmsted-sr 34 http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/frederick-law-olmsted-sr 35 Laura Wood Roper, FLO: A Biography of Frederick Law Olmsted, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973), 124.

36 Ibid., 124.

37 Ibid., 137.

38 George Tatum, Andrew Jackson Downing: Arbiter of American Taste, 1815-1852 (Princeton University, 1950), 144.

39 Ibid, 145.

40 Roper, 143.

41 Tatum, 40.

42 Roper, 143.

43 Tatum, 33.

44 Ibid., 35.

45 Yanni, 58.

46 Charles E. Beveridge, http://www.olmsted. org/the-olmsted-legacy/olmsted-theory-and-design-principles/olmsted-his-essential-theory 47 Ibid., 59.

41

42

Site Analysis

5 43

Introduction

This study looks at the complexity of the historic Richardson Buildings, and the difficulty

with their adaptive reuse, inherent in the character defining features. The reuse proposal of these buildings is difficult to navigate, given that by design, public space was considered therapeutic space.

The difficulty with adaptive reuse is that these public spaces are not easily reused for purposes other than those that keep them open, to the public or private use. This leads little space to be adaptively reused, as illustrated by the analysis of the proposed reuse by McGuire Development (see appendix I).

Redevelopment of the site should reflect original components as Kirkbride interpreted and

then implemented by Richardson and Olmsted to reveal the duality of the plans. The design and architecture embody history, together they tell the story of Olmsted’s therapeutic landscape and the interpretation of the Kirkbride Plan.

The history of this site is not the only important aspect to the redevelopment. ROC has

expressed challenges and problems with how the current site flows, the way finding system, as well as the lack of connection between the various uses on site and proposed to be on site. Therefore, there becomes a challenge with how to tie historic features together while addressing these issues in redeveloping the green space and barn space. The following sections will go through the historic landscape of the ROC and the evolution of the site. Then, the next section analyzes the current site, and finally the next section explains the proposal for future development of the site.

44

Figure 1: 1871 plan of ROC Source: Cultural Landscape Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex

Figure 1a: Historical overlay on current map of ROC

Historic Landscape of Richardson Olmsted Campus

This section will analyze the evolution of the historic landscape of the ROC by comparing and contrasting the historic grounds to contemporary grounds. This will be done by identifying the key defining features of the historic ROC landscape, the features and modifications that have occurred over time, along with the current conditions/existence. Some of these features have been removed completely, some have remnants, some have been removed and restored, and others enhanced. In order to supplement the written descriptions of these features, maps are provided that illustrate the evolution of the ROC grounds.

Figure 2: 1966 Map of Richardson Olmsted Complex and Buffalo State College Source: Aerial Photographs of Buffalo and WNY: 1966

Typology of Olmsted Landscape Surrounding Hospitals

Frederick Law Olmsted designed landscape plans for the grounds surrounding five asylums. In addition to the five asylum designs by Olmsted that were implemented, his designs played influential precedent for future ground designs of health institutions, including the numerous designed by his sons.1 Asylum/Hospital Buffalo State Hospital Butler Hospital Hudson River State Hospital Hartford Retreat Bloomingdale Asylum

Location Buffalo, NY Privudece, RI Poughkeepsie, NY Hartford, CT White Plains, NY

Year of Development

1880 1896 1871 1860 1892

Olmsted’s hospital ground designs were consistent with many of the design features of his parks with the intent of just that – providing a park like setting for patients. These features include open view across the landscape, gentle topography, round-headed trees – such as elm, oak, and ash.

Olmsted landscape plans also called for broad lawns, reflected water surfaces, curving pathways.2 Historic Features of Richardson Olmsted Complex

Plans for the Richardson Olmsted complex were complete in 1871 (Figure 1) . This section of the paper will present the features of Olmsted-designed hospital grounds that are relevant to the design of the Richardson Olmsted Complex. In addition to the features of the Olmsted grounds, this section will also review the features of the grounds of the Kirkbride Plan. Collectively, these features tie together to create a unique design. The existential condition of those features today will also be outlined.

45

a. Railroad

Although it was not a direct feature of the Olmsted

landscape, the railroad spur was a critical feature of the north grounds. This feature is actually a component of the Kirkbride Plan with the sentiment that rail networks would provide access for the transportation of supplies and goods, Figure 3: Olmsted designed water feature - Elmwood Pond

in addition to patients.3

Although the exact date of the development of the

Source: Cultural Landscape Report: The Richard-

railroad switch is not available, the maps allude to it being

son Olmsted Complex

developed in the late 19th century, after the opening of the complex. What makes this evident is that the railroad switch is not present in the 1881 map (Figure 11), but is present in the 1899 map (Figure 8). This is similar for the removal as it is unclear what year the spur was removed although the maps show that it occurred sometime between 1949 and 1974.

Further research shows that it was removed prior to 1966 for the development of the Scajaquada Expressway and Buffalo

Figure 4: Recreational fields west of the administration building Source: Cultural Landscape Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex

State College athletic fields (Figure 2). b. Water Feature

One feature that is characteristic of Olmsted designed

landscapes is the inclusion of water features. The ROC had a water feature on the Northeast corner of the site near Elmwood Avenue, referred to as the Elmwood Pond (Figure 3). The pond was implemented some time between 1881 and 1899, and was removed following the purchase of the site by SUNY Buffalo State College in 1929. The site of the Elmwood Pond is approximately where the Rockwell Road entrance currently is to Buffalo State College and the ROC. c. Recreational Fields

Recreation/sports fields were not always defining

features of Olmsted’s landscapes, however they were present at the ROC for the use of patients and inmates. Located to 46

the east of the administration building and south of the

sprawling male wings, there were fields for patients, which became a popular spot for recreational activity, which can be seen in Figure 4. d. Green Space

Surrounding the ROC is an abundance of green space

in each direction. Historically, each of these areas of green

Figure 5: Patients tending to on campus farm Source: Cultural Landscape Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex

space had specified uses, programming, and activities.

4

Today, much of this space remains underutilized. The grounds to the south were historically landscaped meadows

by Olmsted. This section of landscape was lost for a number of years although a portion of it was implemented once again during rehabilitation and conversion of the three central buildings into the Hotel Henry. e. Greenhouse

Historically, the original greenhouse was constructed

in 1888, located to the north of the buildings was a greenhouse. Greenhouses are a feature of the site’s farmland that were tended to by the patients and inmates of the facility. In addition to the original greenhouse onsite, there were two more greenhouses constructed, one in 1892 and the other in 1916. It is unclear as to the date of demolition for any of the three structures. Although they no longer stand, the foundation of the original greenhouse is still present.

Currently, this area is used to grow fresh produce that provides farm to table items for the culinary experience at the 100 Acres: The Kitchen at Hotel Henry. f. Farmlands

The northern grounds of the Buffalo State Asylum

hosted a farm that was tended to by the patients who resided at the facility (Figure 5). Today, the site of the former

47

farmland is home to the SUNY Buffalo State College campus, although a barn that was built in 1928 still stands on the northwestern edge of the property, just south of Rockwell Road. g. Walking Pathways

Olmsted’s plans called for beautified, meandering

walking paths sprawling across the campus to provide for leisurely activity in a relaxing environment (Figure 6). These paths were central to the original Olmsted plan that was Figure 6: Walking paths through campus Source: Gabler. “About Barns.”

laid out in 1871 (Figure 1). Many of these paths have been removed over time, although the paths located on the south lawn have been restored, as mentioned earlier.5 h. Green Linkages

Buffalo’s Parks and Parkway system are key features

to the city’s overall design and framework. This system is composed of six parks, seven traffic circles, and a series of parkways to connect it all. Delaware Park is Buffalo’s largest park, 368 acres and was central to Olmsted’s park Figure 7: Historic linkages of Olmsted Parks and Parkway systems Source: Gabler. “About Barns.”

and parkway system for the city.6 As previously mentioned, Olmsted designed the grounds on the ROC, thus it had a role to provide connectivity of green space between Delaware Park and Richmond Avenue. Figure 8 represents an 1881 map that highlights this connection of green linkages in relation to site of the ROC. i.Agricultural Land

As mentioned in other sections of this report, the

grounds attempted to provide a therapeutic retreat for patients, with the farmland providing a framework of regimented activity and labor for patients as they are treated and attempt to adapt to societal responsibilities. Production 48

of everything from poultry to produce to grain occurred on the farmland. Figure 9 refers to the 1928 Annual Report of the Buffalo State Asylum, which provides a breakdown of what was grown and produced in the farmland. Below is a list of crops that were grown on the campus.7

Evolution of ROC Grounds

What remains today on the grounds of the ROC is a faint reminder of what once was. While

much of the complex’s central, original buildings still stand, others have faced the wrecking ball while ground features were plowed over and erased from the site. Not only were buildings and features lost over time, but also the site’s original 203-acre footprint was reduced to 93 acres today.

Figure 1 highlights the original 1871 site plan, but it must be noted that the site did not fully develop until 1899 (Figure 8) .

In the years to follow, many of the site’s buildings and defining features within the grounds

began to be removed. This can be seen in Figure 9, where one can see the structures and features that once composed of farmland, rail transport, playing fields, ponds, and historic structures onsite have been replaced or simply removed entirely.

49

Figure 8: 1899 ground plan Source: Buffalo State Asylum and Hospital Site Plan Maps

50

Figure 9: 2008 site plan Source: Buffalo State Asylum and Hospital Site Plan Maps

51

The design of the ROC was not one that was simply implemented overnight, rather one that

has continuously evolved, even to this day. The following section presents a series of maps that highlight the evolution of this plan, the implementation of buildings and park features, and the eventual demolition of buildings and removal of park features.

Figure 10: ROC site plan 1847

The implementation of this plan began in the 1870s prior to the facility’s opening in 1880.

Figure 11 illustrates the development of the grounds as of 1874. At this point, the complex’s central administration building was developed along with two ward buildings to the east and a separate utility building to the north. By 1881, one year after the opening of the Buffalo State Asylum, the complex continued to sprawl to the east with the addition of several buildings to the north, seen in Figure 10.

52

Figure 11: ROC site plan 1881

By 1899, the complex’s original plans had largely come to fruition, seen in Figure 9. Plans

for the original Kirkbride structure with wards expanding to both the east and the west had been constructed, along with an additional building along Elmwood Avenue. Adjacent to the building on Elmwood Avenue to the south was an aesthetic water feature.

Following, by 1926, the campus had expanded to its largest point shown in Figure 11. At this

time, not much had changed from the 1899 plan, aside from various smaller buildings that were constructed across the campus grounds.

53

Figure 12: ROC site plan 1926

Arguably, the greatest change in the makeup of the ROC occurred following the transfer of

the northern half of the site that was sold for the development of SUNY Buffalo State College in 1927.

Shortly following the purchase of this site, the buildings along Elmwood Avenue were demolished, the adjacent pond was removed and the farmland was converted to a campus of academic buildings.

The railroad switch remained in place, bisecting the site that was being developed for the academic campus. These changes become evident when comparing the 1926 plan (Figure 11) to the 1949 plan seen in Figure 13.

54

Figure 13: ROC site plan 1949

The plan of 1974 shown in Figure 14 displays the loss of several historic buildings on the

northeastern edge of the site, including three buildings that were once part of the male ward. This same period also experienced the development of several large new buildings on the eastern portion of the site along with several small buildings that were constructed on the southern border of the site along Forest Avenue.

55

Figure 14: ROC site plan 1974

Concluding Remarks of Site Evolution

This evolution of the site is important when it comes to developing the north lawn of the

ROC. These maps and site plans all illustrate what was once on the campus from the very beginning of the development. Therefore, this allows the developer to include certain site features in the new development because they were once apart of Olmsted’s landscape. Thus, the next section will explain and analyze the current site and the amenities that are there. Following the analysis, the next section will explain what is missing and what is recommended to be included in the future design of the site, tying back to this historic landscape analysis.

56

Analysis of the Current Site

The current Richardson Olmsted Campus is comprised of various businesses and uses that

provide the visitor and user with a variety of things to do and experience on site. For reference, Rockwell Road to the North, Elmwood Avenue to the East, Forest Avenue to the South, and Rees Street to the west surround the campus. As mentioned previously, the site includes a hotel, cafĂŠ, fine dining restaurant, vast green space, and multiple event spaces. There are various off site amenities, With this said, there still seems to be a lack of density on the campus at times, and the ROC itself has expressed their struggles and issues that lead to frustration from guests and users, which can be addressed with a comprehensive way-finding system.

The existing transportation network around the site provides connections to and from

downtown and to local surrounding neighborhoods. Regional access is available via the Scajaquada Expressways, which connect to various other main highways throughout the area. Along Elmwood Avenue and Forest Avenue there are pedestrian and bike lanes that are distinctive and disconnected from the road, making them safe for all users. On Forest Avenue, there are approximately 6 Metro Bus stops walking distance from the campus itself, with about 3 more stops located on Grant Street, to the west of the campus. There is also a Metro Bus stop directly on campus, located behind Hotel Henry.

Pedestrian access to this site is accommodating, with sidewalks located around the entire campus on each side. These sidewalks are also handicapped accessible. Below, the roads surrounding the site are explained in further detail.

Figure 15: Major roads surrounding ROC

57

Rockwell Road

Rockwell Road provides an east/west connection from Elmwood Avenue to Grant Street

to the north of the campus. This road has the main entrance to the ROC located on it. Rockwell Road contains on-street parking, two to four travel lanes and turn lanes into Buffalo State Campus buildings, as well as other driveways. There are sidewalks provided on each side of the road, with signals at the intersection of Rockwell Road and Elmwood Avenue, and Rockwell Road and Rees Street. Rockwell Road itself has multiple stop sign intersections.

Forest Avenue

Forest Avenue is to the south of the campus and provides an east/west connection. Forest

Avenue is a two-lane minor arterial road. There are sidewalks provided on both sides of the roadway.

An important feature to forest Avenue is that it gives a signalized entrance and exit to and from the ROC. This entrance is intersected with Richmond Avenue, a residential road directly to the south of the campus. Forest Avenue allows for on street parking on both sides of the road.

Rees Street

Rees Street is the western border to the ROC, and provides a connection to Rockwell Road

and Forest Avenue, running north to south. Rees Street is made up of mainly residential use, with sidewalks and on street parking allowed.

Elmwood Avenue

Elmwood Avenue is the eastern border of the ROC and it runs north to south, parallel with

Rees Street on the other side. Elmwood Avenue provides sidewalks on both sides, and designated bike paths and bike lanes. There is an entrance to the ROC off of Elmwood Avenue that is signalized, but the visitor will first have to pass a variety of other buildings before hitting the actual ROC itself when using this entrance. On street parking is restricted on the section of Elmwood Avenue between Rockwell Road and Forest Avenue.

58

Analysis of the Current Site Amenities

The ROC recently came out with a RFP for a consulting service to establish a signage system

for the campus entrances, parking, and general way finding, as well as campus-wide signage applications for current and future tenants and neighbors. The RFP project description provided detail of the challenges of the current site. They expressed there is no clear path to parking and building entry points, which causes frustration with visitors. The main entry to the Richardson Olmsted Campus and Hotel Henry is currently located at the corner of Rockwell Road and Richardson Road. This entrance is hidden away, on the Buffalo State College campus next to their maintenance buildings, and the sign is dark and set back into the trees. This entrance does not convey a feeling that a visitor is entering a historic and important site, and it does not give the visitor the sense of place the ROC is looking for. Further, many visitors and community members have an instinct to enter from the historic Forest Avenue entrance, even GPS systems navigate drivers to the Forest Avenue entrance.8 Another problem that comes with visitors entering from Forest Avenue is finding parking and building entry becoming a challenge because it is on the opposite side of the building. The third entrance to the site is the current entrance off Elmwood, which is primarily an entrance to SUNY Buffalo State College and Burchfield Penney Art Center, not to the Hotel Henry or ROC as a whole.

This entrance does not give any suggestion that you’re arriving at the ROC either.

There is a fourth entrance to the site that is kept a bit of a secret for multiple reasons, and

not mentioned in the RFP at all. This entrance is located off of Rees Street, which is on the west side of the campus off of Grant Street. Currently, it would not make sense for the site to use this as an entrance as it leads to the abandoned section of the complex. Further, the entrance also leads towards an unfinished and unusable road to the right with massive potholes and uneven road, shown by an orange/tan dotted line in the roadway around the campus. Lastly, this entrance has great green space along the roadway, but a massive fence that as mentioned before, separates the road from the site follows it. There may be reasons for this, such as safety issues because this side of the building is unstable and abandoned, but it may do more damage to the site than anything else. Rees Street is not a main thoroughfare until it becomes one, as a result of the proposal for it to become the new main entrance. Create an exclusive entrance to the ROC instead of to Buff State. Celebrate your presence in design, and that celebration of entrance in-hand celebrates the neighborhood. The RFP addresses the desire to convey a community feel, because as of now the campus is basically fenced off from the street life and surrounding communities. The campus has absolutely no signage, and there lacks connections for pedestrians to get around the site.

Another aspect to the campus’ landscape is the inclusion of pathways, sidewalks, and other

landscape that is designed for the pedestrian rather than the car. As reference, a map of the campus’ south lawn redevelopment plan is included (Figure 15) . This shows an extensive plan of winding 59

pathways, greenery, and Olmsted influenced landscape design on the south lawn of the Richardson Olmsted Campus. Historically, the landscapes for the campus’ surrounding grounds were designed as a 19th century therapeutic landscape design for the patience enjoyment and health. This site plan included the proposal of planting new trees, complementing the existing ones, environmentally friendly rain gardens, grand and elegant entry to the main campus, and a 1,300-foot pedestrian loop that references Olmsted himself. All of this made it possible to relocate 112 parking spots.9 This south lawn development can be referenced the development of the north side of the building including and leading up to the barn, but it also gives developers a head start on where to continue the paths and landscape to create connectivity between both sides of the building and beyond.

Currently, the two paths that lead into the corners of the Towers Building essentially lead to a vast parking lot and turn into a prioritization of the automobile rather than the users of these paths, putting an end to the connectivity for pedestrians.

The current site has a few amenities that the visitor can experience located on the main

campus, but they cater to a very specific demographic. Below, the amenities are explained in further detail.

60

Figure 16: South lawn design site plan Source: Associates, Andropogon. 2015. Richardson Olmsted Complex South Lawn and Parking Lot Relocation.

61

The “Barn”

Located in the site’s Northwestern quadrant is the only surviving barn of the many that once

served the campus’ former farmland. Built in 1928, the barn served primarily as a shed for wagons and heavy machinery. Over time, most of the doors were replaced or altered, although there are a few that exist in historic nature.

The barn is cobbled together by beams, columns, windows, wall coverings, interior and

exterior materials from buildings of another date. This building is significant because it represents what in today’s world, an innovative and sustainable reuse of materials, and if redeveloped, an innovative and sustainable adaptive reuse of a building. The notches in the wood beams, the teething in the steel beams, the use of window sash as both window and storms all illustrate that this building has been put together in a unique way to make it more significant than a new build would be. The barn has been built by recycled and reused materials from other parts of the campus, making it a historically significant piece of the site as a whole.

Furthermore, this building embodies the agricultural history of the Kirkbride and Olmsted

vision of therapeutic landscapes. The landscape in the field next to the barn is currently used by Buffalo State rugby. However, this green space described is significant in the sense that it has the potential to embody the agricultural landscape envisioned by Olmsted, create the link between the ROC and the barn, along with the link to connect it back to its historic landscape. The redevelopment of this landscape provides paths built and connected to the existing paths, and the redevelopment will also provide another venue for visitors to experience the campus in a different a unique way.

Hotel Henry

Figure 17: The Barn location marked in yellow

Hotel Henry already provides a few amenities that can be utilized by the users of the proposed

development of the site. First, the hotel itself has a total of 88 rooms, ranging from suites to your basic hotel room. This can be considered a great asset to the users as the proposed apartment units that have been seen are on the smaller side, therefore when guests and visitors come they can stay right on site if there is not enough room. Like most hotels, there also is a small gym, but not yet a pool.

The hotel also includes one restaurant and one café located throughout the first floor of the main building. Next, Hotel Henry is known to be an “Urban Resort and Conference Center” and therefore the hotel uses the excess amount of common space and other unique spaces as event space for 62

conferences, weddings, and other events. The unique architecture is something the hotel prides itself on, and therefore there is an architectural museum that is not fully developed just yet. The hotel is also surrounded by cultural landscape designed by Olmsted and Vaux, which has been restored by the hotel, but still seems to be underutilized. There are some pathways, benches, and tables throughout the restored areas but do not possess the historic Olmsted features. Each of these areas are open to the public and not restrictive in their uses, therefore the residents of the proposed apartments have access to each amenity. These amenities are explained further in detail below.

Restaurant

100 Acres is the only restaurant on the campus currently. This is a fine dining farm to table

restaurant, which aims to tie back to the historic farming uses of the Richardson Olmsted Campus.

The menu ranges from $5.00 to $20.00 for lighter fare, $18.00 to $32.00 for entrees, and approximately $12.00 for cocktails.10 These price points are consistent with the type of user that is proposed for the apartment tenants, which are higher income senior residents as well as the user of the hotel itself.

With the current restaurant serving a specific clientele, there may be great opportunity for

other restaurant options, and the ability to develop other amenities on site that will attract a different clientele if desirable. When it comes to restaurants, the proposed use of the barn will address creating alternative places to eat on site besides a fine dining restaurant.

Café

The current Counters café on site seems to cater only to the users of the hotel. They do serve

to outsider users and visitors, but the location and the hours set fourth an environment that may be convenient only to the hotel guests and not the general public. However, there are also numerous cafes around the site that are well established, and therefore catering strictly to the hotel guests may be the goal of the café on site because of the competition off site. However, this gives the users of the apartments a quiet, small and exclusive area to get a coffee without having to travel far, or even travel outside possibly.

The current site does have space that draws visitors onto the campus. However, because of

the selective hours of the café, the pricey menu of the restaurant, and the lack of way finding and signage, there seems to be a missing piece that ties all the amenities together. Whether the current amenities are too selective, or that they are not advertised nearly enough, the site can benefit from further development that will create a connected and welcoming campus to all different types of users. With this said, the next step in analyzing the site is putting forth certain recommendations that are believed to enhance the features and amenities that are already there, as well as tying the site all together to give it the sense of place it desperately needs.

63

Endnotes 1 Yanni, Carla. The Architecture of Madness Insane Asylums in the United States / Carla Yanni. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2007.

2 Heritage Landscapes. “Cultural Landscape Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.” 2008.

3 Clancy, Goody. “Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.” 2008.

4 Heritage Landscapes.

5 GOVERNOR CUOMO ANNOUNCES DESIGN FOR TRANSFORMATION OF LANDMARKED RICHARDSON OLMSTED COMPL EX IN BUFFALO.” States News Service. States News Service, August 20, 2013.

6 Shibley, Robert G., Schneekloth, Lynda H., and Olmsted, Frederick Law. The Olmsted City the Buffalo Olmsted Park System : Plan for the 21st Century / Edited by Robert G. Shibley and Lynda H. Schneekloth ; Developed Under the Direction of, Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy ... [and] with the Consulting Support of the Urban Design Project, University of Buffalo, State University of New York ... Trowbridge and Wolf Landscape Architects, Wendel Duchscherer Architects and Engineers. Buffalo, N.Y: Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy, 2008.

7 Saglian, Mark. 2019. Buffalo State Asylum and Hospital Site Plan Maps.

8 Corporation, Richardson Center. “Richardson Olmsted Campus Wayfinding RFP.” 5. Buffalo, NY: Richardson Olmsted Campus, 2019.

9 Corporation, Richardson Center. “South Lawn Improvements Create Community Recreational Space.”

10 Staff, Hotel Henry. 2019. “100 Acres at Hotel Henry Menu “. https://www.100acresbflo.com/menu.

64

65

66

The Barn

6 67

Barn Typology and History

Figure 6-1: A Dutch Barn showing its steeply pitched roof and low side walls Source: Gabler. “About Barns.”

Figure 6-2: An English Barn one story tall with a loft above for hay Source: Gabler. “About Barns.”

Figure 6-3: A Gambrel-Roof Barn displaying its double pitched roof Source: Gabler. “About Barns.”

68

Barns have played an important role in the United States since the first European settlers arrived, bringing with them their knowledge in erecting new structures for uses such as storing hay, livestock and equipment. They are essential for farms to function properly and they have evolved greatly over the years.

The Dutch Barn was prominently built between the 1640s and the 1840s in the United States. They commonly have a steeply pitched roof with low side walls. Their floor plan is usually almost a perfect square with wagon doors on both gable ends. A dramatic feature of the Dutch Barn are their massive beams that span the main aisle connecting the posts with large protruding tenons. There is typically a main center aisle with rows of stalls on either side. The wagon doors were typically hung on wooden or metal hinges with one side halved to create what we know as the typical “Dutch door.”1

English Barns were prominently built between the 1780s and the 1850s. They are typically one story and rectangular in shape. Like the Dutch Barn, the English is also divided into three bays. They are entered through the long side that opens into the center bay. The bay on one side housed livestock while the other was an enclosed grainery.

Hay was stored on poles in the loft above. Their basic frame consists of four bents or cross sectional framing units connected by plates or sills.2

Gambrel-Roof Barns were prominent from 1850 to the present. They have a double pitched roof and wagon doors on the long side of the barn. Some of them may have basements while others may not. Essentially they have the frame of an English Barn with a roof style that is borrowed from early colonial houses. In the later part of the nineteenth century the Gambrel Barn became popular in the western portion of New York State. At this time they were often adapted to balloon frame construction which used sawn planks instead of hewn timbers. The Gambrel Barn, with its classic red paint and white trim, has come to be known as the “classic American barn.”3

Even though at the time the gambrel-roof barn was

popular in the western portions of New York State, the barn on the Richardson Campus seems to fit the English and Dutch Barn styles more. It is not one style in specific because the barn is pieces together with parts from other barns that were demolished. This is part of what makes this barn special. It was built with whatever they had and they made it work.

Figure 6-4: The Barn displaying its mix of classic barn typology Source: Siera Rogers

William Haugaard

After the original work of the Richardson Olmsted

Complex was completed by architect Henry Hobson Richardson, other local and state architects stepped in to develop additional portions. Some of these architects included Andrew J. Warner, William W. Carlin, Edward B. Green, and William E. Haugaard. William E. Haugaard was a notable contributor to the Wagon Shed, which is why we named our redevelopment of it after him.4

William Haugaard is known to be the man directly

responsible for the construction of the Wagon Shed that we are redeveloping. After Haugaard received his architectural education at Pratt Institute, he became State Architect of New York. He held this position from 1928 to 1944, where he worked on several projects such as the Panama Canal, the Attica State Prison, and the Sixty-fifth Regiment Armory in Buffalo. Haugaard came into power a couple decades after the hospital was up and running, and he made some major changes. He designed the Female Dining Hall and the second Nurse’s Home. Once he got into his office of State Architect, he transferred the northern half of the hospital to the city in order to create the State Normal School, which is now Buffalo State College. This transfer saw the movement of the Male Tuberculosis Ward and the Pre Industrial Shop to the school. It also saw the demolition of Elmwood Building and the Kitchen on the ROC. Most importantly, Haugaard was responsible for the construction of the Wagon Shed, which

69

is the subject of our proposal. In order for Haugaard to build the Wagon Shed, he had to oversee the deconstruction of the frame farm buildings. He allowed pieces from all over the ROC to be used to construct the Wagon Shed, which is what gives the barn its piecemeal form.5

These architects all had a similar vision of how they

wanted the campus to look. One significant feature in all of the barns on the campus are the board and batten exteriors.

The first major architect who influenced the barn designed Figure 6-5: Notches in the wooden beams are evidence that they came from somewhere else where they had a specific use Source: Siera Rogers

was William W. Carlin. Soon after W.W. Carlin moved to Buffalo in 1884, he became a prominent figure. He served as the last president of the Western Association of Architects and designed many important buildings and residences.

W.W. Carlin was involved in the design and construction of multiple buildings on the ROC from the years 1885 up until his death in the early 1890s. The buildings on the ROC that he was associated with were the Second Barn, the Hen House, the Hog House, the Greenhouse, the brick Employee Building, the three Summer Houses, and Ward F.6 All of the additions to the ROC were faithful to Richardson’s original design and completed his overall vision.7

The Barn’s Connection to the Kirkbride Plan and the Olmsted Campus

The barn was constructed around 1930 but is made of materials from other barns that date back to the late 1800s.

Barns were important at Buffalo State Hospital because during the 19th century farming was seen as a form of therapy for mentally ill patients.8 The hospital was designed with over half of the land to be set aside as farmland.

The farmland was used for patient recovery that started with a good site with tillable soil so that the farm and gardens would provide fresh food for the patients.9 The patients participated in regimental farm labor as a part of the 70

healing process, which provided the mentally ill with daily tasks that did not differ so much from the daily lives of the sane.

There were many barns on the campus before this barn was built around 1930. There were some for livestock such as pigs, and others for storage. When those barns were torn down, records show that pieces of them were taken to create this wagon shed. The wooden beams on the interior have notches and marks on them that show they were used somewhere else previously. There are steel beams on the first floor that have “bite marks� in them suggesting they had some sort of gear system attached to it in its previous use. Each of the windows on the first floor have two sets of windows in them, as if they didn’t have storm windows to use but had extra single pane ones that they could double up to effectively be a storm window. The doors are all different styles and opening mechanisms, suggesting they came from different places.

Figure 6-6: The different styles and opening mechanisms of barn doors hint that they came from different places Source: Siera Rogers

71

Character Defining Features and Existing Conditions Feature: Barn Doors Description: There are 11 wooden barn doors, including the hatch door on the second floor under the hoist beam and the small door on the added on shed.

Figure 6-7: Bi-fold door Source: Siera Rogers

Condition: Varies Integrity: High Deficiencies: Rot, inoperable, missing hardware, discoloration, deteriorated frames. Some doors were altered from their original slide opening system to a hinge system.

Some door openings were cut to become larger to allow for bigger equipment to be stored inside.

Figure 6-8: Hinged barn doors Source: Siera Rogers

Recommendation: Repair doors where possible. It can cost about $9,000 to purchase replacement wooden barn doors and up to $2,000 for new track systems, depending on the material needed.

Figure 6-9: Sliding barn doors Source: Siera Rogers

Figure 6-10: Opening that has been cut to make room for larger equipment Source: Siera Rogers

72

Feature: Windows Description: The barn features a variety of different window styles, likely thrown together with any extra hardware lying around. There are x amount of sash windows. They are both double and single hung and mostly 6 over 6 or 20-25 panel.

In some cases, 2 windows are built together, likely to give the illusion of temperature control. Minimal nail use.

Figure 6-11: One of the typical cases where 2 windows were installed together Source: Siera Rogers

Condition: Varies Integrity: High Deficiencies: The windows suffer from varying degrees of damage. There is rot, peeling paint, broken frames and glass panels, inoperable, and missing hardware. Some are boarded up.

Recommendation: Repair windos where possible. To replace windows inside existing and structurally intact window frames, it could cost between $300 to $1,000 per window. If the existing window frame is rotted or damaged in any way, the frame must be rebuilt. A new frame and window could

Figure 6-12: Windows on the lower level are boarded up to deter vandals Source: Siera Rogers

cost up to 100% more than just the replacement window.

This is a cost of about $600 to $2,200 per window.

Figure 6-13: Windows in the chicken coop for the chickens to enter and exit from Source: Siera Rogers

73

Feature: Board and Batten Siding Description: Majority is vertical wooden board and batten siding, with horizontal wooden board and batten siding on the side with the chicken coop doors. On the north and south facades there is a sawtooth decorative edge cut on the Figure 6-14: Board and batten siding

bottoms of the upper boards.

Source: Siera Rogers

Condition: Varies Integrity: High Deficiencies: Most of the wooden siding is damaged by water and deteriorated and suffers discoloration. Some areas of the siding are rotting or have broken off pieces.

Figure 6-15: Board and batten siding on the chicken coop Source: Siera Rogers

Recommendation: Repair board and batten siding where possible. The cost to replace wooden board and batten siding ranges from $3-$10 per square foot. Average installation costs can range from $4,000 to $14,000. Replace 40%, restore the rest.

Figure 6-16: Board and batten siding on the side of the carriage barn Source: Siera Rogers

Figure 6-17: Board and batten siding on the front of the main barn Source: Siera Rogers

74

Feature: Foundation Description: The exterior mortar is rough faced aggregate that is tooled Condition: Good Integrity: High

Figure 6-18: Aggregate can be seen in some exposed areas of the foundation Source: Siera Rogers

Deficiencies: Some spots may need to be re-pointed Recommendation: Repair the pointing where needed and repair it in kind to what is original

Figure 6-19: Different aggregate can be seen in the foundation and the brick work Source: Siera Rogers

75

Feature: Roof Description: Gable end roof with saltbox form at the extension of the gable at the outer wall

Figure 6-20: A hole in the roof can be seen from the interior of the carriage barn Source: Siera Rogers

Condition: Fair to poor Integrity: High Deficiencies: Roof is deteriorated at wall connection in some places, rot and water damage can be seen, shingles are missing and deteriorated; roof over the chicken coop is almost completely collapsed in some places Recommendation: Repair the damaged sections of roof and

Figure 6-21: More holes in the roof seen from the interior of the carriage barn Source: Siera Rogers

Figure 6-22: Water damage can be seen on the second floor of the main barn Source: Siera Rogers

Figure 6-23: Damage can be seen on the main barn roof and the edges of the carriage barn roof Source: Siera Rogers

76

replace in kind where necessary. New shingles are necessary.

Feature: Cornice Description: Decorative cornice where the eave and gable ends Condition: Good Integrity: High

Figure 6-24: Cornice on the brick mechanical roof of the barn Source: Siera Rogers

Deficiencies: Deteriorated and damaged in some spots Recommendation: Repair the damaged sections and replace in kind where needed

77

Feature: Roof Eave Description: Beaked roof eaves at the peak of the barn roof Condition: Good Integrity: High

Figure 6-25: Beaked roof eave side view Source: Siera Rogers

Deficiencies: None Recommendation: Should keep as is and repair where needed

Figure 6-26: Beaked roof eave front view Source: Siera Rogers

78

Feature: Gutter System Description: metal gutter system to catch and distribute water off the roof Condition: Fair to poor Integrity: High

Figure 26-7: Intersection of the main barn and carriage barn showing the existing gutters Source: Siera Rogers

Deficiencies: Missing in many spots, broken, detached and falling off where existing Recommendation: Repair the damaged sections, replace in kind where necessary

79

Feature: Timber Framing Description: Heavy timber framing that includes posts, beams and joists Condition: Fair Integrity: High

Figure 6-28a: Support post that the bottom has been severely damaged Source: Siera Rogers

Deficiencies: Posts too small or too damaged to support the load above, water damage on some joists, some beams have notches carved out of them from prior use Recommendation: Posts in some spots may need to be sistered with new posts to provide enough support for the roof and second floor, repair damaged and replace in kind where needed

Figure 6-28b: Second view of the above damaged post Source: Siera Rogers

80

Feature: Flooring Description: Concrete floor in the main barn lower level, wood flooring on the second floor Condition: Good Integrity: High Deficiencies: Cracks in the concrete Recommendation: Leave as is and polish concrete, repair

Figure 6-29: Concrete floor typical on the first floor of the main barn Source: Brenna Reilly

any wood that needs it

Figure 6-30: Wooden floors typical on the second floor of the main barn Source: Brenna Reilly

81

Means and Methods of Restoration Feature: Wood Apply chemical preservatives, or coatings to wood that are subject to weathering, moisture, ultraviolet light, such as exposed beam ends, and rafter tails.

Implement pest management insect damage, such as installing termite guards, fumigating, and treating with chemicals.

Retain coatings that protect the wood from moisture and ultraviolet light.

Paint should be removed only when there is paint surface deterioration and it is necessary to repainting or applying other appropriate coatings.

Remove damaged paint to the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible (e.g........, hand scraping and hand sanding) prior to repainting.

Repaint historically-painted wood features with colors that are appropriate to the building and district. Use coatings that encapsulate lead paint, where the paint is not required.

Feature: Masonry Cleaning soiled masonry surfaces with the gentlest method possible, such as using low-pressure water and detergent and natural bristle or other soft-bristle brushes.

Applying non-historic surface treatments, such as water-repellent coatings to masonry only after repointing and only if masonry repairs have failed to arrest water penetration problems.

Evaluating the overall condition of the masonry to determine whether more than protection and maintenance, such as repairs to masonry features, will be necessary.

Repairing masonry by patching, splicing, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the masonry using recognized preservation methods. Repair may include the limited replacement in kind or with a 82

compatible substitute material of those extensively deteriorated or missing parts of masonry features

when there are surviving prototypes, such as Terra-cotta brackets or stone balusters.

Sealing joints in concrete with appropriate flexible sealants and backer rods, when necessary.

Cutting damaged concrete back to remove the source of deterioration, such as corrosion on metal reinforcement bars. The new patch must be applied carefully so that it will bond satisfactorily with and match the historic concrete.

Applying permeable, anti-graffiti coatings to masonry when appropriate.

Replacing in kind an entire masonry feature that is too deterio­rated to repair (if the overall form and detailing are still evident) using the physical evidence as a model to reproduce the feature or when the replacement can be based on historic documenta­tion. Examples can include large sections of a wall, a cornice, pier, or parapet. If using the same kind of material is not feasible, then a compatible substitute material may be considered.

Duplicating historic mortar joints in strength, composition, color, and texture when re-pointing is necessary. In some cases, a lime- based mortar may also be considered when re-pointing Portland cement mortar because it is more flexible.

Duplicating historic mortar joints in width and joint profile when re-pointing is necessary.

Removing deteriorated lime mortar carefully by hand raking the joints to avoid damaging the masonry.

Feature: Roofs Designing and installing a new roof covering for a missing roof or a new feature, such as a dormer or a monitor, when the historic feature is completely missing. It may be an accurate restoration based on documentary and physical evidence, but only when the historic feature to be replaced coexisted with the features currently on the building. Or, it may be a new design that is compatible with the size, scale, material, and color of the historic building.

83

Re-Use of the Historic Barn

The rehabilitation of the Barn at the Richardson Olmsted Campus is an interesting challenge

for a prospective developer. The rehabilitation of the property must be in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards as the Barn is a contributing structure to the National Historic Landmark. This project will utilize historic tax credits and other funding sources to finance the project. The proposed use will generate income for the property and help to ensure that the project is a financial success.

The study began with an extensive trial of use proposals in which various project uses were

discussed, studied, and financially tested to determine the potential for success in terms of returns as well as market fit. After this trial phase, it was determined that given the unique location at the conjunction of a state college, diverse neighborhood, and boutique hotel resort, the use would have to be considered a destination that would attract a broad range of individuals. A neighborhood market assessment was completed to understand what amenities and functions were already established in the neighborhood, and interviews with surrounding students and resort staff were conducted to understand what gaps exist that could be filled. This research has led to a conclusion, the surrounding neighborhood lacks affordable options for casual food, inviting atmosphere that is unique and welcoming to all, and retail that is unique and relatable. The proposed redevelopment uses for the Barn include a casual restaurant with bar and tasting room, as well as destination retail components including unique home furnishings and artisan oil and vinegar shop.

In order to determine if the proposed uses would provide a revenue that would produce a

return on investment, rental comparisons were studied in different areas in the Buffalo real estate market to determine an expected rental rate. The results of this study yielded the achievable rental rates that can be expected for a triple net lease of a retail space in this area, and proves this project to be profitable. The marketing of this unique, historic property to attract exciting and dependable tenants will be crucial, and will determine the long-term success of the return potential of the site. The Barn offers a unique destination quality that other spaces simply cannot, and the location amongst a diverse mix of potential patrons will offer a continuous attraction that is sure to succeed over time.

Given the unique challenges that come along with the restoration of historic structures,

extensive cost analysis was performed to understand the types of expenses that are to be expected during redevelopment. Studies on interior and exterior renovation costs, furnishings and fixture estimates, as well as predictions of soft cost stacks were compiled in order to conceptualize the total development cost of this property, all while respecting the historically significant features of the structure. The decision to renovate the Barn in accordance to historic standards was crucial in the 84

financial feasibility of the project, as it allowed for specific development credits to be utilized while constructing a cost proforma.

The renovation of the historic Barn within the confines of the Richardson Olmsted Campus

will provide a unique communal amenity that will act as a destination for a wide variety of people.

It is expected that this income-producing development plan will add incredible value to the campus, and the neighborhood as a whole. This development will also allow for a fluency of outdoor space and site work connectivity by means of its pergola outdoor seating. The following sections are intended to provide an in-depth understanding on the critical components of historic reuse, and prove the validity and financial success of the redevelopment of the Barn.

Use Breakdown Analysis

The proposed use of the barn structure is retail space. The barn will be divided into two main

portions to make the best use of the available structure. The main barn and the chicken coop will be dedicated towards restaurant space. The proposed use of the wagon shed is retail space. The space will be divided into two separate spaces to allow for retail spaces that fit within the current demand of the market.

Below, Table 6-1 shows the breakdown of the uses for the proposed historic Barn, there will

be 8,880 square feet of gross lease-able space. There will be two destination retail spaces consisting of 628 square feet and 1,650 square feet. The third and largest retail space will consist of a restaurant that will be 6,602 Square feet. Common areas will consist of 785 square feet.

Table 6-1: The Barn square footage by use

Figure 6-31: Proposed use of The Barn

85

Restaurant Component

One of the three proposed uses for the barn structure is a tasting room designed to bring

together a ground-floor restaurant and several local distilleries and breweries to make a Buffalocentric inclusive restaurant and bar where patrons are free to experience a variety of different beers and spirits, crafted locally. This use will be called, “Haugaard House” based on the name of the architect who oversaw the construction of the Barn in 1928. The second floor of the Barn which is a large open space, will be used as a second bar with long communal tables. This space will be called “Asylum Tasting Room,” based on the history surrounding the Richardson Olmsted Campus’ former use as the Buffalo State Hospital. The Asylum Tasting Room will be the primary space that can be rented out for private events such as weddings or banquets, and the entire venue Haugaard House and Asylum Tasting Room, can also be rented out for large-scale events. The overall site will be replanned, offering green connections and space for programmed activities outside of the tasting room in the courtyard, to be utilized during warm-weather months as well as creating availability for outdoor restaurant seating.

Reasoning Behind the Use

There are multiple factors which led the development team to considering a restaurant and

bar use for this portion of the barn. The main idea is to create a use that will attract a wide base of customers in terms of age and income.

The location of the subject property is a main reason for the proposed use as well. It is located off of Rockwell Road, in between the Richardson Olmsted Campus and Hotel Henry to the south and Buffalo State College directly to the north. Further south, is a concentrated neighborhood with a wide variety of demographic conditions, largely made up of young urban professionals and older residents between the ages of 55-65. Also surrounding the site are Delaware Park and The Albright-Knox Art Gallery. The goal for the tasting room is to be a use that can attract people from any one of these areas while they are in proximity, as well as be a destination for those not in its vicinity.

Another factor which influenced how the use was developed is the interior space itself. The

lower floor is separated into two large spaces as the customer walks through the large barn doors.

The entry space will be used for the main bar with side tables spread throughout and the space to the left will be used for seating. However, further back into the space, it begins to narrow, leaving little room for a kitchen. In its current condition, the back of the barn has a former chicken coop space, which has been determined to be the best location for a small kitchen. This limits the ability to run as a large-menu restaurant, so the concept was molded to be oriented to a smaller menu. The interior material also lends to the idea of a tasting room/bar use. The rustic nature of the barn gives a homey and historic feel to the space and there are several historic built-in furnishings that would operate well in storage for glassware and the variety of different spirits on display.

86

The plan for the restaurant is to also be utilized as a potential rental space for private

parties, more namely, weddings. The over-arching plan for the barn site will see the re-planning of its surrounding green space to make it more walkable, along with the ability to program activities in warm weather. The site offers impressive backdrop views of the Richardson Olmsted Campus’ architecture and provides the rustic theme which has become increasingly popular for weddings.

Also on the Richardson Olmsted Campus is Hotel Henry which can be utilized to accommodate guests attending the wedding. The large open floor plates inside the barn on both the first and second floor ensure that space requirements for small to large events can be met.

Destination Retail Component

Another potential use for the historic Barn is for retail shopping space. To make retail space

successful in this building, it is necessary to have a tenant that is a destination. A retail tenant cannot rely on foot traffic from the street, as there is no such traffic present. Retailers that need to be on main pedestrian streets or in malls will not be successful in this location. Retailers will have to be able to market themselves and take advantage of the unique characteristics set forth by having the barn as a storefront.

There is the possibility for the barn to be divided into smaller retail spaces while preserving

the character defining features of the structure. The wagon shed and its three associated stalls are not connected to the larger two story barn by any interior pathways. The wagon shed’s existing partition can be maintained to divide the two smaller spaces. These separations between retail spaces are possible while retaining the interior character defining features. The available loft spaces in the wagon shed can be used for running mechanicals for this retail space, or for the potential of overhead storage space for the retail operations. These smaller spaces would be more suitable for smaller tenants that are just starting their businesses and would like a unique and rustic setting. The entire barn complex would need a single tenant with an established brand and clientele base to be successful in such a large space. The entire barn is over 6,000 square feet, which is a very large retail space compared to retail found on traditional storefront corridors.

The Elmwood Village is home to many high-priced retail storefronts. The storefronts in this

commercial strip of Elmwood Avenue are normally fairly small, about 1,000 to 2,000 square feet. The market comparable range from $22 to $30 per square foot per year. In addition to the high rent, the leases are triple net, meaning tenants are responsible for paying for maintenance, utilities, insurance, and other related expenses. The storefront at 773 Elmwood Avenue is leased at $30 per square foot.

This at the top end of the market but it is a relatively small space (830 square feet) in one of the best blocks of the Elmwood Village for pedestrian activity. Other examples include 448 Elmwood Avenue, a 1480 square foot space that was previously a clothing boutique. The building is not historic and is recent new construction. It is currently for leased for $20 per square foot triple net. The restaurant

87

at 929 Elmwood Avenue is a 2,630 square foot operational restaurant that is for lease for $22.81 per square foot triple net. This space has access to a 50 space parking lot to the rear of the building, not common for Elmwood Avenue retail properties. A space in a less trafficked area, located in The Mentholatum at 1360 Niagara Street, is a 2,293 square foot retail space. It is for lease for $12 per square foot triple net. The barn property cannot command the rent of the Elmwood Village main commercial corridor. However, it is possible to achieve a rent higher than that of Niagara Street. This barn property would be one of the most unique retail spaces available and will have ample parking resources. An estimate for an achievable rent for the barn is between $15 and $20 per square foot per year, triple net. Breaking up the barn into a series of smaller retail spaces will achieve a higher rent per square foot, as smaller tenants pay a premium to large single use tenants.

The lack of available storage space in the barn will require retailers to be creative with excess

inventory. There is the option to purchase off site storage units from a variety of different providers to store excess and seasonal merchandise that does not need to be on the sales floor. The fixtures for the retail space can be selected to allow for storing extra merchandise within them and out of view.

If Buildings 40, 39, and 38 are renovated to include basement space, there may be an opportunity to lease storage space in these basements in a similar fashion to the occupants of the apartments above.

Storage space comes at a lower price than typical retail square footage. This creates the opportunity for cost savings by not wasting valuable sales floor space for storage.

The Barn will have to be a destination retail space and will as a result need good access. While the distinction between the Richardson Olmsted Campus and Buffalo State College is lacking, there are available roadways to provide access to the site. Its location near the New York State Route198 brings in traffic from all directions. It is easy to connect to all major highways in the Buffalo metro region through this expressway. This will allow destination retailers to have a wide customer base into other parts of the city and surrounding suburban areas. The parking lot surrounding the barn will provide ample parking resources to the retail space.

Branding for the Barn and the associated retail will be important to making retail space successful. The presence of a barn of this style in the city of Buffalo is a very unique characteristic.

The historic board and batten exterior and other exterior features separate the barn from the surrounding building types. The interior of the barn provides the opportunity for a unique retail experience that cannot be found in any surrounding competition. While some spaces on Elmwood Avenue have hardwood floors and exposed brick walls, the mass timber beams and columns are unique. The fit out of the retail space must make the most of these character defining features, as well as make these features a part of the branding and marketing for the retail tenants. The reuse of the barn as retail space will limit the necessary build outs to the structure. It is important that the beams and columns remain exposed, and the wood floors are maintained in the second floor of the main barn. The ground floor of the barn and wagon shed will be suitable for poured concrete floors that 88

are useful for retail spaces. Retail uses will not require a lot of plumbing, kitchen, or bathroom build outs. There will be a need to provide ample electrical outlets throughout the entire building. The lack of available natural light in the barn space will need to be supplemented with artificial lighting.

Lighting is a key component of retail businesses, and any permitted renovation that provides more light should be considered.

Figure 6-32: Proposed interior space planning for The Barn

The reuse of the barn as destination retail space is a realistic future use. The barn will provide a one of a kind retail space that will be able to differentiate itself from other retail in the surrounding area. There is the possibility for the space to be occupied by a single large tenant or divided up into smaller storefronts for multiple tenants. Branding and marketing for the prospective tenants will be key to their success. It is necessary that these tenants are able to drive their own traffic through existing established operations or recognizable and desirable brands.

Retail Competition

The proposed goal tenants for the retail space includes a home furnishing shop in the larger

89

portion of the wagon and an artisanal oil and vinegar shop in the smaller space.

There are a variety of home furnishing stores and interior design showrooms in the area.

They are located mainly on the commercial corridors including Elmwood Avenue, Hertel Avenue, and Amherst Street. The retail competition in the Elmwood Village include Neo Gift Studio located at 905 Elmwood Avenue and Ro at 732 Elmwood Avenue. Neo focuses on gift type and small home decor products and does not carry lines of furniture. Ro is a mid-century modern style shop that includes some vintage furniture and smaller items that fit the mid-century style of the shop. There are two home decor stores located on Hertel Avenue. These include ROOM at 1400 Hertel Avenue and MiMO Decor at 1251 Hertel Avenue. ROOM is a home furnishings store in addition to a showroom connected to the interior designer who owns the store. MiMO Decor is a mid-century modern and contemporary furniture store with other smaller items that accent the mid-century style.

There are a few interior design showrooms in the surrounding area. The closest to the site

include Michael Donnelly Interior Design at 463 Amherst Street and Blueprint Design Studios at 464 Amherst Street. Conley Interiors has a showroom at 1425 Hertel Avenue in addition to the ROOM showroom that includes the decor portion of business. Nest Interiors is located at 443 Delaware Avenue.

Competition for artisanal olive oil and vinegar is not present close to the site. The closest

comparable business is House of Olives located at 1374 Hertel Avenue. A location in the surrounding suburb of the Village of Williamsville is the D’Avolio Kitchen at 5409 Main Street. This shop offers a wide range of imported and flavored olive oils and vinegars, in addition to being an eat-in restaurant.

Farmers and Artisans is also located near the Williamsville area, and is a store that features a wide variety of local produce and other edible products. Premier Gourmet in the Town of Amherst at 3904 Maple Road sells specialty kitchen products and gourmet prepackaged foods.

Alternative Analysis and Back of the Envelope

The potential for providing high-quality tenants to attract a great customer base is essential

for the success of any development project. By evaluating alternatives based on their performance with respect to individual criteria, allowed us to conclude the highest and best use of the 8,880 SF barn space. The evaluation matrix that determined the highest and best use, involved several tools and real estate research to assist in adopting the recommended use. Tools that test the highest and best use of a property would include permissible legal use through zoning, physical and historic characteristics, financial and investment analysis, and a marketable use of the facility.

Alternative 1: Fitness Center

Fitness centers can be broken into three categories; mega fitness centers, medium fitness

centers and boutique fitness centers.

90

Table 6-2: Types of fitness centers

For a fitness center to work in the Historic Barn space, it would have to be considered the

“Boutique� fitness center type. Rather than a monthly fee that is seen at mega gyms or medium sized fitness centers, boutique fitness centers usually charge per diem or per class. According to 2019 CBRE Market Outlook report about retail spaces, the larger the fitness center the larger the customer radius.

Research shows the vast majority of people are willing to drive three miles or less (or travel ten minutes or less) to a gym to work out. Proximity remains one of the biggest drivers of where people choose to work out.

Boutique fitness centers however, have a much smaller footprint of attendance radius. The

small footprint allows these centers to be plentiful, but location density is one of the top priorities.

When it comes to boutique gyms, the travel time for gym users would actually be less than what is stated in the CBRE study. Travel time is reduced to a five-minute travel radius, rather than ten.

There are two very important reasons that this alternative is not the highest and best use.

The first is the location of the historic Barn. The location does not have the walkable perspective.

In addition, the five-minute walk or drive vicinity, there is the Hotel Henry which has a gym, and Buffalo State College. There are multiple concerns with Buffalo State College students as a market group. There is a gym facility at the school and the students are unlikely to pay the premium cost of boutique fitness which can range from $10-$30 per class and $400 per month. The surrounding density of the historic Barn would likely not support a boutique style fitness center.

The second reason is high tenant improvement cost for construction. According to the Design

Cost Data database, tenant improvement for fitness facilities for new build is $200 per square foot and an additional $40 per square foot for FF&E (furniture, fixtures and equipment). FF&E for fitness centers would include showers, high capacity cooling units, sound proofing between rooms, and special gym flooring. With extra FF&E expenses, rents needed to offset cost of construction will need to be a minimum of $36 per rent-able square foot, triple net lease using an 8% Cap Rate.10 In addition, these FF&E expenses will not be eligible for Historic Tax Credits.11

The closest comparable for a boutique fitness center is BikeorBar, that is located on Elmwood

Avenue, three quarters of a mile from the Barn. Elmwood Avenue is a popular site for mixed-use residential and commercial sites. It contains over 300 shops, coffee houses, restaurants, bars, offices and art galleries. Most shops are storefront facilities, typically 800-2000 square feet. BikeorBar holds a $25 per square foot, triple net lease in a roughly 2,500 square feet faculty.

91

This concept would work better for new construction and retrofitting store fronts in more

densely populated and walkable areas like Hertel and Elmwood Avenue. If $25.00 per square foot for rent is charged, the value will not be greater to the cost of building out this type of facility. The Back of the Envelope Analysis (BOTE) for the fitness center (Appendix II), shows that Total Project Cost would be $2,359,669.41, while the value would be $1,806,196.88. Figures on the BOTE analysis are based on market research from CBRE, one of the world’s largest publicly traded real estate companies, as well as industry standards.

Alternative 2: Bed and Breakfast Space

Using this space as a bed and breakfast space was conceptualized because unlike hotels, they

offer more space and more rooms, and will operate independently from the Hotel Henry. The bed and breakfast will offer a different experience than that of the hotel and can be operated by a local establishment. The bed and breakfast would have 3-8 rooms over the 6,500 feet square of the historic Barn, with a kitchen facility on site.

One major hurdle would be changing the zoning to allow for hospitality establishment.

According to the City of Buffalo zoning map from the 2016 Buffalo Green Code, the historic Barn is zoned Campus. Campus zoning areas do not allow for hospitality establishments, so the developer would need to apply for a variance to change zoning. Variances are not the end all be all to a development project, since the Hotel Henry had to do the same. While it is likely a variance would be given, there is no guarantee that it will be granted. The additional time and money needed to apply for a use variance would add additional risk to the project.

There was also a concern that the bed and breakfast would be too much like Hotel Henry.

The hotel has a non-compete clause in regard to the other uses of the campus. Although a bed and breakfast is not a hotel, it is very similar. This could create some early issues in the development process.

There is also a concern for a lack of use-diversity of the Richardson Campus. The historic Barn

gives the opportunity to bring in more diverse uses rather than residential and hotel space. Uses such as retail, or restaurant space would be a great addition to the campus and with the Barn’s location close to Buffalo State College and the West side, it could be a great segue to connect the campus to the surrounding area.

Alternative 3: Destination Retail Only

The historic barn on the Richardson Olmsted Complex has many opportunities for

rehabilitation and reuse. After considering uses such as a Fitness Center and Bed and Breakfast, it was clear that this space would be better suited for retail. To make retail space successful in this building, it is necessary to have a tenant that is a destination. A retail tenant cannot rely on foot traffic from the 92

street, as the location of the barn does not allow for foot traffic along sidewalks.. Retailers that need to be on main pedestrian streets or in malls will not be successful in this location. Retailers will have to be able to market themselves and take advantage of the unique characteristics set forth by having the barn as a storefront.

The entire barn is over 8,000 square feet, which is a very large retail space compared to retail

found on traditional storefront corridors. The Elmwood Village is home to many high-priced retail storefronts with strong pedestrian traffic. The storefronts in this commercial strip of Elmwood Avenue are normally fairly small, about 1,000 to 2,000 square feet. The market comparable range from $22 to $30 per square foot per year. In addition to the high rent, the leases are triple net, meaning tenants are responsible for paying for maintenance, utilities, insurance, and other related expenses. The storefront at 773 Elmwood Avenue is leased at $30 per square foot. This at the top end of the market but it is a relatively small space (830 square feet) in one of the best blocks of the Elmwood Village for pedestrian activity. Other examples include 448 Elmwood Avenue, a 1480 square foot space that was previously a clothing boutique. The building is not historic and is recent new construction. It is currently for lease for $20 per square foot triple net. The restaurant at 929 Elmwood Avenue is a 2,630 square foot operational restaurant that is for lease for $22.81 per square foot triple net. This space has access to a fifty space parking lot to the rear of the building, not common for Elmwood Avenue retail properties. A space in a less trafficked area, located in The Mentholatum at 1360 Niagara Street, is a 2,293 square foot retail space. It is for lease for $12 per square foot triple net.

The barn property cannot command the rent of the Elmwood Village main commercial corridor.

This barn property would be one of the most unique retail spaces available and will have

ample parking resources. An estimate for an achievable rent for the barn is between $15 and $20 per square foot per year, triple net. The back of the envelope analysis for retail reviles that with a core and shell cost of 100 per square foot. This price per square foot to build out retail is lower than a fitness facility due to the fact that the building just needs to be stabilizes as the historic features of the building will remain intact as it is. The retail tenant will then be responsible for all their build out expenses, as they typically are in this type of agreement. Retail will also not require special FF&E expenses that a fitness facility would need.

To be conservative, using a $20 per square foot for rent will value the barn at a higher price

than what it cost to build the property. With any Back of the Envelope Cost of construction can vary, so being conservative is key at times in the development process. Figures on the BOTE analysis (Appendix II) are based on market research from CBRE, one of the world’s largest publicly traded real estate companies, and industry standards.

The Back of the Envelope shows that retail will be the highest and best use. However, 8,000

square feet of destination only retail, may not work. Therefore, a multi-tenant mixed retail location would be the highest and best use for this location.

93

Barn Precedents

Since the historic barn on the Richardson Olmsted

Campus has many opportunities for rehabilitation and reuse, precedents are important to show. There are several Figure 6-33: Magnolia flagship store exterior; Waco, TX

precedents of rehabilitated barns for both a retail destination and tasting room use.

Source: magnolia.con

Retail Destination Precedents:

One of the most remarkable and renowned barn

rehab projects for destination retail is Magnolia Market in Waco, Texas. Magnolia Market is a flagship store for a wellestablished brand headed by Johanna Gaines. The barn space and its unique features are an extension of Magnolia’s mission and visibility.

There are also plenty of local examples found

in Western New York. Patricia’s Back Barn located on Figure 6-34: Magnolia flagship store interior; Waco, TX Source: magnolia.com

Shawnee Road in North Tonawanda is an antique shop in a rehabilitated barn with an eclectic mix of furniture, home dĂŠcor, accessories, antiques, vintage clothing, and architectural salvage. The Plant Shack located in East Aurora on Knox Farm State Park, is newly built out of an old horse stable, retailing plant and gardening items. The Plant Shack is a stand-alone barn, with a similar setting to the Historic Barn found on the Olmsted Campus, as it is located in Knox Farm

Figure 6-35: Research & Design flagship store exterior; Orchard Park, NY Source: researchanddesign.com

State Park.

The most closely associated local precedent is

Research and Design, located on North Buffalo street in Orchard Park, New York. Research and Design is a retail destination. The flagship store is located in a rehabilitated 150 year old two-story barn.

Figure 6-36: Research & Design flagship store interior; Orchard Park, NY

94

Source: researchanddesign.com

Tasting Room Precedents

While there are no local examples of tasting rooms used in rehabilitated barns there are

several successful establishments across the county. Round Bar Tasting Room in Baroda, Michigan is a wine tasting room with locally inspired food, craft beer and other spirits. The Tasting Barn, at the Seneca Lake Restaurant is a rehabilitated house barn, that serves tapas-style snacks, brunch, lunch, dinner, local coffee, and fresh, made-to-order, farm-to-table, local food.

Figure 6-37: Round Barn Tasting Room exterior; Baroda, MI Source: roundbarn.com

Figure 6-38: The Tasting Barn: Seneca Lake Restaurant, Winery and Tasting Room exterior; Burdett, NY Source: thetastingbarn.com

The most relevant rehabilitated barn turned tasting room is Mallow Run Winery Tasting Room found in Bargersville, Indiana. The tasting room is located in the hayloft of a nineteenth-century timberframe barn built circa 1870. The Barn that was rehabilitated is very similar in size, age and condition as the historic barn found on the Richardson Campus.

Figure 6-39: Mallow Run Winery Tasting Room exterior before being rehabilitated; Baroda, MI Source: mallowrun.com

Figure 6-40: Mallow Run Winery Tasting Room exterior after rehabilitation; Baroda, MI - not consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards becasue of the change in elevation to entert the building Source: mallowrun.com

Figure 6-41: Mallow Run Winery Tasting Room interior; Baroda, MI

Figure 6-42: Mallow Run Winery Tasting Room interior; Baroda, MI

Source: mallowrun.com

Source: mallowrun.com

95

Market Analysis Statement of Objective:

This market analysis is used to identify strengths and weaknesses of the overall regional

market, demographically as well as the site and proposed use for marketable viability.

Executive Summary:

The market analysis revealed that the proposed uses for the subject property are proper for

the scope of the building as well as the location. It is determined that the location of the property is advantageous to capitalizing on multiple age groups. Income levels in the both the macro and micro markets appear to be sufficient to maintain steady sales for the retail uses. The supply analysis shows that the market is not saturated in any of the proposed uses, nor would any of the uses cause any over-saturation. The mix of uses are differentiated enough in the market that competition should be limited. The demand analysis takes into consideration multiple interviews as well as demographic data and it showed there is sufficient demand for each use. Overall, the projected development is appropriate in size, scale and scope. The uses provide a unique combination and its location allows for a wide mix of potential patrons.

Methods and Process:

There were a variety of methods used in researching the site and determining the proposed

use for the building. There were several days spent on site measuring, documenting, and analyzing the structure and surrounding site to identify possibilities for the space as well as what uses would not be feasible. Measuring and documenting the structure and site allowed the team to rule out uses that would potentially harm the existing structure or would not be enough of a draw. Market reports were used as well in determining the highest and best uses for the site. Reports generated by REIS, CBRE and ESRI were used to research the surrounding region to narrow down what could and could not be supported based on demographic metrics. An ESRI report generated for the City of Buffalo titled, “Retail Demand Outlook� is especially useful in determining what the retail uses currently have and are projected to have the greatest amount of money spent in each industry sector. For example, Furniture sales and home furnishings are projected to be one of the highest growing retail sectors in Buffalo. This will be expanded further upon, in the demand portion of this market study.

Lastly, we conducted interviews with various members of the community, including Buffalo State College Students and residents in the local neighborhoods.

Macro-Economic Analysis: 96

Given the location of the subject property, the macro-economic area that will be analyzed for

this market study is the City of Buffalo, New York.

Population Trends:

The target demographic the proposed uses will be aiming for are the young urban professional

demographic (23-30) and the aging demographic between 50-60. These demographics have been selected due to the availability of disposable income which is necessary for the success of a retail use. Per ESRI data, Buffalo has seen a population decline since 2000, and the metro statistic area is at approx. 1.56 million people.12 Beneficial to the proposed use, currently, the demographic targets make up the highest percentages of ages in Buffalo; 25-34 makes up 12.3% while 55-64 makes up 14.7% of total population.13 Moreover, the projected values for 2024 show those same age brackets continuing to own the largest shares of population percentage, 12.3% in the 25-34 demographic and 13.8% of the population being made up of 55-64. Based purely on age demographics, it would appear that the project is targeting the correct age groups to rely on as patrons.

Income Trends:

As previously stated, the demographic age brackets that are being targeted with the proposed

site are defined in census data as 25-34 years old and 55-64 years old. It is important to consider the income and spending potential in Buffalo, especially given that a proposed use for the site will be destination retail in the form of a home furnishings store. It is crucial that the target market have a stable income and spending ability for the success of the retail uses. Based on ESRI data, income in Buffalo is varied. It is well known that Buffalo does not have a very high rate of high-income individuals, but the spread of income in the city is encouraging for the potential uses. When looking at households by income, there are a considerable amount of households with income $50,000 and under, but there still are a large amount of households that post incomes above $50,000. 18.6% of households post incomes from $50,000-$75,000. An additional 26.5% post incomes spanning from $75,000-$150,000. By 2024, it is anticipated that there will be an even higher percentage of medium to high-income households, bumping up from 45.1% to 46.6%. A small percentage, but one that shows potential income growth for the city, which is encouraging. Disposable income is another important metric to consider when planning for a retail use. Per a disposable income profile report, ran by ESRI, there are a total of 646,111 households in Buffalo with available disposable income.

Similar to the data on household income, there are a considerable amount of households in Buffalo with lower levels of disposable income. What is encouraging for the proposed use however, there is a high concentration of population with medium to high levels of disposable income. 47% of the population with disposable income have between $35,000-$100,000 in disposable income, which is considerable buying power. The target demographic of people aged 25-65 also make up a large amount of the disposable income in Buffalo. Based on the data, the ages between 25-65 make up

97

the four largest groups of disposable income, a finding that bodes well for a use that looks to target this exact demographic. Having a higher potential for disposable income allows for a much more sustainable client base and potential income stream.14 Retail Demand Potential:

The proposed uses for the subject property include a tasting room with a bar and food as well

as destination retail including home furnishings. It is important to understand what kind of demand there is for retail uses such as these in Buffalo in order to make an investment decision. The first report to look at is the Restaurant Market Potential report, provided by ESRI. This report is important in understanding what kind of restaurant uses would be feasible as well as what kind of money people are more likely to spend at a restaurant. The report shows that on average, the majority of people will spend between $51-$100 each time they go out to eat. This bodes well for the projected use in that most tasting rooms will offer meals in this range of pricing. It would not be overly cheap, but it would not offer very high-priced meals, landing in this range of what people are most likely spend at a restaurant. Another stat from this data that encourages this use is the fact that nearly 75% of the population reported that they have eaten out in the past 6 months.15 Having a community around the restaurant that eats out often is a serious benefit to this use. The other uses for the site involve destination retail, more specifically in home furnishings. ESRI’s Retail Demand Outlook report allows for the most popular retail markets to be categorized and sorted by how much money is spent on them per year. There are several categories, ranging from clothing, technology and food sales. But what is a very good sign for this project is that home furnishings is projected to be one of the highest categories in terms of spending growth from 2019-2024. This confirms that the proposed use for this site is in fact the correct one or has considerable potential for success.16 Local Market Assessment: General Description:

While understanding the macro market as a whole is important to get an idea on what kind

of demand a project can drive from the larger market, it is equally important to understand what demand factors are present in the subject property’s immediate surroundings and neighborhood.

The neighborhood identified is a 2.18 square-mile section of Buffalo. The 198 Expressway serves as a natural barrier to the north, while Delaware Avenue, the 190 Expressway and Utica Street serve as barriers to the East, West, and South respectively. The neighborhood is varied in terms of land uses, property ownership and the demographics of people residing in it. The neighborhood just south of the subject property contains mostly single-family styled housing, the majority being rental units.

There is a strong influence of Buffalo State College on this neighborhood as it is a popular area for 98

student housing. During site visits, there would frequently be students crossing through the subject property to walk or bike to the campus, just north of the site. Further east, running south along Elmwood, there is a wider mix of uses, including multifamily and single-family housing, storefront shops, restaurants and office space. This area is known well in Buffalo as the Elmwood Village and is a popular area for a wide variety of people with different demographic backgrounds to live.

Proximity to Key Locations:

The subject property is placed in a convenient location between Buffalo State College’s

campus and the Richardson Olmsted Complex. Directly to the north of the property is Buffalo State College, one of the major higher education institutions in Buffalo. The tasting room/restaurant use looks to capitalize on students leaving class or filling time between class. To the northeast, about 0.5 miles from the subject property is the Albright-Knox Art Gallery, a historic and popular art museum which is heavily visited by people local and foreign to Buffalo. Directly south of the subject property is the Richardson Olmsted Complex, which currently is partially occupied by Hotel Henry Urban Resort Conference Center. Located inside the hotel, 100 Acres, is an upscale restaurant which caters predominately to hotel guests.17 The subject property would look to attract hotel guests looking for something different from what 100 Acres has to offer. Approximately 0.5 miles south of the subject property is Forest Avenue, which also serves as an entrance to the Richardson Olmsted Complex.

Forest Avenue can be seen as the gateway to the large neighborhood south of the site, where there is a large mix of student housing as well as young urban professionals and families. The students living in this neighborhood who attend Buffalo State College are frequently seen walking, skateboarding and biking through the Richardson Olmsted Complex to get to and from class. This is seen as an important group of people to capture as a potential client base to ensure the sustained success of the business. About 1 mile south of the subject property is the neighborhood known as the Elmwood Village. This neighborhood has several uses throughout and the patrons of the business as well as the residents of the surrounding side-streets would be seen as target patrons of the proposed uses at the subject property.

Quality of Surrounding Environment:

The environment surrounding the subject property has an array of different qualities. Directly

north of the site is Rockwell Road, one of the major entrances to Buffalo State College and the Richardson Olmsted Complex. The road is well maintained as well as the buildings and lots on the campus. The road directly south of the site, Richardson Road is in worse condition than Rockwell is.

There is significant repair that needs to be done to it, especially near the Rees Street entrance, which is a major detractor to traffic. The surrounding neighborhood is also mixed in its overall quality.

The housing stock is older and is a mix of rental houses, predominantly occupied by Buffalo State

99

Students but is in overall good condition. There are not many signs of dilapidation throughout aside from the closed restaurants on the corner of Forest Avenue and Elmwood Avenue. The building stock and road conditions are in overall good condition along Elmwood Avenue as well as on the side Figure 6-43: Cole’s on Elmwood Ave. Source: Sharon Cantillon / Buffalo News

streets connecting to it.

Supply Analysis

When planning a project of any use, it is important

that there is a firm understanding of what exists currently in the market as well as what is planned. This is to ensure that the proposed project does not enter a market where the use is already saturated. The current proposed uses for the subject property include a tasting room / bar which serves food, a destination retail home furnishings shop and a combined loose tea and non-perishables shop with items like olive oil and jarred foods.

The current supply for the tasting room is

encouraging for its use. In the defined neighborhood, there Figure 6-44: Tommyrotter Tasting Room Source: Buffalo Rising

are no similar uses in terms of building typology in the barn, where it will be located as well as the actual tasting room use itself. Along Elmwood, there are several restaurants and bars, most notably, Cole’s Restaurant and Bar, located at 1104 Elmwood Avenue and Mr. Goodbar, located at 1110 Elmwood Avenue. These two are both popular destinations for residents of the neighborhood and students at the colleges and universities nearby. Cole’s is an Irish bar and restaurant18, while Mr. Goodbar is a traditional bar19, neither of which are the same use which will be implemented in the site.

However, outside of the neighborhood, there are multiple tasting rooms in the City of Buffalo as a whole, all further south towards downtown Buffalo compared to the subject property. Tommyrotter Distillery20 opened their tasting room to the public in 2015 at their distillery site at 500 Seneca Street, a building developed by Savarino Companies.21 Their

100

operation allows patrons to taste their variety of spirits, shortly after their bottling. However, the Tommyrotter Tasting Room is very minimalistic and does not serve as a meeting place for different drinks or food. They act simply as a place to taste their product, which is not the same function as the proposed use. They are similar in the fact that both are located in buildings developed using an adaptive reuse of a historic structure. Another site downtown, in the cobblestone

Figure 6-45: Ro Homeshop

district next to Key Bank Arena is the tasting room at Labatt

Source: Google Maps

House. The building opened in 2018, constructed by R&P Oak Hill, and developed by Terry and Kim Pegula. Labatt House is similarly located in an adaptive reuse building and features a large space with multiple bars as well as food service, similar to the proposed use at the subject property.22 The tasting room, however, is a small portion of the overall Labatt House site, featuring a small bar where patrons can sample limited editions of Labatt’s beer. There is no food service in this tasting room either. Lastly, also in downtown Buffalo, there is Black Button Distillery, located at 149 Swan Street.23 They have a smaller space than the subject property and do not offer food, similar to the Labatt House tasting room. There are no current plans in the market pipeline for a similar tasting room and food service combination to the scale of the subject market, making it a use that would not face over-saturation.

The home furnishings use is different than an average furniture store and will be more of a destination for limited or select merchandise. Currently, the neighborhood surrounding the subject property does contain home furnishing shops, but none to the scale of destination retail.

Room,24 located at 1400 Hertel Avenue could be considered destination retail, but is further north than the physical barrier of the 198 Expressway, meaning the subject property’s use would draw from residents further south. In the direct neighborhood however, there are multiple home furnishing stores along Elmwood Avenue, none of them constituting as a destination retail site. Ro, located at 732 Elmwood Avenue

101

is a popular shop, but is significantly smaller than the subject property’s allotted space for the furnishings shop and is located in a renovated house, where the subject property has the advantage of being located in a rustic and historic location, with easier access given its proximity to the 198 Expressway.25 Another shop, located at 905 Elmwood Avenue Figure 6-46: D’Avolio Kitchen Source: Buffalo Rising

is Neo Gift Studio.26 Neo is a smaller home furnishings store that serves more as a gift shop than specializing in furniture.

There are no other current plans for a destination retail location in the area aside from the subject property. Given the destination retail nature of the proposed use as well its special advantage over other shops in the Elmwood Village neighborhood, one can determine this would not cause an over-saturation of the market.

The third and final proposed use for the subject

property is an artisan vinegar and oil products shop. A comparison to a competitor in the larger Buffalo market would be D’Avolio, a local chain that sells gourmet olive oil and vinegars.27 The differentiation between the proposed use and D’Avolio is the additional offerings from the subject property. As well as artisan oils and vinegars, the subject property will also offer loose teas and act as a tea shop, Figure 6-47: D’Avolio Kitchen Source: Stepout Buffalo

catering to students at Buffalo State College and those staying at Hotel Henry. While there are not any retail shops with this combination in the area, there are storefronts in the neighborhood that offer one of the goods or the other.

There is one D’Avolio Kitchen located downtown at 535 Main Street and offers the gourmet vinegar and oils as well as a kitchen with a full dining menu. This is a similar use as the proposed use for the subject property, except instead of a full kitchen service, the subject property will serve different teas and act more as a coffee/tea shop than an eatery. This is the only D’Avolio Kitchen location in the City of Buffalo; the other locations being in Niagara Falls and Amherst.

There is only one other institution in the area which has similar offerings to the proposed use, in terms of artisan

102

olive oils and vinegars, which is The House of Olives, located at 1374 Hertel Avenue. The House of Olives is a similar storefront to D’Avolio in that they specialize in selling gourmet olives, olive oils, and vinegars.28 It acts as a storefront, rather than a place to eat and drink, where the proposed use would act as both a store as well as a place to sit and drink tea. The location is also north of the 198 Expressway, which is set as the northern boundary of the target neighborhood. There are coffee shops along Elmwood Avenue, including chains such as Starbucks and Spot Coffee, but there are no dedicated loose tea sales or drinking shops; and none that offer the unique combination of an artisan oil and vinegar shop with a tea shop. Currently, there are no projects in the market pipeline to have this combination in the neighborhood, or Buffalo as a whole, making this use a good fit in the current market.

Demand Analysis:

Equally important to the success of a development as supply is demand for the use. Supply

will tell the development team what kind of use could fit in a market, while demand will tell them what is actually desired or would succeed based on current market conditions. Demand for a use is caused by a myriad of things, including existing supply in the market, neighborhood needs and demographic data.

Supply:

As previously covered in the supply analysis, the projected uses for the subject property fit

well within the market. Each proposed use does not appear that they would cause any form of market saturation nor are the markets already too saturated for the uses to be successful. The location gives it an advantage in the neighborhood given its ability to draw from potential patrons north of the site because of its accessibility by the 198 Expressway; and also prevents patrons from going further north because of the physical barriers in place.

Neighborhood Needs:

Neighborhood needs is the second demand factor to be considered and is potentially the most

important. Throughout this project, the development team has conducted interviews with people in the neighborhood, such as Buffalo State College students, employees of the Richardson Olmsted Complex and residents of the surrounding neighborhood to best understand what is needed in the neighborhood and what is not. After discussions with Buffalo State students, it became clear that what is needed for them is a place to sit down, study and drink coffee or tea. There are several coffee shops on campus and around it so the development team decided to take a different approach and utilize a loose tea shop, rather than a traditional coffee shop. This way, the shop can capitalize on

103

the students on campus while providing a different and more interesting concept. The loose tea shop will also be combined with the sale of artisan olive oils and vinegars, which is designed more to cater to an older demographic for those staying at Hotel Henry or who live in the surrounding neighborhood. The destination retail component for the subject property is also designed to attract older demographics than those in school at the college. This is another use that has been discussed with members of the community as well as employees at the Richardson Olmsted Complex. A retail component is something that has been desired by the ROC in order to generate more traffic to the site and based on the location of the property, it has been determined that the appropriate use would be a destination home furnishings shop. After discussions with members of the community to reinforce this idea, the overall sentiment is that this is a use that would attract people to the site, and then be able to keep them on site with the different uses. The largest use on the subject property is the tasting room. Based on conversations with students, employees at ROC and neighborhood residents, this has returned the most interest and demand. The sentiment is that while there are bars and restaurants in the Elmwood Village, there is nothing this unique in scope and it would immediately become an attraction over these standard bar & grills. Based on interviews with people who are frequently near the subject property, the development team’s proposed uses are reinforced by neighborhood needs.29 Demographic Data:

Demographic data is the final component to demand and is crucial to determining the

potential long-term success of a development. The demographic data used in the macro-economic portion of this report has been used, but scaled down to the previously defined neighborhood.

Population in this neighborhood has been consistent over the last decade, not rising or lowering significantly, nor is it projected to have any major changes in the next five years. What is important to this development however, is more about the age of residents as well as the spending power. This is where the demographic data benefits the development. The target age demographics that the development plans to bring in are between the ages of 24-64, more specifically 25-34 and 55-64. The reason this benefits the development is that these age ranges are among the highest populated in the neighborhood. The 24-35 range represents the highest amount at 18.4% of the neighborhood while the 55-64 range represents 10% of the neighborhood.30 All together the age range between 24-64 represents over 50% of the population. This kind of target demographic favors the site greatly in that they have a much larger base of potential patrons. Buying power is another vital demand factor that can positively or negatively affect a development. Buying power can be measured in both household income and disposable income. In the neighborhood, like all throughout Buffalo, the income levels are quite varied. Given that a substantial number of the households are in fact student housing, there is a larger volume of households reporting income below $15,000 (19%). But what is encouraging to the site is the spread of medium to high-income households. In the neighborhood, over 50% of 104

residents report a household income of $50,000 or higher.31 This lends to the idea that a good portion of the area will have sufficient buying power to support the retail uses. This idea is further confirmed by a Disposable Income Profile (ESRI) which shows the percentages of how much disposable income households in a neighborhood possess. The data shows that approximately 60% of neighborhood residents have disposable income levels between $35,000 and $150,000, which further bolsters the idea that there is sufficient buying power in this neighborhood.32, 33

The final market report to look at is the retail demand outlook report (ESRI) and see what

projections look like for the demand of the proposed uses. The data is very similar to the data pulled for the macro level reports, most similarly, the home furnishings use is projected to be one of the highest growing markets in the area, with a combined growth in spending of nearly $2 million.

Alcohol sales are a very stable use in Buffalo, showing an increase of nearly $700,000. Data is more difficult to find for an artisan oil and tea shop but considering the lack of supply in the area and demand displayed by the neighborhood, it will be a safe use for the development.34, 35 Conclusions:

The overall market for the City of Buffalo and the smaller neighborhood which the subject

property sits in is stable for the proposed uses. There does appear to be a market gap that can be capitalized in several aspects. The size of the gap is difficult to quantify but looking at the current supply and demand factors of the market, a significant gap is evident. In each use, there is a lack of supply in the neighborhood and the uniqueness of the proposed uses all differentiate themselves from anything else in the market. The proximity to the college campus as well as the ROC and surrounding neighborhood gives it a unique advantage where it has the ability to attract from people of all age ranges and the proposed uses allow for the site to be visited by anyone of any age.

The size capabilities that the site possesses also makes it stand out compared to other similar uses in the area. Based on the supply analysis, one could conclude that there is no market saturation nor would the development cause any. The demographic data also supports the potential success of the development. Based on both macro and micro level data, the demand for retail in each use is projected to grow substantially in the next five years, supporting the idea that not only will the shops be successful, but they will increase in profits yearly. The data also shows that the spending power for the targeted age demographics should be sufficient enough to support the different uses.

Timing and Special Conditions:

The success of this development is dependent on outside factors like potential competition

as well as interior factors like the timing of the opening of the storefronts. There is always a threat of competition coming in at a later date and taking from the client base. However, based on the unique location of the subject property, it could be argued that in the neighborhood there aren’t any other

105

buildings that could support this kind of retail development. Bars and breweries are constantly opening in Buffalo, but the differentiation in the market that this use has should be enough to avoid a significant decrease in the customer base if another bar opens up. Similarly with the destination home furnishings use, there is a high level of space required for this type of storefront. The competitors to this use currently in the market are limited due to their space limitations. This is why in this neighborhood, there should not be too much cause for concern of another destination home furnishings store opening.

Timing the opening of the development is important to making the right first step towards

success. The overall plan for the entire site is to also have programmed activities on the grounds surrounding the Barn site, so it is crucial that the development open in either late spring or summer in order to display the full potential of the uses. Opening in the winter would limit the ability to show the programmed activities and not make it as inviting as it possibly could be. The businesses can expect to do different levels of business throughout a year. But the mix of uses is what will keep the development strong while one business has a down period, another can keep up the pace. For example, if the tasting room is experiencing lower sales in the late winter, the retail uses can expect to carry a burden during the holiday season. It is very cyclical in that sense.

Market Gap Analysis

There are no current retailers the match the style of the Barn. All of the surrounding

competition is mid-century modern or contemporary in style, which does not match the aesthetic of the Barn property. A retailer that would make the best use of the space should display products that match the rustic feel of the Barn. The exposed wood beams and columns, as well as the worn concrete floors should be accented by the product mix and merchandising of the home furnishings tenant.

The currently popular “farmhouse� style will take advantage of these existing features that have to be maintained in the barn.

There are no existing stores in the area that are selling artisan oil and vinegar products.

There was a D’Avolio store on Elmwood Avenue but it closed in 2017 and the space has been taken by another business. There is a specialty spice store called Penzeys Spices located at 783 Elmwood Avenue, but their product lines do not include oils and vinegars.

106

Cost and Expenses Analysis Construction Estimates Analysis

The Barn, located on the Richardson Olmsted Campus will be constructed into destination

retail and a tasting room restaurant, obtaining accurate estimates for the construction process is a very important aspect of feasibility for this project. Showing feasibility will help with obtaining financing for this project. The construction estimates for this project deals with extensive replacements and repairs to the exterior and the interior. The barn is in poor to fair shape and requires a broad range of renovation. The construction estimates also include estimated costs for relevant furniture and equipment for the retail and restaurant uses. The total project cost is $2,205,849 and a complete breakdown of the construction cost estimates can be found in Appendix III. Exterior Cost Estimates

The exterior renovation of the barn consists of demolition work, site-work, sheathing,

masonry, doors, windows, and roof repairs. Probably the two most important and character defining features of any historic preservation project are the doors and windows. In this case, there are nine large barn doors, including the second-floor door, and some original and some are not. It is best to try and repair the original doors and replace and fix in place the other ones. Some of the barn doors here are hinged, and some are sliding, and it is important to keep these features intact. The original frame and hinges should be used if applicable, or else new roller tracks and trolleys can be used if the originals cannot be repaired. The cost to fully replace a barn door, can be up to $10,000, and is much more expensive than repairing it, but almost half of these doors are so greatly damaged that replacement is necessary.36 Windows are also very important but can be problematic to restore because wood windows on historic buildings are the most time consuming. The windows to be replaced should be replaced with a sash and flashing to match the existing. A complete restoration includes epoxy repairs, borate wood preservation strategies, weather seal installation, resetting of the glazing, and painting and installation of a storm. The cost of a fully restored historic window can be 4 or 5 times the price of an inexpensive replacement, however, not just any replacement windows can be used in this project, so even replacement windows will still be expensive. A complete wood window restoration can cost between $1,500 and $4,500.37 Even though restoring historic windows is more difficult and expensive, it is important to do so in order to maintain the historic integrity of the project. Since this is a historic preservation project and most character defining elements must be kept, only a small percent should be demolished. The minimal demolition in the barn consists of the non-historic partition walls in the wagon shed, which will be the future retail space. Demolition costs are high at $10.00 per square foot, amounting to a $13,000 demolition estimate.38 The exterior

107

sheathing of the barn is mostly intact and only needs repair. There is water damage in some areas and discoloration throughout. The exterior sheathing estimates are for most of the vertical wood board and batten siding minus the window openings. The siding repairs should be of the same species and the color should revert back to the yellow tint it used to be. There is some masonry on the exterior made out of aggregate concrete blocks that can be repaired. The damage is minimal and will not require major work. Cost estimates for repairing the siding, masonry, and installing new insulation for the roof and the walls were taken from RSMeans Commercial Renovation 2016.39 As for roofing, roofing-material that keeps the barn dry may be installed. However, plywood or OSB panels cannot be installed over or replace existing roof boards because they would ruin the historic significance.

Asphalt roll roofing is allowed to be installed.40 The barn will require a full replacement of its roof systems, including its shingles and gutters. It will require partial repair to its roof framing. Both of these repairs are costly, and will require approximately $155,000.41 The site-work for the barn site requires pavement resurfacing for the beer garden, as well as asphalt removal and sod installation for new green space. The pavement resurfacing for the 4,900 square foot beer garden space at $3.00 per square foot amounts to $14,700.42 The removal of asphalt to make way for the sod installation costs the same price as the resurfacing and will cost $75,000 for 25,000 square feet.43 The sod installation is cheaper at $0.80 per square foot for 25,000 square feet, costing $20,000.44 Interior Cost Estimates

Most of the Barn rests on concrete slab foundations, which will remain as the flooring for the

renovated barn on the first-floor. Restoring concrete flooring is relatively easy and cheap, compared to installing new flooring. Concrete flooring repair is $2.32 per square foot, costing $13,966.40.45 Repairing wood flooring on the second-floor space will require more money. The roof leaks in the barn promote rot in the wood flooring and the joists underneath. The more acceptable process of wood floor rehabilitation is to replace or repair the entire or part of the wood joist or floor board with timber of appropriate size using traditional joinery. Any rotten wood can also be cut away and replaced with a structurally and historically appropriate piece.46 Because of the expensive labor and materials, wood floor repair can be up to $10.00 per square foot, amounting this estimate to $26,855.40.47 Replacing or repairing the timber framing in the barn can be difficult and expensive, depending on the damage and the type of material. Original wood timber that was used at the time, such as walnut, cherry, or maple, may be currently extinct or very expensive. Replacement timbers may be cut from alternate species that were around during the time of construction. The barn features heavy timber and light timber framing. In general, hardwood should be replaced with hardwood and softwood should be replaced with softwood. It is also a bad idea from a preservation standpoint to replace locally sawn or hewn timbers with dimensional lumber, pressure-treated lumber, and chemically-treated lumber.48 The barn has both heavy and light timber framing, and 108

there are some instances of rot, but this barn does not require more than $70,000 in timber framing restoration. Light timber repair is $10.41 per square foot and heavy timber repair is more expensive at $21.25 per square foot.49 The circulation of the building consists of the addition of one mechanical lift and the repair of the existing staircase, which amounts to $22,886.72.50 The mechanical fixtures include the addition of four bathrooms, one for the retail space and three for the restaurant space.

It also includes five gas fired heating/cooling systems that are made to cover 1,200 square feet each.

The total cost for mechanicals is $65,458.204.51 The electrical systems cost is very high in this project because it needs to build electrical systems in an old and outdated building. Electrical includes two 200 amp service units for retail, one 400 amp service unit for the restaurant, wiring throughout, and both fluorescent lights for retail and incandescent lights to create an ambient feel in the restaurant.

The electrical costs amount to $182,398.34.52 The renovation of an existing building requires new plumbing pipes to be installed, and can get costly. There is one existing bathroom in the barn, so there must be some existing plumbing, but much more will need to be added in order to accommodate all of the customers. New plumbing installation for the barn is $10.02 per square foot.53 Finally, the commercial kitchen fit out, excluding the purchase of appliances, can be the most expensive part of a project. The food and beverage industry has strict regulations on how a commercial kitchen can be built and they specify professional grade conditions. The major cost of a commercial kitchen is not the kitchen equipment, it is preparing the facility for the installation of the equipment and installing the correct flooring and other surfaces. Prices to build out commercial kitchens range from $149.47 to $254.13 per square foot. The kitchen for the barn restaurant will use $249.05 per square and amount to a cost of $269,970.20.54 Furniture, Fixtures and Equipment Cost Estimates

Since we are proposing destination retail and a tasting room restaurant as the highest and

best uses for the barn, we included the fit-out costs of all of the necessary furniture and equipment for these uses. This way we can lease the space to the tenants who will work based off of our proposed uses. These costs can be removed from the proforma in the event a decision is made to instead create an empty space that is flexible for the tenant’s required use. The tables, benches, chairs, and barstools for the tasting room are made out of wood and rustic looking in order to match the look and feel of the barn. The 9 foot long tables are meant to go indoors and outdoors, while the smaller tables and barstools are meant to stay indoors. There are also two large outdoor pergolas that will go outside in the beer garden. The cost of all the wooden furniture is $40,900.55 The commercial appliances required was information obtained from researching other tasting room restaurants and seeing what they were using. These are the minimal number of appliances for the kitchen and amount to $34,700.56 109

Soft Cost analysis

Soft costs are any costs that are not considered direct construction costs. Soft costs include

everything from architectural and engineering fees, legal fees, permits, market and environmental studies, bank inspections, developer fees. For financed projects soft costs also include loan interest payments during the construction period, title recoding fee and construction loan origination fee.

Total soft and financing cost for this project is $303,998, which is 15% of the total construction cost.

Historic Preservation Standards in the Barn Use Proposal

The adaptive reuse of the barn is a development project that would help further restore the

history of the Richardson Complex while providing a modern use to the surrounding neighborhood and City of Buffalo. Historic Tax Credits will be used in order to help develop this project and keep it feasible. In order to get the maximum amount of Historic Tax Credits, the redevelopment must stay faithful to the character defining features of the Barn. The proposed uses of destination retail and restaurant/tasting room will stay consistent with the character defining features of the barn in order to create a unique space that showcases the history of the site while providing modern amenities. The new uses will retain the historic fabric and the historic volumes of the barn by keeping demolition at a minimum. Non-physical features will also be preserved by the new uses in terms of the prior uses of the barn and the surrounding region. The prior uses of the region dating back to the 19th century were heavily focused on agriculture and handmade crafts. The restaurant use will retain the past agricultural use of the region by serving locally made beer, wine, whiskey, and food. These all have similar ingredients to what was grown, harvested, and raised in the area. The destination retail use will buy and sell locally sourced and hand-crafted materials and clothing. There will be nothing commercial or mass produced sold since this would degrade the local ambiance and the connection to the region’s history.

The proposed uses for these spaces retain the character defining features identified at the

beginning of this chapter. The exterior of the Barn is what is seen first and it will be restored back to its original appearance. The site around the barn will be improved and better connected with the rest of the campus to emulate how it once was. The aesthetics of the exterior elements and the facade will remain virtually unchanged, they will just be updated and weatherproofed. The vertical board and batten exterior sheathing will be restored and repainted with a historically accuracte color. The barn doors and windows will be restored which will help to demonstrate how this barn was accessed.

The hoist beam that sticks out of the large door on the second floor will be kept as a reflection of how materials were moved. The exterior masonry work and the roof will be repaired. Residents and guests 110

will get a sense of the type of craftmanship and teamwork that was required to build something like

the Barn.

The interior of the Barn is unique in that it was essentially cobbled together using leftover

materials from the psychiatric hospital outbuildings. Except for the non-historic partition walls in the wagon shed segment that will be demolished, the interior will keep its original volume and special characteristics. The walls in the other sections of the Barn are made of different materials such as stone blocks, wood, and concrete, and these will be preserved. There is a section of the ceiling on the first floor that is made out of left-over tin tiles from the hospital. The restoration of the heavy and light timber framing will preserve the intimate, sectioned setting of the first floor and the large uninterrupted chamber that makes up the second floor. The tongue and groove framing will be retained to showcase the work and care that went into each connection. The second floor will retain its large cross beams and long wooden floorboards and the first floor will retain its durable concrete flooring. The original staircase will be restored and retained as a main circulation component of the Barn. The project will retain the original cast iron radiators on the first floor that have decorative carvings in them. The project will preserve the existing notches in the wood beams on the second floor and the steel members on the first floor. There is also a rope pulley system that extends from the first to the second floor that will be retained. The attic spaces will be kept intact and mostly used for mechanicals and storage space. The chicken coop interior, located in the back of the barn is the only area that will have to be significantly changed in order to accommodate a commercial kitchen fitout.

Investment and Proforma Analysis

The proforma financial modeling has shown that this has the potential to be a strong

redevelopment project (See Appendix III). Through the use of relatively minimal public funds (24% of funding), and a reasonably sized conventional loan, the project is able to produce strong returns.

A conservative cap rate of 8% was utilized to produce a potential value of $1.89 million

based on the projected net income. This figure was used to determine a maximum loan at 75% of that value. Additional loan sizing metrics were utilized including debt service coverage ratio which shows a favorable amount at 1.27 in year one and rising well above 2 by year ten. The debt yield which compares the net operating income to the initial loan amount was utilized, as this has become a highly weighted benchmark in the industry and showed a favorable 10.67%.

The project shows a strong internal rate of return at 18% and an average 27% return on the

initial developer equity invested, both of which can be used to demonstrate a healthy return to a potential investor. The required developer equity required to be brought into the deal represents 111

only 12% of the total funding sources which therefore limits the amount of capital that a potential developer would need to put at risk.

As stated, based on the proforma model, this project has the potential to be very successful

in all the required facets for a development project to proceed to further investigation. The project financials show a return for the developer while effectively redeveloping this historical space into a mixed-use project with broad appeal.

Funding Funding Sources

The rehabilitation of the barn makes financial sense with the proposed reuse of mixed use

retail and restaurant/distillery. The proposed uses will generate enough income to provide a value for the property higher than the expected rehabilitation expenses. The proposed funding sources include conventional bank financing, federal and state historic tax credits, developer equity, and a Save America’s Treasures federal grant. Additional future funding sources can include an Empire State Development grant and Greenway Funding.

Conventional Bank Financing

The proposed rehabilitation of the barn into a distillery/ restaurant as well as retail space will

generate income for the property. This allows for the project to be financed through conventional bank loans in construction and operation. Based on the financial analysis of the project, the value of the project in operation is approximately $1,891,372 based on a cap rate of 8%. A loan amount for this project will be a 75% Loan-to-Value, resulting in a loan of $1,418,529. The construction period will be financed with an interest only construction loan at 6%. After construction is complete, the construction loan amount will be converted into a permanent loan at 5.25% on a 30 year amortization. The annual debt service for the loan will be $93,998.

Federal Historic Tax Credits

The Federal Historic Tax Credit program is a 20% federal credit on qualified rehabilitation

expenses of a historic building. The rehabilitation of the Barn will qualify for federal historic tax credits based on its inclusion within the National Historic Landmark status of the Richardson Olmsted Campus. The rehabilitation of the building will need to be approved by the National Parks Service. Qualifying hard costs include walls and partitions, floors, ceilings, permanent coverings, windows and doors, HVAC systems , plumbing and fixtures, electrical and lighting, chimneys, stairs, elevators, and sprinkler systems. Qualifying soft costs include construction period interest and taxes, architect fees, engineering fees, construction management costs, reasonable developer fees, and any 112

other fees paid that would normally be charged to a capital account. The Qualified Rehabilitation Expenses will total approximately $1,347,795, resulting in a tax credit amount of $269,559. These credits will be syndicated to bring cash equity into the funding stack for the project. The estimated syndication rate is $.90 per $1 of credit. This will result in a cash value of $242,603.

State Historic Tax Credits

The State Historic Tax Credit is a 20% credit on qualified rehabilitation expenses, with a

maximum credit of $5 million. The size of the barn rehabilitation allows for the utilization of state historic tax credits without exceeding the per project maximum. The qualifying expenses for the state historic tax credits are the same as that of the federal program. The approval for historic tax credits by the National Parks Service guarantees the approval for the state tax credits. The Qualified Rehabilitation Expenses will total approximately $1,347,795, resulting in a tax credit amount of $269,559. These credits will be syndicated to bring cash equity into the funding stack for the project.

The estimated syndication rate is $.75 per $1 of credit. This will result in a cash value of $202,169.

Roofing Grant

The Richardson Center Corporation has applied for a Save America’s Treasures Grant and has

been awarded a grant totaling $400,000. This grant will help to subsidize the replacement of the roof on the barn as well as other buildings on the Richardson Olmsted Campus. The funding allocation for the grant has included $77,500 for the barn roof restoration. This grant involves a match equal to the grant amount allocated for the roof. The available developer’s equity for the project can be used to satisfy this matching requirement.

Developer Equity

The developer will need to contribute 12% of the funding into the project. The developer will

need to contribute $265,047 to the project to balance the sources and uses for the project. Based on the income potential for the project, there is the ability to invest into the rehabilitation and achieve a return on invested equity. A ten year valuation of the project at an 8% cap rate results in the value of the project in operation of approximately $1,891,372. The return on equity for the first year of operations will be 12%. After holding the property for ten years, the return on equity will be an average of 27% per year. This creates a project that will provide a strong return that will make equity investment a favorable investment decision.

Empire State Development Grant

The Empire State Development (“ESD”) Grant provides up to 20% of qualified expenses to

construct commercial space. Given the current funding needs for the project, it will not be necessary

113

to apply for an ESD grant at this time. If there is a change in project scope or value in the future, this funding source may be able to be explored at that time. However, the fixed timeline for applying to the grant will impede the construction schedule.

Empire State Development Grant funding becomes available once a year through the

Consolidated Funding Application. The goal of ESD grants are to promote economic development across New York State and works toward leveraging multiple funding sources to create impactful projects that help create jobs and restore economic vitality to struggling areas. In the 2019 funding round, up to $150 million of grant funding was available to help fund projects across New York State. The grants are given as a way to help advance the mission and strategic direction of New York State as a whole. Preference is given to projects that support Downtown Revitalization Initiatives and Strategic Community Investments, in addition projects that improve access to child care and that incorporate environmental justice practices. Eligible applicants include for-profit and not-forprofit corporations, local governments and industrial development agencies, as well as many other institutions and groups that help drive economic development. There are generally three categories of investment. These include (1) Strategic Community Investment, (2) Business Investment, and (3) Economic Growth Investment. Grant funds may be used for a variety of purposes. These include the acquisition of land or buildings, demolition and environmental remediation, new construction or renovation improvements, acquisition of furniture and fixtures, soft costs up to 25% of total project costs, and planning and feasibility studies for a specific project or site. Ineligible expenses include developer fees and residential development. The grant can be up to 20% of the total project costs based on the eligible expenses. It is encouraged to have other funding sources present to limit the grant request for each project. Empire State Development requires a minimum of 10% cash equity to be contributed to the project by the developer based on total project costs.

There is a potential to use an Empire State Development Grant for the rehabilitation of the

Barn given the proposed new use. The entirety of the Barn will be rehabilitated to commercial space, and most of the construction costs for the project will qualify for grant funding. The ESD grant also apples to furniture and fixtures, which are additional expenditures not covered by historic tax credits.

The required minimum 10% of cash equity cannot come from loans or from other

government grants. It is not explicitly specified whether federal and state historic tax credits would qualify as cash equity If the credits are syndicated, the syndication process will result in cash to fund the project. However, this equity will not be coming directly from developer. This project will require cash equity from the developer based on the proposed funding sources, and will be a large enough amount to meet the 10% requirement.

Greenway Funding

114

The site-work around the barn is not a Qualified Rehabilitation Expense for historic tax

credits. Greenway Funding is possible to help fund the necessary greenspace improvements around the barn and on the rest of the campus. Greenway Funding is a grant program funded through the licensing of the Niagara Power Project. This fund proves $9 million of funding per year to projects within the Niagara River Greenway. In relation to the Barn rehabilitation and the entirety of the Richardson Olmsted Campus, there are $2 million of the $9 million fund allocated to projects in Erie County. The scope of rehabilitation for the Barn does not include a wide range of site work. The existing parking lot features can be used for the proposed use of the Barn. There will be a limited need to remove existing asphalt pavement to improve the operational facilities of the barn as a restaurant and bar. The current available funding stack for the project provides enough capital to make the necessary site-work improvements to the site immediately surrounding the Barn structure.

Greenway funding can be considered for future greenspace improvements on the remainder of the Richardson Olmsted Campus.

Funding Gap

The proposed use for the property and the projected income from operation does not result in

a financing gap. The construction costs are above the operating value for the property, but the federal and state historic tax credits help to offset the necessary rehabilitation expenses. It is important to note that the state and historic tax credits are crucial to the development’s success. Based on the financial analysis for the project, it is clear that without the historic tax credits, this project would not be feasible. The funds received from each tax credit program total to $444,773, which without would create a deficit in funding which would render the project infeasible.

The Save America’s Treasures grant for the roof of the barn will help to cover the costs of

the total replacement necessary for the roof and alleviate some of the value gap present. Site work around the barn to improve its connectivity to the remainder of the campus can be funded through Greenway Funding, and the scope of the work can be adjusted based on the available funding resources.

Marketing Plan Outline Strategic Objectives

The tactics in this document are designed and coordinated to increase awareness of the

Barn project located within the historic Richardson Olmsted Complex. The specific audiences interested in patronizing and supporting local retail including signature home goods, and craft alcohol distilleries, breweries, and wineries from around the Western New York area. The goal is to generate sales leads in support of the proposed uses of local retail and a functioning tasting 115

room. Furthermore, a major objective for the redevelopment of this structure is to bring together the vastly separated neighboring tenants by creating a common amenity that can be utilized by all.

Marketing must be done in a strategic way to attract all of these different parties, and in order to have an accurate predictor of success, a cohesive surrounding market analysis has been performed to understand the different populations of people, businesses, and institutions that surround the site.

Directly surrounding this site exists a State College, an arts corridor, a boutique hotel, and residents that show a mix of demographics and income. In addition to being considered an attractive amenity to the variation of neighboring uses, the functions of this redeveloped Barn should be considered a destination to bring in people from all over the Western New York area. The way to adjust marketing towards this goal is to show promise of variation compared to similar uses in the area; people want to know that when they get there, they will be experiencing something special, and something that cannot be found closer to their place of origin.

When discussing alternative development options for this site, many came to mind, however,

the concept of destination retail and locally-inspired alcohol tastings was consistently returned to.

Buffalo is a close-knit city, and the projects that tend to be most successful and accepted by the public tend to include good food and drinks. Over the past decade, Buffalo and its surrounding areas have proven to take a strong interest in craft alcohol products including beers, wines, and spirits, having a facility in which these products can be showcased and enjoyed offers a unique amenity. Many people enjoy going on wine tours, beer buses, or whiskey riots, to enjoy craft products and experience varying landscapes, but the downfall to these events is they often involve an entire day of planning, traveling, and great expense. “Asylum Tasting Room� allows for this sought after pastime of alcohol or cocktail tastings to occur conveniently under one roof, and by doing this a great variety of people and products can exist cohesively amidst a campus with a grand history and agricultural function.

Target Audiences

There are a variety of target audiences that need to be marketed towards in order for this

project to be successful. Our tactics will be focused primarily on surrounding neighbors, graduate level students, Elmwood corridor employees, downtown workers, craft liquor enthusiasts, etc. There is a large population of homeowners and renters in the surrounding area of the project site, and with homes comes the need for home furnishings. The destination home furnishing retailer as a proposed tenant for the Barn will attract an audience of individuals looking for unique home goods.

The benefit of being within close proximity of a state college comes with a constant influx of young people moving into homes, apartments, and dormitories, so unique home furnishings would be an attractive amenity to this targeted group.

Another sample of people that this development will be targeted towards is individuals

who are interested in historic places, specifically those with previous agricultural uses that also 116

promote sustainable design and use. The Barn is a structure completely constructed of materials that were once used in other places, and these materials were repurposed to create a very unique space that represents the ability to reuse instead of build custom; this attribute allows for yet another targeted audience that is interested in sustainable building practices and the repurposing of historic structures. Buffalo has a deep history of historic buildings, so this audience of architecture and history buffs is substantial, especially in the surrounding area of a historic park system and arts district.

As mentioned before, the concept of a tasting room is one that allows for a growing culture in

Western New York to function under one roof, so yet another target audience for this project would be enthusiasts of craft products. Of course, all tastings are made better with parings, so the concept for this use would not only include cocktails and locally-made products, but would promote local foods as well. With a growing trend in food trucks, tapas, and small bites in the Buffalo area growing rapidly over the past decade, the mission to bring these two functions in one property is both convenient and highly-desired.

Historic Connection

A thoughtful remodel and adaptive reuse of a historic barn within the Richardson Olmstead

Complex will provide space for a tasting room which, if marketed properly, will become a revitalized local landmark. The Barn, as a part of the Richardson Olmstead Complex, is a National Register-listed farmstead complex in Buffalo, New York complete with wagon shed and tool shed with second floor access that would have been operated by the patients staying within the Buffalo State Hospital for the Mentally Insane in the early to mid-1900s. As previously mentioned, the Barn, as we see it today, was actually a reconstruction using repurposed materials from agricultural buildings within the complex. Architect William Worth Carlin would have been the lead designer responsible for the original agricultural structures built in the 1880s, “...earliest work at the asylum was the Second Barn (SD1) and several outbuildings, including the Hen House (HN), built in 1885-86. It is also likely that he designed the Hog House (HG). These farm buildings featured board-and-batten exteriors, and it is possible that some of them were moved and/or provided materials for the Wagon Shed (WAG) of 1928, which also features a board-and-batten exterior…”.57 So it is clear that this building was patched together in order to serve new agricultural functions for the campus, and the decision to reuse these materials and be stewards to our environment rather than acquiring new materials is an ethical management of resources that would be admired today, but would have been considered a revolutionary marvel during its time of construction. William E. Haugaard, also an architect, would have been responsible for the reconstruction of this barn in the location held today, “...He also likely oversaw the movement and/or the deconstruction of the frame farm buildings for use in the Wagon Shed (WAG) in 1928…”.58

117

The two-story barn looks much as it has since erected in 1928, with a gabled roof, barn style

doors, chicken coop, and hay door. Inside, the space is still identifiable of its original functions with its original repurposed tongue and groove walls, exposed wood beam ceiling, concrete floors, and unique widows. This structure can be spruced up and complimented by the addition of a tasting bar and seating area, a customer bathroom, storage space, and an area for food preparation. Outside, the courtyard space can be converted into additional seating and event space.

Budgeting Categories •

Photography – Capture the building before and after renovation for use in website and other

advertising outlets. Includes interior and exterior photography.

Approximate Cost: $1,000.00 •

Website – Create a website to showcase the property and help to create a building image.

Sharing renderings, progress photos, the history of the building, and media stories will help position the building for success in the marketplace. The website will also include a form for interested retailers to submit a request for a showing.

Approximate Cost: $4,500.00 •

Collateral Materials – Folders and collateral items (key chains, pens, etc.) for use by leasing

agent in securing tenants and retailers.

Approximate Cost: $2,500.00 •

Open Events/ Previews/ Tenant Parties/Grand Opening – An open house event will be

scheduled at the discretion of the leasing agent for the property. This event will be promoted via available advertising outlets, on the website and through social media. It is expected the event will coincide with the grand opening of the building. Additional events to welcome tenants and improve retention rates will be scheduled accordingly with support from Property Manager.

Approximate cost: $10,000.00 •

Signage/Banner – Capturing localized traffic and pedestrian interest, the site signage will lead

potential tenants to contact us for more information. The sides of the building facing Richardson Road, Rockwell Road, or Rees Street are potential locations for temporary signage.

Approximate Cost: $2,000.00 118

•

Signage - Prime street level exposure in the lower level near the barn doors fronting the

parking lot provides exception signage visibility and the ability to provide a degree of recognition to those spaces while build out occurs.

Approximate cost: $10,000.00 •

Direct Mail Postcard – A series of postcard style mailings to a list gathered through early pre-

leasing activities. A series of 3 mailings will be used to drive showings.

Approximate Cost: $1,500.00 (does not include postage) •

Buffalorising.com – Alternative news outlet. Internet based. Targeting 21-50 yr. olds, making

$30-$100k. 150,000 impressions per month. Ad frequency and placement throughout the site will enhance branding message in the market.

Approximate Cost: $3,000.00 •

Pay-Per-Click (PPC) Advertising

A combination of Google Adwords and Facebook advertising targeting specific demographics that are searching for local retail/dining or craft beverages in the Buffalo market.

Approximate Cost: $4,000.00 •

Loopnet.com – A resource for prospective tenants searching for available space for rent in the

Buffalo area. Internet searches on space rental listing websites have proven a very valuable channel for qualified leads.

Approximate Cost: $7,400.00 •

Apartmentguide.com – A resource for prospective tenants searching for available apartments

in the Buffalo area. Internet searches on apartment listing websites have proven a very valuable channel for qualified leads.

Approximate Cost: $9,600.00 •

ForRent.com – A resource for prospective tenants searching for available apartments in the

Buffalo area. Internet searches on apartment listing websites have proven a very valuable channel for qualified leads.

Approximate Cost: $4,600.00 •

Craigslist – Free listing in Buffalo apartments for rent section of Craigslist can produce

valuable leads in the early stages of a retail project.

119

120

Endnotes 1 Ann Gourlay Gabler, et all. “About Barns.”

In The Hudson Valley Regional Review. 55-57 2 Gabler. “About Barns.” 57-58 3 Gabler. “About Barns.” 58-59 4 Clancy, Goody. “Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.”, pg.5, 2008 5 Clancy, Goody. “Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.”, pg.59, 2008 6 Clancy, Goody. “Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.”, pg.56, 2008 7 Clancy, Goody. “Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.”, pg.60, 2008 8 Patricia O’Donnell, Carrie Mardorf, Sarah Cody, Cultural Landscape Report (Heritage Landscapes: 2008), 3.

9 Tomes, The Art of Asylum-Keeping: Thomas Story Kirkbride and the Origins of American Psychiatry, 1984 10 “Cap Rate Survey-Fitness Centers.” Net Lease Advisor, June 28, 2018. https://www.netleaseadvisor.com/tenant/fitnesscenters/.

11 “Fitness Center.” Design Cost Date, October 30, 2018. https://www.dcd.com/articles/category/estimating/fitnesscenters.

12 ESRI, “Market Profile - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 13 ESRI, “Demographic and Income Profile City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 14 ESRI, “Disposable Income Profile - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 15 ESRI, “Retail Demand Outlook - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 16 ESRI, “Retail Market Potential - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 17 Hotel Henry, “Hotel Henry Urban Resort Conference Center in Buffalo, NY,” Hotel Henry Urban Resort Hotel Conference Center in Buffalo NY, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www. hotelhenry.com/) 18 Cole’s Restaurant and Bar, “Cole’s Restaurant and Bar, Burgers, Beer, and Pub Food in Buffalo NY,” Coles, accessed November 17, 2019, http://colesonelmwood.com/) 19 Mr. Goodbar, “Mr. Goodbar,” Mr. Goodbar, December 4, 2018, https://mrgoodbarbuffalo.

com/) 20 Tommyrotter Distillery, “Home,” Tommyrotter Distillery, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www.tommyrotter.com/home) 21 500 Seneca, “Developers Convert Another Larkinville Warehouse into a Mixed-Use Facility,” 500 Seneca St., March 16, 2015, https:// www.500seneca.com/developers-convert-another-larkinville-warehouse-into-a-mixed-use-facility/) 22 Labatt USA, “History: Labatt USA,” History | Labatt USA, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www.labattusa.com/history/) 23 Black Button Distilling, “Buffalo Distillery: Black Button Distilling: Locations,” Black Button Distilling, accessed November 17, 2019, https:// www.blackbuttondistilling.com/buffalo) 24 “Room,” room, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www.room-buffalo.com/) 25 Ro Home Shop, “Ro,” Ro, accessed November 17, 2019, http://www.rohomeshop.com/) 26 “Neo Gifts Studio,” Neo Gifts - The Art of Gifting, accessed November 17, 2019, https:// www.neogifts.com/) 27 D’Avolio , “Gourmet Olive Oils and Balsamic Vinegars,” D’Avolio, accessed November 17, 2019, https://davolios.com/) 28 House of Olives, “The House of Olives The House of Olives, Imported Virgin Olives Oils and Vinegars,” the house of olives - The House of Olives, imported virgin olives oils and vinegars, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www.thehouseofolives.com/) 29 Neighborhood Needs Interview, Tony Masiello, November 4,2019.

30 ESRI, “Market Profile - Neighborhood” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 31 ESRI, “Demographic and Income Profile Neighborhood” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 32 ESRI, “Market Profile - Neighborhood” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 33 ESRI, “Disposable Income Profile - Neighborhood” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 34 ESRI, “Retail Demand Outlook - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 35 ESRI, “Retail Market Potential - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019) 36 Lazarus, Richard. “Recommendations for Appropriate Repairs to Historic Barns and Other Agricultural Buildings.” New York State

Barn Coalition, 16 Oct. 2002, www.barncoalition. org/?page_id=138.

37 Corbett, John M. “A Last Look at Historic Wood Windows.” Wood Window Restoration Marlowe Restorations LLC, www.marlowerestorations.com/window_restoration.html.

38 Hometown Demolition. “How Much Does Demolition Cost per Square Foot?” Hometown Demolition, 5 Sept. 2019, www.hometowndemolitioncontractors.com/blog/how-much-does-demolition-cost-per-square-foot.

39 Mewis, Bob. RSMeans Commercial Renovation Cost Data. RSMeans; 37th Edition, 2015.

40 Lazarus, Richard. “Recommendations for Appropriate Repairs to Historic Barns and Other Agricultural Buildings.” New York State Barn Coalition, 16 Oct. 2002, www.barncoalition. org/?page_id=138.

41 Mewis, Bob. RSMeans Commercial Renovation Cost Data. RSMeans; 37th Edition, 2015.

42 HomeAdvisor. “Learn How Much It Costs to Repair Asphalt Paving.” HomeAdvisor, www. homeadvisor.com/cost/outdoor-living/repair-asphalt-paving/.

43 CostHelper. “How Much Does Asphalt Removal Cost? - CostHelper.com.” CostHelper, home.costhelper.com/asphalt-removal.html.

44 Angie’s List. “How Much Does It Cost to Lay Sod?” Angie’s List, 4 Sept. 2018, www.angieslist.com/articles/how-much-does-it-cost-laysod.htm.

45 Mewis, Bob. RSMeans Commercial Renovation Cost Data. RSMeans; 37th Edition, 2015.

46 Lazarus, Richard. “Recommendations for Appropriate Repairs to Historic Barns and Other Agricultural Buildings.” New York State Barn Coalition, 16 Oct. 2002, www.barncoalition. org/?page_id=138.

47 Mewis, Bob. RSMeans Commercial Renovation Cost Data. RSMeans; 37th Edition, 2015.

48 Lazarus, Richard. “Recommendations for Appropriate Repairs to Historic Barns and Other Agricultural Buildings.” New York State Barn Coalition, 16 Oct. 2002, www.barncoalition. org/?page_id=138.

49 Thumbtack. “How Much Does It Cost to Frame a House?” Thumbtack, 22 Dec. 2017, www. thumbtack.com/p/cost-to-frame-a-house.m 50 Mewis, Bob. RSMeans Commercial Renovation Cost Data. RSMeans; 37th Edition, 2015.

51 Mewis, Bob. RSMeans Commercial Renovation Cost Data. RSMeans; 37th Edition, 2015.

52 Mewis, Bob. RSMeans Commercial Renovation Cost Data. RSMeans; 37th Edition, 2015.

53 HomeAdvisor. “Learn How Much It Costs to Install New Plumbing Pipes.” HomeAdvisor, www.homeadvisor.com/cost/plumbing/installnew-plumbing-pipes/.

54 CES. “Small Commercial Kitchen.” CES, 3 Apr. 2019, cesdfw.com/small-commercial-kitchen/.

55 WebstaurantStore. “Antique Rustic Solid Pine Furniture.” WebstaurantStore, www.webstaurantstore.com/flash-furniture-xa-farm-6-gg-hercules-40x-108-x-30antique-rustic-solid-pine-folding-farm-table-with-two-benches/354XAFARM6GG. html?utm_source=Google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=GoogleShopping&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI8ouCzOri5QIVC3iGCh0ZAwYrEAQYASABEgL3ePD_BwE. 56 RestaurantSupply.com. “Commercial Restaurant Supplies & Equipment.”

RestaurantSupply.com, www.restaurantsupply.com/?keyword=restaurant%2Bsupply&gclid=EAIaIQobChMInqTBxs_z5QIVjJ-zCh3ikQr9EAAYASAAEgILVvD_BwE. 57 Clancy, Goody. “Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.”, pg.61, 2008.

58 Clancy, Goody. “Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.”, pg.64, 2008.

121

122

Recommendations

7 123

Historic Preservation Recommendations

In considering rehabilitation of the Barn at the Richardson Olmsted Campus from a historic

preservation perspective, it is the recommended to revisit the original conceptual design put forth

by Frederick Law Olmsted with Henry Hobson Richardson. The designs support the ideology of the Kirkbride Plan and Dr. Thomas Kirkbride’s therapeutic approach to the treatment of the mentally ill.

The landscape design was an integral part of the original concept. Although over time the property was impacted by the selling of land and construction of new buildings, the remaining open space is a defining characteristic of the campus, and should be respected as such.

The landscape should include organic pedestrian paths connecting the campus, agricultural

crops, and the inclusion of water features, specifically ponds, as seen in Figure 7-1. The pedestrian paths would reflect the paths that are seen in the original conceptual drawings by Olmsted, as well as those that exist presently in his other local park designs. There are some remnants of previously existing paths observable on the grounds, and it is recommended to incorporate them with the new path plan.

As agriculture was an important aspect of the work-therapy concept, it is important to

recognize and designate selected crops as a homage to the past site use. Crops mentioned in reports about the site (such as wheat, barley, hay and corn) would be good candidates.

The recommendations for the barn are more specific. The characteristics that define

the structure must be preserved (Figure 7-2). The materials used should reflect those that exist, and replacements should only be made upon necessity (see Figure 7-3). The windows should be repaired and reused, as appropriate. The interesting mix of materials and elements, as salvaged and re-purposed from buildings torn down years ago provide an opportunity to further promote sustainability and reuse. For this, it is suggested to use and reuse local materials in the rehabilitation of the building.

Real Estate Development Recommendations

Redeveloment of the Barn should be an adaptive reuse which seeks to enhance and work with

the existing historic context of the building and site. A way to accomplish this is to work within the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and the New York State Historic Preservation Office guidelines.

Working with these organizations will satisfy the requirements needed to receive federal and state historic tax credits. It will then be necessary to syndicate these tax credits to an investor in exchange for additional equity capital that will be utilized for long-term financing of the Barn rehabilitation.

The historic barn is over 8,000 square feet , therefore we recommend a good tenant mix rather

than a singular tenant. Multi- tenant buildings are far less likely to have 100% vacancy at any time 124

and the owner can yield a higher price per square foot for rent with multiple smaller tenants, rather

than with a singular tenant.

It is important to create a strong historic branding for

the barn and in respects to the Richardson Olmsted Campus.

The brand should strive to a create a destination spot. A destination retail tenant paired with a beverage and food service tenant will create an ambiance that will draw traffic from the neighborhood and the region.

Figure 7-1: Olmsted designed pond Source: Richardson Center Corporation

Urban Planning Recommendations

In prior chapters, the site amenities and features in

their current state were described in detail. The proposed signage, linkages, amenities, and physical features strive to reconnect the historic ROC design to the redevelopment of the ROC as it evolves today. Proposed amenities on the northern grounds are specifically focused on tying back to the original Olmsted design. The shortcomings of the current site and amenities were also addressed. With this said, the

Figure 7.2: Barn Structure Source: Brenna Reilly

site has great potential, and with the right ideas, can once again be a significant space in the City of Buffalo. Below, recommendations are explained in detail.

Main Entrance

First, to address the main entrance issues that

were outlined in the previous chapter, the following map proposes to move the main entrance to Rees Street. Rees Street to the west of the campus has potential to provide a unique opportunity that may be beneficial to the proposal

Figure 7.3: Entrance to Kirkbride designed building Source: Siera Rogers

of apartments, but also to the possible development of the Barn, and in general the green connections throughout the entire campus. Instead of using the Forest Avenue entrance or the other hidden entrance to Hotel Henry off of Rockwell Avenue, Rees Street can possibly be used as the main entrance to the entire ROC . This entrance would be useful because as one drives into the site, the user will first see the renovated porch entrance at the most western part of the campus buildings and the green space that leads up to

Figure 7-4: Cabinets found in the Barn Source: Brenna Reilly

125

the main buildings. The design of the main entrance can be designed referencing popular Olmsted designs. This type of design includes a tree-lined road leading up to the site, which can be seen in the Olmsted designed parkways throughout Buffalo, illustrated in Figures 7-5 and 7-6 . This type of road Figure 7-5: Olmsted designed tree lined roads Source: Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy

entrance has been used in other Kirkbride buildings as seen in Figure 7-7. Another recommendation would be including a grander pedestrian entrance along the side of the road entrance, which will lead to the paths around the campus, as many of his park entrances focused on the user on foot as seen in Figure 7-8. Figure 7-9 references some ideas of what could possibly be implemented for this proposal. This road entrance will include signage that explains which direction to take to get to the barn, hospital, apartments, hotel and parking.

Figure 7-6: Pedestrian entrance to Central Park Source: Frederick Law Olmsted Society

Further, the user will have to drive past the Barn when

coming from this entrance and there will be an entrance to the Barn directly to the left of this entrance. Using Rees Street will provide the businesses at the Barn frontage to a higher trafficked area and be one of the first things the user will see, Figure 7-10. The visitor will also be able to drive past the redeveloped green space before parking instead of seeing a massive parking lot and an empty expanse of grass. Another important feature of this entrance is that the visitor can

Figure 7-7: Entrance to Kirkbride designed building Source: Ethan McElroy

easily find parking when coming to the site without having to drive around the building, as one would have to do from the Forest Avenue entrance. Since there will be parking space taken away from the site around the barn, there is proposed parking by buildings 38-41, which will be tucked away from the pedestrian paths by a green space buffer from the main road (shown in the proposed map), but convenient for users of both the apartments and visitors of the Barn and areas surrounding. Additional pedestrian paths can connect those

Figure 7-8: South lawn pathways Source: Robert Carey : Richardson Center Corporation

126

parking in that lot to the green space and Barn.

Another reason for this recommendation is that

Rees Street is convenient to travellers from all over Buffalo

because it directly connects a driver to Grant Street which has unique amenities and assets for the visitor to experience, and the 198, which connects to most other major thruways in Buffalo, making the Richardson Olmsted Campus an easy find right off the exit. It also makes possible the use of off campus signage to help locating the site more straightforward. This entrance provides the visitor an initial view of the historic grounds designed by Olmsted. Designing the site to make Rees Street the main entrance allows for

Figure 7-9: Tree-lined path with signage Source: Macquarie University. “Wally’s Walkway”

visitors and users to experience the “beautiful and pastoral design style with gardenesque components and an overall park-like landscape” that provides a sense of place to the campus and reduce the frustration of the visitor.1

Lastly, The other two entrances can and should be

utilized, but making one designated grand entrance for a visitor can enhance this site as a whole because it allows the visitor to experience both sides of the campus when entering the site. The current Rockwell Road entrance can possibly be used as a back entrance for maintenance,

Figure 7-10: Distillery in Central New York Source: Siera Rogers

suppliers, and trucks. The entrance off Forest Avenue can be primarily utilized for the operating state hospital, as well as for pedestrians coming from the nearby residential areas such as Richmond Avenue, or from the pedestrian and bike paths located on Elmwood Avenue and Forest Avenue (A full illustration of this can be seen in Maps 7-4 and 7-5.)

Historic Paths and Landscape Features

Next, the map incorporates many Olmsted landscape

design elements throughout the green space and site as a whole. As mentioned earlier, the south lawn was redesigned in 2013 and tried to closely emulate Olmsted’s characteristics.

This is proposed to continue through the northern green space, including paths that connect the main campus to the green space for pedestrians. Therefore, this development will connect the site for a pedestrian from the most northern part of the site all the way to Forest Avenue, the most southern

127

part of the site, this is illustrated in Map 7-5. The implementation of pathways on the northern grounds should see to the connection of pathways on the southern grounds. In other words, the paths should be constructed in a similar nature with the same materials. Materials used on the south lawn consist of small gravel pathways bordered by grey sandstone, which can be seen in Figure 7-8. Paths on the north lawn should use the same materials to establish consistency and uniformity. There may also be space to include paths for other types of travellers, such as bikers.

These paths will allow the traveller to move through different features including a water

feature that was once included on the site with Olmsted’s original design. Although a water feature no longer exists on the ROC, water was integral to the Olmsted landscape. Olmsted designed and illustrated these features as evident in Delaware Park. Historically, there were two small bodies of water located along Elmwood Avenue. These features should be re-implemented within the underutilized green space that encompasses the former agricultural land. To provide the visitor and user with a better understanding of the campus, there is proposed signage throughout the paths and around the features explaining the history and significance. Further, there can be uniform signage along the path to give the area a sense of place and a sense that the user is on a campus as seen in Figure 7-9 and Map 7-2.

Agriculture Space

Further, the paths will connect the user to agricultural land that will tie in the crops that were

historically grown on the farmlands. The crops grown here can be used by the 100 Acres restaurant, or by the tenants at the Barn, such as the distillery if needed. Lastly, there will be therapeutic gardens on this landscape that can be enjoyed by tenants and users of the site. To tie this all together, and provide the way finding this site desperately needs, didactic signage throughout the pathways and other features are crucial in order to explain the important history of the campus as well as the explanation as to why it has all been reintroduced once more. Figure 7-10 references a distillery located in central New York with agriculture out back and winding paths around the barn and throughout the site.

128

Table 7-1: Recommended Site Changes. See corresponding Maps 7-1 through Map 7-6

129

Map 7-1: Recommendations for the proposed site

Map 7-2: Proposed way-finding signage

130

Map 7-3: Proposed water features

Map 7-4: Paths to Rees Street/ Main Entrance

131

Map 7-5: Proposed pedestrian pathways

Map 7-6: Proposed agricultural land

132

Map 7-7: Proposed recomendations for the site

133

Endnotes 1 Patricia O’Donnell, Carrie Mardorf, Sarah Cody, Cultural Landscape Report (Heritage Landscapes: 2008), 2.

134

Conclusions

8 135

Conclusions

The Urban Planning discipline first analyzed the evolution of the historic landscape of the

ROC through the use of historic maps, and the analysis of the evolving features of the site shown on these maps, starting from the 1870s, all the way to 2008. This analysis of the historic landscape concludes that the historic features of the site need to be incorporated when developing the north lawn of the ROC as well as the development of The Barn. The maps illustrate what Olmsted once incorporated in his landscape designs, and therefore can guide the developer when reintroducing Olmsted features.

Following, the current site was analyzed and a few major conclusions were made. The current

site lacks many things that can be detrimental to the site as a whole and can leave the user with frustration and confusion when visiting. The site lacks a grand main entrance, creating no sense of place.

The site also has poor way finding within the campus, making it difficult for visitors to navigate the site. Fencing surrounds the site as a whole, limiting the connection to the surrounding neighborhoods. The north lawn of the campus is completely underutilized with a vast parking lot and empty green space surrounding the Barn, and it is basically cut off from the main campus by the underutilized space. Lastly, the amenities that are already on campus seem to cater to a certain user and demographic, and therefore create a less welcoming space for other types of users.

Therefore, by evaluating the historic features of the campus’ landscape and the strengths and

weaknesses of the current site, the Master of Urban Planning discipline focuses on recommendations for future development of the site. The main recommendations include creating a campus that has greater connectivity to the Barn that will be developed as well. This connectivity will be improved by the incorporation of pedestrian and bike-friendly paths, better road conditions, incorporating historic landscape features to generate more traffic to the site and connect to the historic past of the site, and creating a more welcoming and better designed main entrance to create a sense of place for the user.

The development of the landscape of this site should include paths, agricultural lands, water features and gardens which will introduce more amenities for the proposed user, and more of a reason for the public to come visit the site. These recommendations bring together the important historic features of the site and use these features to address the current weaknesses of the site in order to propose a campus that will be designed to work for each proposed user of the campus.

From this research, we have learned that each development project comes with very unique

challenges. The history of the campus can be both a hindrance to the development, but it also can be utilized in a way that will enhance the project and make it an unparalleled development project. However, with such a large-scale project, comes the grand cost of the redevelopment of the site.

Therefore, it is important to plan what can be included on the site so that it meets the budget, con136

nects back to the historic nature and landscape, and creates a space that a user wants to visit and

experience.

Many different factors were considered by the Real Estate Development discipline when find-

ing its conclusions. Market and financial analyses as well as case studies were factored into the final plans for the Barn as well as the critique of McGuire Group’s proposed development strategy. It was found that McGuire’s plan was constrained too much by the historic tax credit standards and they would not be able to generate enough revenue to sustain success for their proposed use. The market did not show favor for the desired use considering the proposed amenities for the site compared to what amenities are offered at similar developments.

The Barn on the Richardson Olmsted Campus was studied as a potential mixed-use devel-

opment. Several studies were done including market and financial analyses, interviews with local residents, students attending Buffalo State College and employees of the Richardson Center Corporations. It was determined that the best use for the Barn is a combination of uses including a restaurant/ bar with a tasting room, a destination home furnishings store, and an artisan olive oil and vinegar shop with loose tea sales as well. This group of uses was finalized due to the market favoring each use, projecting sales growth over the next five years. The market analysis proves that the market is not already saturated in each use and there is sufficient demand for each. The financial analysis shows that the proposed development is feasible with a comfortable return on equity to the developers through the use of historic tax credits and minimal additional public financing.

The Richardson Olmsted Campus has a rich history, and because of this there are many great opportunities to bring the site to life. With ample historic documentation, creating a narrative that respects the key characteristics of the architecture, landscaping, and theory that the original design was derived from, is important. As a designated Historic Landmark, this narrative can be instrumental in the success of development projects.

Through thorough investigation of the site, it becomes evident that there is a significant

amount of character defining features. In considering the future use of the buildings, compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards will require one to envision the preservation from inside out; from materiality to line of sight. As members from different disciplines examine this site, the identification of these features, and understanding of the Secretary of the Interior’s role, may lend to a smoother process.

To sum up the importance of this process, one can look at the site as it is. The past decisions,

by planners, developers and architects alike lead to the dismemberment of much of the campus, including two buildings on the eastern-most wing of the main structure. Such drastic changes, while representing shifts in medical practice as well as architectural styles, had altered forever the profile of the campus. This is what is at stake for the site, and this is why it is so important to preserve the deep architectural history is embodied by this varied site.

The future of the Richardson Olmsted Complex needs to connect with surrounding neighbor-

137

hoods and institutions by creating inviting spaces and connection gateways. It must also preserve the history of this unique Historic Landmark all while creating a mix of uses that will provide ongoing financial income that will cover the initial costs and ongoing maintenance. This report has outlined the many difficulties that lie ahead for the potential developer but has also provided a clear path forward that can be used as a stepping stone for the next group of diverse disciplines that is prepared to take this plan to the next iteration.

138

139

140

Appendix Buildings 38, 39, 40, & 41: A Case Study in Adaptive Reuse

I 141

Existing Conditions Building: 38 - Female Ward J Description: This is a brick masonry building located at the western most part of the complex. It has a basement, one wood-framed floor, and one wood-framed attic. The building consists of a stone foundation, gable cap stones with decorative scroll carvings, belt courses, sills and window mullions. The floor framing requires the most repair.1 Figure 1 shows new stabilization in the form of metal wire adhered to the brick, most likely to stop it from crumbling.

Condition:

Interior: Roof leaks and broken internal downspouts

have rendered damage in the interior. There is plaster failure on all of the walls, peeling paint, rusted tin ceilings, and cracked plaster ceilings. The interior has plain cornices and Figure 1: Building 38 west facade

wood moldings, as well as a fireplace made of unfired brick.2

Source: Nicholas Anto

Stone: Minor spalling, soiling, and algae growth on

the surface of the foundation.3

Brick: In some areas, the brick has collapsed and

there is evidence of rebuilt brick. In most areas, the brick has atmospheric soiling, spalling, and algae growth. There is deterioration on the original mortar and the repointed mortar.4

Porches: There is an iron porch in Figure 1 that is

in poor condition because of rusting steel and a collapsing concrete floor.2 There is also a wooden neo-classical style porch that is in poor condition due to wood deterioration and Figure 2: Interior of Building 38 Source: Nicholas Anto

142

partial collapse.5

Roof: The roof is asphalt 3 tab shingle with copper

flashings and it is in poor condition. There are a few missing shingles, but no open holes. There are wooden overhanging eves with decorative rafter tails that hang over the edge of the building.6

Windows: The basement and first floor windows are

covered with plywood and the attic windows are left open.

Most of the window panes are broken.7

Figure 3: Porch on the east side of Building 38 Source: Nicholas Anto

143

Building: 39 - Female Ward I Description: This is the next building to the right of Building 38 and consists of a basement, 2 floors, an attic, and 2 sets of double decker iron porches. It is a brick masonry building with wood-framed floors, a stone foundation, gable cap stones with decorative scroll carvings, beltcourses, sills and window mullions. The roof is unique because it is the only remaining slate roof with copper gutters and flashings.

There are 2 wood and copper ventilation cupolas on the roof that are in poor condition, shown in Figure 4. This building is also unique for its copper finial. This building is in the worst condition in the complex.8 Condition:

Interior: There is severe structural instability in some

Figure 4: Building 39 north facade

of the rooms in this building. There is plaster failure on all

Source: Nicholas Anto

of the walls, peeling paint, rusted tin ceilings, and cracked plaster ceilings. The interior has plain cornices and wood moldings, as well as a fireplace made of unfired brick.9 All shown in Figure 5.

Stone: Minor spalling, soiling, and algae growth on

the surface of the foundation.10

Brick: There are large areas of exterior brick collapse

and large areas of rebuilt brick that is deteriorating. In most areas, the brick has atmospheric soiling, spalling, and algae and ivy growth. There is deterioration on the original mortar and the repointed mortar and the joints between the gable stones are exposed.11

Porches: The iron porches are both in fair condition.

They are experiencing minor rusting. These can be seen in Figure 5: Interior of Building 39 Source: Nicholas Anto

144

figure 6.12

Roof: The original slate roof is failing in many locations and there are large patched up holes. The roof still has the original copper valleys, gutters, cupolas, and wooden overhanging eves with decorative rafter tails.13

Windows: Most of the window panes are broken

on all floors. Plywood covers the basement and first floor windows. The second floors windows have iron bars installed and the attic windows have no covering at all.14

Figure 6: Porch on the north side of building 39 Source: Siera Rogers

145

Building: 40 - Female Ward H Description: This is the next building to the right of Building 39 and consists of a basement, 2 floors, an attic, and 2 sets of double decker iron porches. It is a brick masonry building with wood-framed floors, a stone foundation, gable cap stones with decorative scroll carvings, beltcourses, sills, and window mullions.15 Condition:

Interior: The damage is limited on the interior and

thus it is in good condition. Two rooms on the second floor have limited instability. There is peeling paint, rusted tin ceilings, and cracked plaster ceilings. The interior has plain cornices and wood moldings, as well as a fireplace made of unfired brick with a nice carved detail on the mantle shown Figure 7: Building 39 north facade

in Figure 7.16

Source: Nicholas Anto

Brick: The brick exterior seems to be in good

condition on this building. In some areas, the brick has atmospheric soiling, spalling, efflorescence, and algae and ivy growth. Large areas of rebuilt brick are beginning to deteriorate. The joints between the gable stones are exposed and some mortar joints are beginning to deteriorate. Some step cracking is also occurring in the brick and stone. There is original red mortar visible in the porch area.17

Porches: The porches are in fair condition with some

rusting.1 In the porches, there is evidence that they were expanded at a later date due to the ghost lines shown in Figure 8.

Roof: The roof is covered in asphalt 3 tab shingles and seems to be in good condition. There aren’t any open holes.

Figure 8: Porch on building 40 showing ghosting of the original Source: Nicholas Anto

146

The roof has the original copper valleys and flashing and wooden overhanging eves with decorative rafter tails. These

rafter tails appear to have its original reddish-brown paint.18

Windows: Most of the window panes are broken

on all floors. Plywood covers the basement and first floor windows. The second floors windows have iron bars installed and the attic windows have no covering at all.19

Figure 9: Exterior of building 40 on the north side Source: Siera Rogers

147

Building: 41 - Female Dining Hall Description: Built in 1930, Building 41 is a 4-story traditional masonry building directly behind and in the middle of Building 40 and Building 42. This building has a concrete foundation and brick bearing walls. There are steel columns supporting steel beams for the interior framing and the flooring is a mixture of slab-on-grade and concrete slabs cast on extruded mesh. The lintels over the windows and doors are formed by brick jack arches. The window design and brick condition can be seen in Figure 10. The exterior also has sandstone cornice, beltcourses, keystone, quoins, and sill. The condition of the roof is currently unknown.20 Condition:

Interior: There are some areas of the floor framing

that require reinforcing. This building has the most open uninterrupted interior space in the whole undeveloped complex. The large spaces are unique to the complex and there are a variety of ways that they can be reused. Shown in Figure 10: Brick deterioriation on the west facade of building 41 Source: Nicholas Anto

Figure 11, the interior looks to be deteriorated like all of the other spaces.

Brick: The exterior is in good condition, with minor

mortar erosion, efflorescence, soiling, and spalling of the brick. Most of the building mortar needs repointing.21

Stone: There is minor spalling and soiling on the

surface of the stone as well as cracks in the basement concrete foundation wall.22

Windows: Almost all of the windows are covered by

plywood and are in poor condition.23 Figure 11: Interior condition of building 41 Source: Nicholas Anto

148

Building: Connector Buildings Description: The 3 connector buildings that connect buildings 38-41 are Connector G-H, Connector H-I, and Connector I-J. These are all brick connectors that have a basement and one, two, or three floors and either a vaulted or flat copper roof. They are made with Medina sandstone foundation, cornice, beltcourses, sills and window mullions, and multiwythe brick construction on the first and second floors. The copper rooves are nearing the end of their 50-75 year life span and showing deterioration.24 Condition:

Interior: All of the connector interiors are in disrepair

and most have steel beam stabilization inside of them as shown in Figure 12. There also seems to be a nice tile floor in them beneath the dust and debris.

G-H: This connector shown in Figure 13 has a

sandstone basement, brick first and second floors, a vaulted copper roof with windows as the third floor, and removed stairs. The Exterior is facing issues such as open mortar joints,

Figure 12: Interior of a connector with supports in place to keep it from collapsing Source: Nicholas Anto

spalling, staining, and collapsed brick.25

H-I: This connector has a sandstone basement, brick

first and second floors with a flat copper roof, and removed stairs. The Exterior is facing open mortar joints, spalling, staining, and collapsed brick.26

WI-J: This connector has a sandstone basement,

brick first floor, a vaulted copper roof with no windows, and removed stairs. The Exterior is facing open mortar joints, spalling, staining, and collapsed brick.27 Figure 13: Exterior of a connector in disrepair Source: Nicholas Anto

149

Character Defining Features Feature: Stone Description: Roughly hewn, rusticated reddish Medina sandstone used for walls, contrasted with chiseled, finely hewn version around openings. Yellow sandstone used for Figure 14: Stone on exterior

decorative pattern.28

Source: Siera Rogers

Condition: Good Integrity: High Deficencies: Overall the condition of the stone is fairly good with the cracks in stone pieces (usually in lintels, sills, mullions, etc.), spalling of stone- usually minor on facades, soiling, especially under window openings has caused the buildings to look very imposing and algae, especially on Figure 15: Stone on exterior

lower portions of north façade.29

Source: Siera Rogers

Recomendations: Acknowledge that the reddish Medina sandstone & its overall rusticated appearance are integral to the historic character of buildings – therefore, attempt to restore as much of the exterior stone on central buildings as possible, where it is necessary to reconstruct areas of loss, use material that matches the original in color, texture and composition.30

Figure 16: Stone on exterior Source: Siera Rogers

150

Feature: Brick Description: Hard-fired multi-wythe red brick used for exterior of brick buildings Use of tarred brick on male ward buildings to create horizontal bands and circular surface pattern (non-extant).31 Condition: Fair

Figure 17: Exterior brick of building 40 with mesh to keep bricks from falling

Integrity: Fair

Source: Siera Rogers

Deficencies: The brick is in fair condition, with isolated areas of deterioration that can be categorized as poor.

Common problems are water infiltration and subsequent saturation leading to peeling, step cracks- especially between openings, minor spalling, extensive soiling, alge growth especially on the north elevations, extensive ivy growth, shifting/open joints, common along roof and floor levels and building corners and efflorescence- in areas of water saturation.32 Figure 18: Exterior brick under porch Source: Siera Rogers

Recomendations: Acknowledge that the red brick used for the outermost wards is integral to defining the historic character of the buildings – therefore, attempt to restore as much of the exterior brick as possible, where it is necessary to reconstruct areas of loss, use material that matches the original in color, texture and composition.33

Figure 19: Exterior brick of building 41 Source: Siera Rogers

151

Feature: Windows Description: Typically, double hung, sash windows ranging from 2-over-2 to 15-over-15. Concealed sash cord- important considering the asylum. Folding, wooden louver shutters on some windows in Admin. Bldg. Tall/ vertically linear proportions, usually with ventilator above (both rectangular and arched). Originally unpainted varnished wood finish, coated with paint in subsequent renovations.34

Figure 20: Window in common space area Source: Siera Rogers

Condition: Varies Integrity: Fair Deficencies: The condition of window sash and trim varies depending on location – in areas of severe water damage in wall, there is extensive deterioration of window elements.

In general, common problems include rot, inoperability, missing hardware, paint build-up and historically inappropriate color palette for paint coating.35 Recomendations: Repair of historic windows is always

Figure 21: Window in attic space Source: Siera Rogers

preferable to replacement. It may be possible to restore the wood windows, depending on the overall condition of them.

If restoration is not possible, replication of the original muntin pattern, size and shape should be undertaken.36

Figure 22: Window in patient room Source: Siera Rogers

152

Feature: Copper Description: Copper on tower and connector roofs – its distinctive green patina has come to symbolize the complex for most part of the 20th century, used elsewhere for flashing and gutters.37 Condition: Poor - fair Integrity: Good Deficencies: Copper is one of the most durable materials, however, it is beginning to show signs of age at instances

Figure 23: Copper roof on a coupola Source: Siera Rogers

throughout the buildings. Typical problems associated are corrosion and failure of jointing with the roof and building shell. Copper gutters on Female ward I show extensive deterioration.38 Recomendations: The copper roofs are in poor condition.

They should be reinstalled on connector buildings. For copper used elsewhere in building, all exposed areas of copper should be replaced in kind, at other unexposed areas, alternate material options may be analyzed.39

153

Feature: Doors Description: Shutters- Usually solid with inclusion of small window grill in wards for disturbed patients, chamfered-edge panel detail; originally unpainted varnished wood finish, painted in modern renovations. Dutch-doors similar in design to other doors, strategically located in vending areas such as at the entrance to clothes room, medicine room, etc.

Glass/ wood transoms included in most interior doorwaysimportant for increased light (& ventilation) in patient Figure 24: Door in building 41 Source: Nicholas Anto

rooms.40 Condition: Varies Integrity: Fair Deficencies: Overall, door shutter and frames are in fair condition in most buildings. Common problems include missing parts and/or missing hardware, paint build-up and historically inappropriate color palette for paint coating.41 Recomendations: Repair of historic doors is always

Figure 25: Half door

preferable to replacement. When replacement is necessary

Source: Siera Rogers

(more than 50% of component parts need replacement), match new door with all characteristics color, finish, configuration, glassto-frame ratio, frame depth, width, and details of historic door. Do not cover door or transom opening with incompatible vents, fans or air-conditioning units.

Special door types like dutch doors, etc. help define historic character of the space - although they may be removed at certain locations depending upon rehabilitation program, yet, some representative examples should be preserved in place. 42

Figure 26: Doors from tunnel into building 41 Source: Siera Rogers

154

Feature: Casework Description: Wide wood casing around doors/ windows chamfered-edge detail; originally unpainted varnished wood finish, painted in modern renovations.43 Condition: Fair Integrity: Good

Figure 27: Casework around windows in hallway Source: Siera Rogers

Deficencies: In areas of water infiltration, the casing may be rotted, though it is overall in good to fair condition.44 Recomendations: The casing is important in defining historic character in the buildings and should be restored or replaced-in-kind as appropriate.45

Figure 28: Casework around window in patient room Source: Siera Rogers

Figure 29: Casework around window in common space area Source: Siera Rogers

155

Feature: Moldings Description: Rounded edge, wood/rubber base and chair rail moldings; plaster moldings at ceiling – these help to unify the interior spaces, and break down the scale.46

Figure 30: Different moldings in hallway and room Source: Siera Rogers

Condition: Fair Integrity: Good Deficencies: In areas of water damage, and at some other locations too, the moldings are either missing or damaged.47 Recomendations: Restoration or replacement-in-kind is recommended, though latitude may be exercised in certain areas where the rehabilitation program mandates otherwise.

Some representative examples should be preserved in place in any approach.48

Figure 31: Chair rail and molding Source: Siera Rogers

156

Feature: Fireplaces Description: Historic stone and exposed brick fireplaces with minimal naturalistic ornament were built in public recess on each floor of Female wards; stone fireplaces in Admin Building – important feature in historic intent of providing a ‘home-like’ feel to the interiors.49

Figure 32: Fireplace in common area in female wing Source: Siera Rogers

Condition: Fair Integrity: Good Deficencies: Common problems are minor physical damage (spalling, soiling), graffiti in certain areas and paint schemes that are inappropriate with historic character.50 Recomendations: Restore all fireplaces to match historic appearance in size, proportion, material, finish and color.

Remove non-historic paint and graffiti using gentlest methods possible. Avoid sandblasting to minimize damage to existing material.51

157

Feature: Ventilation Grilles Description: Metal grilles featuring various patterns installed on corridor walls, slightly above floor level and/or above lintel level, to conceal passive ventilation channelsalso play an aesthetic role.52 Condition: Fair Figure 33: Ventilation grille

Integrity: Good

Source: Siera Rogers

Deficencies: Common problems include whole missing units and broken parts.53 Recomendations: It is recommended that these grilles be retained where intact and re-installed where missing or broken. They may be removed at instances, depending upon the rehabilitation program but representative examples should be retained in any approach.54

158

Feature: Timber Trusses Description: Two main types: Wards A & B- field constructed scissor trusses; 2 x 12 framing Wards F to J – timber trusses supporting 6 x 8 wood purlins with 2 x 6 rafters.55 Condition: Varies

Figure 34: Timber trusses in attic Source: Siera Rogers

Integrity: Good Deficencies: In areas of water infiltration, there is some wood deterioration.56 Recomendations: Repair in kind. If attic is used as habitable space, make attempts to keep the trusses exposed as they are – do not cover with false ceiling panels, etc.57

Figure 35: Timber trusses in attic Source: Siera Rogers

159

Introduction

The Richardson Olmsted Campus poses many challenges for rehabilitation. The proposed

buildings to be renovated, Buildings 38, 39, 40, and 41, are historic in nature and pose challenges for rehabilitation based on the requirements set forth by the Secretary of the Interior. Federal and State Historic Tax Credits will be used to help finance the project, and the rehabilitation will have to be approved by the National Parks Service. The proposed use for the building by the development company McGuire is University based senior housing. It will work towards taking advantage of the available amenities in the neighborhood and Buffalo State College. The current financial model created by McGuire is not financially viable. There is a large financing gap due to extremely high construction costs. To work towards closing the gap, an analysis of adding office use and additional funding sources was explored. Figure 36 and 37 illustrate Proposed Renovation for University Based Retirement Community (UBRC).

Figure 36: McGuire’s proposed development

160

Figure 36: McGuire’s proposed development close up

Potential SHPO and NPS Issues

There are a few design proposals that may be potential NPS and SHPO issues. In buildings

like this, a major character defining feature is the corridor space. McGuire may have issues proposing to truncate and bump into corridors, especially on all floors of each building. They are will have a difficult time making an argument to construct a new building on the site connecting to the historic buildings. It would have to be shorter than the historic buildings, and the proposed placement of the new construction would negatively impact the viewshed from and to the north side of the complex.

If they build apartments or commercial space in the basements and create basement entrances, they need to be careful not to destroy the main look of the façade. Removing significant portions of the grade around the buildings and exposing the foundations to allow for new basement windows will impact the understanding of the historic use of the property.

There also are a few things they are looking to propose that are feasible, with the proper

argumentation and proof of historical precedence so that SHPO and NPS will approve of them.

During our site visits, we noticed ghosting on the porches showing where the original porches had been. With a little extra research, we were able to find photographs showing these original porches that were shallower than the existing and were glazed. This evidence can support McGuire’s proposal of reintroducing the original porches as enclosed interior space for the adjacent apartment, with the existing porch remaining as a private outdoor space for that apartment. They also want to add skylights into the roofs to add lighting into the attic spaces. There are some existing skylight-like features on all of the roofs which supports the idea to add more.

161

Tax Credits Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credits

Historic tax credits have come into existence at the state and federal level to facilitate the

rehabilitation of historic structures which may not otherwise be feasible. Prior to the enactment of this legislation, it was not always financially feasible to redevelop a historic property in a manner that maintained the ornate character of historic details. As a result, many historic buildings have been demolished or renovated beyond recognition. The first version of a federal program began in the 1960’s and evolved into a tax credit structure in the late 1970’s. States then saw the benefit of the program and created similar programs to augment the federal.

There are a variety of types of tax credits that may be applicable to the adaptive reuse of the Richardson Olmsted Campus.

Federal Historic Tax Credits

The first example of a tax credit program that is made available to those looking to

rehabilitate abandoned and or underutilized historic buildings is the Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit program. This program provides a 20% federal tax credit to property owners seeking to rehabilitate historic buildings. In order to receive this tax credit, rehabilitation work must meet the standards set by the Secretary of Interior standards, and approved by the National Park Service.58 New York State Historic Tax Credits

An additional example of a historic tax credit program is the New York State Commercial

Properties Tax Credit. This program provides a 20% state tax credit to cover up to $5 million of the rehabilitation costs. In order to qualify for the New York State Historic Tax Credit, plans by property owners must be approved by both the New York State Office of Historic Preservation Office and the National Park Service. As a result, property owners can receive up to 40% off of qualified rehabilitation expenditures, 20% from New York State and 20% from the federal government.59

Qualifying Rehabilitation Expenses According to the National Parks Service, “not every expense associated with a rehabilitation project contributes toward the calculations for the 20% rehabilitation tax credit. In general, only those costs that are directly related to the repair or improvement of structural and architectural features of the historic building will qualify.”60 Qualified Rehabilitation Expenses include both interior and exterior improvements and some soft costs. The QREs are broadly limited to rehabilitation of the 162

existing fabric and most soft costs but do not include unattached fixtures, exterior landscaping and

other non-capital expenses. See Figure 8 for a chart of what expenses qualify and what do not. These non-qualifying expenses reduce the available basis for the Historic Tax Credits. Developer fees are a qualifying expense, and McGuire has created an high developer fee to create more basis for the historic tax credits.

Figure 37: Qualifying and Non-Qualifying Expenses

Substantial Depreciation Test

A rehabilitation project must undergo and pass a Substantial Depreciation Test which

involves a financial analysis to determine if the rehabilitation costs exceed the adjusted basis cost of the building. For this project the analysis is as follows:

Adjusted Basis = A – B – C + D

$0 (property is leased)

A = purchase price of the property (building & land)

$0 (property is leased)

B = the cost of the land at the time of purchase

$unknown/TBD

C = depreciation taken for an income-producing property

$43,891,739

D = cost of any capital improvements made since purchase

163

Therefore, the adjusted basis in the property, assuming none or minimal depreciation, is

$43,891.79 which is less then total rehabilitation costs and the project then passes the Substantial Depreciation Test.

Back of the Envelope Analysis A quick BOE analysis of this project shows the following: -

Rentable Square Footage: 51,691

-

Proposed Rental Rate: $2.10/sf

-

Gross Rental Income: $108,551

-

Operating Expenses: 50% of GRI = $54,275

-

Net Operating Income: $54,275

-

Assumed Cap Rate: 7%

-

Projected Value: $775,375

-

Historic Tax Credit Equity: $13,600,000

-

Total Projected Value: $14,475,375

-

Project Cost $56,000,000

This shows that a projected future value for the property could be $14 million but weighed

against a projected cost of $56million this initially looks like a very poor investment even with the large additional value of adding in the historic tax credit equity.

University Based Retirement Communities A UBRC Defined

University Based Retirement Communities (UBRC) have become increasingly popular when it

comes to development projects in the recent past. These communities and sites vary on whether they are on campus or near the campus, as well as the level of connection and involvement the entities have with one another. These communities can be beneficial to both the students and the residents, in regards to the amenities packages, the student opportunities, and the type of environment that can be created for all users. This connection is not for everyone, therefore there needs to be an attractive amenity package that comes with the residential complex that does not rely strictly on what the university could provide. When prospective tenants hear about a UBRC and choose to live there, they are expecting and wanting something more than just warm weather, a golf course and a pool. There are amenities beyond this that these types of tenants desire, therefore if McGuire is looking to market this as a UBRC, they need to look at what they can provide on-site, as well as what Buffalo State can 164

provide and find the most cost effective method to do this. It is important to look at other UBRCs

and Kirkbride residential reuse projects across the country to see their methods and strategies, while keeping in mind that the McGuire project is working with an extremely greater cost than most other senior living developments. The inclusions of different varieties of amenities from parking to unit finishes is going to impact the costs greatly, as well as the rents. If asking for higher rents, as McGuire proposed, the quality of amenities needs to also be high. Thus, there is a huge challenge that runs throughout this project, which is making sure the rents are able to financially sustain the provided amenities in the long run costs that will come with.

There are a variety of UBRC developments which all have a different level of connectivity

between the educational institution and the senior housing. There are benefits to both the students and the residents that should also be explored. First, we are going to investigate the types of amenities that a UBRC provides as well as the prices for these benefits and for the rents in general. From here we will explore what Buffalo State can provide, if there are any limitations to this partnership, and the opportunities this partnership can provide for the residents and students.

UBRC Precedents: Ithaca College and Longview Partnership

Looking not too far from Buffalo, Ithaca College created a UBRC partnership with Longview,

which is located just up the road from the college. This partnership began in 1999, and the two entities share a mission statement that states the goal is to “create a unique, shared environment that enriches the College’s academic curriculum, and affords members with intergenerational educational and social experiences; to facilitate person and professional growth; to promote volunteerism; and to enhance the quality of life.�61 The first way Ithaca College and Longview follow this mission statement is through course related projects at Longview. The students go to Longview for service learning projects, discussion groups, tours, and other social activities that are planned by the students. At Longview, there is a classroom, offices and an assessment room that are all designated for the programming from this partnership. Ithaca College has five schools, and each school is represented or involved in this partnership in some way. For example, the physical therapy, occupational therapy, and similar programs provide health assessments and other health-related programs for the senior residents. Further, for entertainment, students will perform at Longview for the residents. Not only are students involved, but professors and faculty provide lectures for the seniors. Lastly, the residents are allowed to use the facilities on campus as well, including the bookstore, the pool/gym, attend art exhibits, performances, and sporting events. Although the Longview apartments are off campus, there is a shuttle that is provided to make sure each location is accessible to both the students and residents and to maintain this connection.

One of the problems that McGuire is running into is the question of how these programs

will be paid for. What we can learn from the Ithaca College and Longview partnership is how they

165

organize these events and programs. Many of the activities are guided by Ithaca College’s work-study students and student volunteers.62 Therefore, the students and workers are paid by the college or through federal work study money, so ultimately there may not have to be a position created by McGuire to organize many of these types of amenities.

There are great benefits to both the residents and the students that should be noted. For

the residents, there is this opportunity for continued learning and intellectual stimulation that many of these residents are looking for in a UBRC. There is also greater social interaction that is intergenerational. These residents create strong personal relationships with students, faculty, and their neighbors when participating in these activities together. The residents also have access to health and wellness programs and resources right down the road or even within their building. On the other side, the students are able to learn outside of the classroom in an experiential learning setting. They are able to make connections, get the necessary volunteer hours in order to graduate, as well as learning from a different demographic of people. Lastly, there are also benefits to the faculty at the college. Faculty members are able to enrich their curriculum and make their courses more unique. They also are able to have different research and service opportunities for themselves and implement interdisciplinary teaching within their courses.

The relationship between Buffalo State and the Richardson Complex has great opportunity to

become something greater than just shared recreational facilities as McGuire Development proposed.

These benefits will not close the financial gap that has been mentioned, but they could be a step in the right direction if implemented beyond just marketing the site as a UBRC.

Longview has different levels of housing types and care types, from independent living to

enhanced care. For the sake of our project, we are going to look at the rates of strictly the independent living. Longview charges per person, below is a table that gives the monthly rents:

Figure 38: Longview Apartment rates

166

Longview Apartment Rates63 include the partnership amenities with Ithaca College plus a

great amount more. For example, the rent includes one meal a day, but there is restaurant style dining so for additional fees you can have up to three meals a day provided. The utilities are included in the rent, as well as basic housekeeping services, many rooms for activities, and places (indoor and outdoor) where planning recreational activities are. Tenants are responsible for cable, phone bills, personal entertainment expenses, extra meals, private laundry, and arranging personal health care services.64 These rents seem to be in a similar range as what McGuire Development is proposing, however, McGuire Development does not seem to have nearly as many amenities as Longview does.

The strong partnership with Buffalo State is lacking in different ways too. However, it is very early on and Longview can be a solid reference to what is possible at the Richardson Olmsted Campus buildings.

Buffalo State College can be an incredibly valuable resource for this development if the

partnership is strong and if both entities are willing to think creatively to receive the greatest benefits from one another. Buffalo State College has many programs but the top programs (highest number of students enrolled) are Business, Management, Education, Public Safety and Law Enforcement Programs.65 With this information and using the type of partnership Ithaca College and Longview have, the students from these top programs can become an important piece of this partnership. For example, students in the education program can possibly get the volunteer hours they need to teach classes at the Richardson Complex, or even students who are in art programs who are willing to teach the art classes through work study or volunteering. Further, one of the main concerns McGuire Development has the idea that if the apartments tare open to outside community members, or if a social club is implemented into this development, there will be a problem with security. Therefore, another use of the Buffalo State College partnership could be utilizing the students who are enrolled in the law enforcement, fire safety, and related protective service programs to be security for the apartment buildings again through fulfilling volunteer hours or work study programs. Lastly, the layout of the site currently creates a physical disconnect between the college and the Richardson Olmsted Campus. Therefore, the barn is an important piece that needs to be developed not only to foster this proposed partnership, but it also is a space that needs to bring in foot traffic from the outside.

The Villages at Traverse City Commons Although this senior living facility is not a UBRC, it is a Kirkbride facility and very similar to the type of development that is happening at the Richardson Olmsted Campus. The Villages at Traverse City Commons have 110 apartments total, which more than doubles the proposed plans for the Richardson Complex. Therefore, there does not seem to be a density issue at this facility, and the programs seem to be supported greatly. Rental and Fees for The Villages at Grand Traverse66 , listed are

167

the rents and fees are seen below.

Figure 39: The Villages at Traverse City Commons Apartment rates

These are the monthly fees which includes a variety of amenities that will be discussed. On

top of this, there is a one-time fee of $6,000 for the club initiation fee for each resident. With rent and this one time initiation fee, the amenities residents get are listed below67 : -

Dining venues and open dining hours

-

Programs that take place throughout the complex

-

Housekeeping teams to help with daily chores

-

Valet parking

-

Transportation (scheduled and private)

-

Fitness center

-

Trails, gardens and parklands (seen in the picture to the right).

-

Indoor connection to the rest of the mixed use complex at the Grand Traverse Commons

-

Business center and library

-

Artist center and woodshop

-

Personal iPad that connects you to the complexes schedule, events, etc.

-

Salon and spa

These amenities come with a great cost that seems to be very much above what McGuire Development proposed. Further, the complex itself is much more established and has a sense of place. Almost everything these residents need are on site, as well as a mixed-use complex including 168

retail and office that connects to the site. Something that should be looked into is the security of the buildings, and whether non-residents are able to pay for club memberships because of the possible consideration of including a club or membership system at the Richardson in order to increase the density.

Although this is not a UBRC, we can look at what amenities that Buffalo State can provide that

are included in this example. Buffalo State has the basic things such as a library, swimming pool and fitness center, as well as different programs and entertainment that the residents can enjoy. However, even with this connection to Buffalo State, the Richardson Complex itself still needs to implement plenty of amenities in order to keep people on the site for their needs and wants and to allow them to charge the higher rents they are proposing. Not only this, but it is important to establish what kind of place they are trying to develop. The Traverse City Commons have established a sense of place and have created its own village. Therefore, the redevelopment of this site needs to have clear goals of what kind of place they would like and who they want to include, whether is it just residents, or outsiders such as community members and other visitors. There are benefits to allowing the outside community to come in, and it might even be necessary to design a site that is welcoming to all, not just residents. Creating a social club where people pay membership fees to use the amenities is something that can help both the density issue as well as the financial issue that has been presented.

Danvers State Hospital (Avalon Danvers)

Danvers State Hospital, another Kirkbride hospital, was redeveloped to accommodate a

residential use. Although this is not senior living, it is still useful to compare the rents and what amenities are included with such rents. Further, Avalon Danvers is strictly residential, there are no retail or commercial uses on the site. Therefore, they rely purely on their own amenities, not from outside sources such as universities or the mixed-use aspect. This is most similar to the current state of Richardson Olmsted Campus. Once the apartments are fully built out, the amenities will be strictly the ones McGuire builds into their design, which currently is limited to an art studio, a puzzle room, a proposed fitness center, and a media room. There may be a pool in the near future whether Hotel Henry builds it or Buffalo State allows residents access it. Also, the Kirkbride provides other unique designs such as public porches that will be implemented at the Richardson Olmsted Campus as well as a vast lawn. The hotel has a few more amenities like a restaurant and event space, but there is no connection there in regards to rent. This is the current state of amenities if they keep a distant relationship with Buffalo State College and do not fully utilize that connection. Figure 11 shows Table 1.3 Avalon Danvers Rental Rates .

The amenities that are included at this site are :

-

Pet Friendly w/ fenced in park

-

Swimming pool

169

- Sundeck -

Fitness center (seen to the right)

-

Outdoor fitness challenge course & running trail

-

Yoga studio with Apple TV Virtual Yoga System

These types of amenities seem like a realistic goal for the Richardson. However, these types of

amenities might not be exactly what senior residents want. Further, the Richardson Olmsted Campus has an abundance of open space outside and inside to possibly implement more amenities than this.

Again, although they have the space to implement more amenities and spaces for recreation, social space, and space for other activities, it does come down to the cost of implementing these amenities, keeping in mind the kind of market that Buffalo, NY is and if the higher rents can be supported and afforded.

Other Basic Amenities

What remains now is does this site even work with the proposed user/tenant? There are a

variety of ways McGuire can develop the site and form partnerships to create an amenity package that makes living at the Richardson Olmsted Campus more desirable to tenants. However, there are a few restrictions to this. The first being the complex itself and the historical preservation that restricts some amenities that can be included. However, it is important to note that the historical preservation does not always restrict development, it can also be something that enhances other creative and unique design. In this case, we will focus on amenities that seniors (the proposed user) may need or want but cannot get. One amenity in mind is including spacious units for the user. The user may be downsizing from a home in the suburbs to an apartment, but still needs extra space or storage.

The proposed units in this complex are somewhat small and may deter residents from choosing to live there. Further, because it is proposed to be senior living, some residents may need extra space because of wheelchairs, or other physical needs. Although the hallways will be spacious and easy to get around, some units themselves seem to be tighter quarters. On the other hand, if the units are a bit smaller it may encourage the user to be outside of their apartment more and utilize the outside amenities that will be provided. Next, another factor to consider is the fact that there are no garages proposed or allowed because of the historic preservation restrictions. With the proposed user being a senior, the idea of brushing the snow off their car may be something that is a harder task for those users compared to a user who is younger and more able bodied. Many of the senior living apartments included in this research either have valet, public/private transportation included in the rents, or garages.

Next, because there are 40-50 proposed apartments (approximately 100 people living

there), the classes and other amenities may not be utilized as much as McGuire expects them to be.

Therefore, there needs to be other developments on site that bring in foot traffic, such as destination 170

retail, restaurants, or other unique uses. Further, to get the most use out of the provided amenities, it may be necessary to be open to the possibility of a social club as mentioned earlier. The Village at Grand Traverse Commons has a total of 110 apartments, and therefore they do not have the same concerns. Looking at other types of clubs in Buffalo can give a precedent to what can be implemented in the Richardson Campus that will create greater desire to be at the site from tenants and the surrounding community wanting to be members. The Garret Club for example provides educational seminars (which can also connect Buffalo State into this aspect), different clubs, dining rooms with daily meals, and ability to host private events.68 Creating something along the lines of a social club could be beneficial to the tenants, the financing, and the ability to increase the rents because of the high quality amenities provided.

Amenity Conclusion

Because of these many restrictions and challenges, it may be ideal to not necessarily have an

age limit on who is able to live at the Richardson Olmsted Campus. This may create an even greater barrier to success. These apartments are already narrowing the prospective tenant pool down because of the cost of rents, and therefore the age limit may create an even greater restriction. When asking for such high rents, it is important to have quality amenities not only outside of the apartment but in the unit as well. This ultimately may be the greatest challenge for McGuire’s project. Balancing the amenity package, the affordability of the apartments, and the budget they have to work with to design a complex that is desirable, unique and is not just an apartment complex but as a sense of place that people want to live in and visit will be an extreme challenge. The amenities do not need to be over the top amenities that cost a great amount of money. There can be simple things implemented that make the site much more usable and desirable. This can include public grills, spaces to spend time outside, trails for people from the outside to walk through and use, and other minor features that can go a long way. One of the top goals should be to create a site that is connected to the city and the surrounding landmark sites, and it should be a place to bring people to.

Adaptive Reuse as Senior Housing Proposed Programing

McGuire Development is proposing that buildings 38, 39, 40 and 41 become a University-

Based Senior Community.69 They are looking to coordinate with Buffalo State College since its campus is just on the other side of the road.

They are looking to turn Building 38 into an office to run the senior living community, an

amenity space that can be rented out to community members and the rest of the space will turn into apartments. Building 39 and 40 will both become all apartments with a few amenity spaces mixed in.

171

The first floor of building 41 will become commercial space. The desired tenant for this commercial space has not been determined by McGuire at this point in time. The upper three floors will become apartments since this building is the most flexible with its open floor plan. Currently McGuire is looking to possibly build an additional building on the site and connect it to one of the original buildings in order to gain more apartments.

In figure 40 you will find the potential program stacking plan for all 4 buildings and Unit

Mix analysis. It is important to note that building 42 has three floors, with the first floor commercial, buildings 39 and 40 are similar in size and unit count and building 38 is smaller than 39, 40.

Figure 40: Program stacking plan

There is projected to be 38 units will be a mix of one-two bedroom and one Commercial space

ranging from around 650 sf to 1250 sf. Building 41 is projects to have 17 units, buildings 40 and 39 will have 12 units and Building 39 will have nine units. Units will not be uniformed. The goal is to create units with great livable space as seen in images 1.5 and 1.6 are concept drawing of the first and second floors.

172

Figure 41: McGuire’s unit mix

Market Study:

The current iteration of McGuire Development’s plan for the rehabilitation of the Richardson

Olmsted Complex would see the development of a 41-unit university based senior housing development. In order to construct a market gap analysis, it is first important to understand McGuire’s reasoning for making this development plan as well as what the market looks like in terms of supply and demand for such a plan.

University based senior communities (UBRC) are a newer development trend which places an

independent senior living community on or near a major university campus. The community would then have access to the university’s facilities as well as having the opportunity to audit classes at the school. A benefit to UBRCs is also the care that the university can provide to the residents. Often times, students enrolled in the school’s physical therapy, nursing and other healthcare departments will work at the senior community for school credit. Students in the school’s communications and management departments will assist with programing activities taking place at the residency.

It’s a mutually beneficial system which allows the UBRC to have cheaper healthcare options and programmed activities on site while giving the students much needed experience.70 After better understanding what exactly UBRCs are, it is time to find the market demand for them as well as the supply. In meetings with McGuire Development, they were adamant that this is a market that has not been tapped in Buffalo yet and is one that would succeed given its potential. After researching for local UBRCs, none were found in Buffalo or the Erie County area. This suggests that it is indeed an untapped market in Buffalo. More important factors to take into consideration are who is going to be living there and potential occupants, and if the school in question is able to create demand for a university connection.

Figure 42: Comparison of proposed development site with location of Buffalo State Facilities

173

Buffalo State College is located directly next to the Richardson Olmsted Campus, which is

one of the reasons a UBRC would make sense. However, there are a few issues with the campus, in terms of geography and prestige. Geographically, while the two sites are located next to each other, there is actually a substantial distance between the university campus and the Richardson Olmsted Campus. As you can see on the map in Figure 1, there is a lack of connection between the two sites and senior citizens would likely be unwilling to make a walk that far to use the campus facilities.

The yellow on the map indicates McGuire Development’s proposed development area where the red shows Buffalo State’s facilities. The issue this brings is there will either need to be a shuttle for residents to get to campus or residents will likely need to drive which creates either an added expense or an inconvenience for the residents. The other issue is the prestige and size of the school.

Retirementliving.com is a helpful website for senior citizens looking to find the right place to retire and age in place in. It has a comprehensive list of different UBRCs across the United States and where they are in each state. A positive for this plan is that there indeed are not any in Buffalo or in Erie County. The only UBRCs in New York are located in Rochester, Ithaca and Purchase. This supports McGuire’s reasoning for seeing this as an untapped market. However, if you look deeper into which schools are targeted for these UBRCs. In Ithaca, Cornell University, an ivy league school features a UBRC. In Rochester, a similarly prestigious Rochester Institute of Technology also has a retirement community on its campus. In Westchester, Purchase College, a top-100 liberal arts school in the nation also has multiple retirement communities affiliated with them. This is a trend that is being seen with UBRCs in that they are frequently affiliated with either prestigious universities or very large campuses such as Duke University, University of Texas and University of Notre Dame.71 The clear trend is to create a linkage between an either prestigious or large scale university in order to give residents access to its classes or facilities. Buffalo State College is not the biggest college campus in the Buffalo area, and it is not ranked to the level of other examples with UBRCs. On top of this, Buffalo State College does not offer physical education or nursing programs, meaning that one of the largest draw factors to UBRCs is not available through a connection to Buffalo State College.72 This raises concerns for the desirability of the college as a selling point to potential residents of this community.

The other data that is important to analyze is what other supply and demand factors

contribute to successfully renting a luxury senior living complex in Buffalo. Age is an obvious factor when dealing with senior living complexes. The current plan for this development describes it as a 62-and-up retirement community. Based on the 2017 ACS, 23.6% of the population in the Buffalo MSA is aged 55-74. This bodes well for the project and proves the assumptions that there is a large portion of population that fits the demographic target of this project. There are other issues to consider however; and one troubling statistic shows that only 22% of the Buffalo MSA population has some form of retirement income. This is troubling to the project because in order to obtain 174

the high rent demands required to make this project feasible, the resident would more than likely want some form of retirement savings plan.73 And while there is certainly a high volume of aging population, their household income is just as important. A report from Esri in Figure 2 shows the detailed breakdown of household incomes in the Buffalo MSA in households aged 50 and up. The table shows that in each age bracket, the majority of the household income levels sit between $50,000 and $74,999.74 This should be cause for concern considering that the age demographic this project is planning to target largely has a household income lower than what would be able to afford high rents that are needed. It could be argued that this is a retirement community for seniors not working.

But when over 70% of Buffalonians do not have some form of retirement income, it tightens the demographic significantly.

The current plan of this development features 41 units. While this can be harmful to the project in terms of density needed to meet costs, there should not be too much difficulty to find 41 people in Buffalo who would be interested in moving to this development. It is located in an optimal part of the city. It is close proximity to the Elmwood Village, Delaware Park, and the Albright Knox museum as well as the college. On top of this, it is located near some of the wealthiest neighborhoods in the city.

This is a product that residents in these neighborhoods who are looking to downsize would consider especially given their predisposition to the neighborhood.

Figure 43: Table showing the household incomes of population 50+ in Buffalo, NY

There is a lot to take away from this gap analysis, and this is not to say that McGuire’s own

market analysis in unfounded. There is a definite lack of university-based retirement communities in the Buffalo and Erie County area and with the large amount of higher education opportunity in the area, there should be a strong opportunity for this type of development. However, there are considerable issues that need to be addressed. The focal point around Buffalo State University does not seem like it will be a big enough draw on its own to lure in potential residents. The campus does not offer physical therapy or nursing programs so a common feature in UBRCs will not be available.

The lack of easy connectivity to the campus also creates more pricey problems in a project which is already tight budget-wise. Lastly, the lack of a high volume of high-wealth individuals 60 and older makes the demographic selection even tighter. In conclusion, it seems that there is a gap in the market in terms of asset type, but the location and cost to develop makes this project a major risk.

175

Market Gap Analysis

There is a lack of a comparable university based senior living complex in the Buffalo, New

York region. This makes the project difficult to evaluate from a market standpoint. It is unknown whether or not the concept will be well received in the area. There is an example in Rochester that utilizes a connection with the University of Rochester. This community is known as the Highlands at Pittsford.75 It features many amenities including a restaurant and meal service, an indoor pool and fitness facility, and a medical office staffed by University of Rochester medical students.76 There is a planned development at SUNY Purchase where the college will be retaining ownership of their land and will receive yearly lease payments from the developer for the proposed housing complex.

This project is a planned $320 million project that will construct 220 independent living homes on the property. The ground lease payments received by Purchase College will be used to fund student scholarships and hire additional faculty.77 Neither of these projects relate to the project on the Richardson Olmsted Campus.

It is undetermined whether there will be enough seniors 62 and older that have the desire

and means to live in this project. With rents of $1,900 for a one bedroom unit and $2,800 for a two bedroom unit, the proposed rent are over the current market average for all multifamily properties, as stated in the market study provided to McGuire Development.78 Since this project is independent living, it cannot be compared against assisted living facilities that command very high rents. Meal service is not included, and there are limited programmed amenities planned for the site. The Ellicott Development senior housing development at Symphony Circle has significantly higher rent, but provides meal service and more amenities.79 It also has a greater number of units and has a higher density due to it being a new built construction project as opposed to adaptive reuse.

There is competition in the use of the buildings as Class A office space, but there is limited

competition of a building with as much historic value as the Richardson Olmsted Complex. An example of an office building with an equally famous architect in Buffalo, NY is the Guaranty Building designed by Louis Sullivan. This building is currently fully occupied by the law firm Hodgson Ross.80 The office space in Richardson Complex would be competing for a similar type of tenant. The desired tenant would include law firms or other high end services. The likelihood of Class A office space being successful is reasonably high based on comparable properties and known demand.

176

Branding and Marketing

The idea for Richardson Academy Retirement Community located in Buffalo NY, will be part

of the Richardson Olmsted Campus and sits adjacent to SUNY Buffalo State College. The idea of the Campus is to be able to deliver these aspects to create an encompassing university-based retirement experience.

The Richardson Olmsted Campus, consist of a National Historic Landmark designed by HH

Richardson and is one of Buffalo’s most iconic buildings. The complex boarders the Elmwood Village and West Buffalo neighborhoods. The structure is famed for its Romanesque revival architecture and spectacular landscape. The building was once the Buffalo Insane Asylum and design as part of the Kirkbride plan. The 42 acre, ten building campus is part of a Master Plan to restore and rehabilitate the building in a campus like effort. Currently the main administration building and 2 adjacent wings had been recently (2017) rehabilitated as part of a 70-million-dollar rehabilitation. These building are currently the home of Hotel Henry. Hotel Henry is an urban resort with 88 rooms, including a cafÊ, full restaurant and bar, state-of-the-art conference space with pockets of incredible communal spaces. The proposed UBRC will be located in Buildings 38,39, 40 and 41. It will be directly adjacent to the Hotel Henry and Buffalo State College.

Branding and marketing will need to occur in two concurrent segments for the proposed project.

The marketing for the residential senior living portion of the project will be separate from that of attracting a large office user.

Branding of the project needs to play off of the historic architecture of the building and how it

was absolutely necessary to reuse the structure. It will be important to accentuate all the remaining historic and character defining features inside the buildings. Branding will need to build off of the 177

existing brand created by the Richardson Center Corporation and Hotel Henry. It will be necessary to make a clear distinction between where the hotel ends and the other uses begin. The complex as a whole needs to work on becoming more accessible to the public and provide a clearer entryway into both the complex and the buildings.

Proposed Building Amenities

The goal of URBC’s are to fully engage the residents. There will be plenty of open space

including community rooms, lounges, plenty of outdoor patio space, throughout the entire complex.

The buildings are connected by 3 grand connectors, that will also double as a meeting lounge space.

These connectors will give the residents access to all four buildings and all of the amenities they have to offer.

Much like the Hotel Henry, there are many pockets within the space and building that

may not be rentable but will add value in other ways. Retirees, friends and family will be able to congregate in these amazing communal spaces. No matter how technically perfect your building is, the true functionality of this complex will be measured by how much it aids to user’s comfort.

Collective areas provide additional facilities for tenants to experience, entertain, and unwind which, accordingly, will increases the functional value of the entire complex.

Building amenities include:

Building 41

Community Room for meetings and gatherings

Building 40

Fitness Room Business Center Media Room

(2) 1st floor grand porches

(2) 2nd floor grand porches

Building 39

Library Room

Large walk out patio and garden on 1st floor

Puzzle Room Game Room

Building 38

(1) Grand porch

Reception/office 178

1,500 SF event space with kitchen

1,500 SF Art Studio

Possible Outdoor Amenities

Sports courts (pickleball/tennis)

Walking paths

Shuttle service to events

Outdoor Campus Events

Proposed Tenant Demographic

The intended demographic for this UBRC community is retirees above the age of 62+ looking

for independent living in a urban setting, that want to experience a communal environment.

University based connection with SUNY Buffalo State College

As mentioned, prior, there are key criteria for UBRC to be successful. These will need to be

implemented with SUNY Buffalo State College.

i. Be in a location that is directly accessible to a University or College.

The proposed URBC project will be directly adjacent to Buffalo State College. Buffalo State College is a public college part of the State University of New York system (SUNY).

The School offers 79 undergraduate programs and 64 graduate programs. The proximity is walking distance to the university and will be easily execrable by all modes of transportation.

ii. Have formalized programming incorporating with the University or College.

Richardson Academy slogan will be “Retire Smart�, There will be a complete connection to the College. The residence of the Community will be able to take classes, see guest speakers, and attend sporting events at a discount. The goal here is to integrate the two environments

iii. A financial affiliation between the university and the retirement community provider.

The key is to have a financial affiliation that is mutual between the College and UBRC. The College will be increasing their bottom line by gaining the extra income from the tenants enrolling in classes. The UBRC will benefit as it will create an age inclusive environment and connection, that the ROC lacks right now.

179

Membership Options

The final leg of this stool is to fully utilize all the amenity space provided. A membership will

be offered to friends and family of the residence to be able to use all the common space and outdoor space amenities. The residence will have an automatic membership included in their rent, but friends and family members will be able to join in on the fun too! They will be able to book event space, use the library, puzzle and computer rooms at a monthly Price.

The Idea is a combination of a country club and a retirement community. These activities

generally allow residents to maintain healthy lifestyles by encouraging movement and socializing with their peers. Being able to socialize with other residents and like members becomes an important part of many peoples’ lives and the membership options open to family and friends, offers common spaces indoors to support that need.

UBRC Goals Tenants, along with friends and family will also love visiting the urban oasis, close to shops on Elmwood avenue, Hotel Henry directly connected, SUNY Buffalo State, and diverse West Buffalo neighborhood. The goal is to creating an inclusive connection with the appropriate programming for both the college and the residents.

The university based senior living component of the project will be marketed toward seniors

62 and older that have enough disposable income to afford the projected rents. The apartments will be a part of the historic complex and will feature unique floorplans. The basement apartments will show many exposed features for a vintage and industrial style. It will be important to market the apartments towards empty nesters and baby boomers that would like to move back into the city.

These individuals or couples would be able to sell their suburban houses in a favorable real estate market and downsize into an apartment in a historic building. They would be able to save money on property taxes and the cost of maintaining a house. They would be able to save time by not having to upkeep with required maintenance. The location next to Buffalo State College will allow for residents to take advantage of the resources present at the college and take continuing education classes. The location of the property near Delaware Park and other recreational amenities will help residents maintain an active lifestyle. The Elmwood Village provides many dining, shopping, and cultural activities. These assets will need to be focused on in attracting new residents.

180

Pro Forma, Financing, Investment Analysis

McGuire’s proposed program of the buildings includes 54 units of university based senior

housing. This proposed use results in a funding gap of over $27 million that will prevent the project from undergoing construction. McGuire is contributing a limited amount of partner equity into the project, less than $500,000, in ensure they receive a return on investment of 15% or more. If McGuire is able to raise the gap through private fundraising that involves no returns or repayments, the project will be a good investment for the company. However, free money is not given away in that fashion. The current project is not feasible and is not a good investment for any potential investor.

To work towards closing the gap, a change in proposed use was undertaking. The character

defining features of the buildings greatly limit the efficiency of fitting apartment units into the floorplans. The main floors of Buildings 40, 39, and 38 and their associated connectors would be better suited for use as commercial Class A office space. This use would allow for the gross square footages of these floors and common spaces to become gross leasable area and generate revenue. The assumption of a rent per square foot of $25.00 gross lease per year would generate more income than the 6 apartment units that could be fit into each floor. Building 41 will become fully an apartment building with seven units on each of the four available floors. There will be no commercial space in Building 41. The basements of Buildings 40, 39, and 38 will be utilized for apartments and necessary mechanicals. The apartment units in the basements will have more freedom with SHPO and NPS because they are not as historically significant. The attic of Building 38 will feature 9 apartments after the removal of the proposed amenity spaces that have no apparent programming from McGuire. The attics of Buildings 40 and 39 will remain empty and be used for mechanicals, as similar to the Hotel Henry rehabilitation.

This change in use provides greater efficiency and increases the overall gross potential

income for the building. The construction costs remain similar as to those expected by McGuire. The increased income will raise the value of the project and allow it to support more debt. The funding gap will be lessened, but the project is still infeasible. The gap stands at almost $17 million.

181

182

Gap Analysis: Funding Gap

There is a significant funding gap for this project. The deteriorated nature of the building has

created exorbitant construction costs for stabilizing the buildings. The historic use of the building created large corridors that are character defining and can’t be removed, narrowed, or truncated. This results in an inefficient use of space that limits the amount of rentable area. By changing the use for the property from entirely senior apartments to a combination of apartments and office space improves the efficiency of the buildings. Leasing office space allows for corridors and circulation space to become leasable area, whereas residential uses do not. The construction of office space as limits the some of the demolition and fit outs needed to create apartments. The final build out of the office space to meet the needs of a tenant will be paid through the tenant improvement allowance built into the rent price.

The addition of office use will help to shrink the funding gap for the project. The additional

rentable square footage will improve the gross effective income for the property, resulting in an improved Net Operating Income and the potential for a larger loan. The construction costs will remain the same but more space in the building will be rentable due to the addition of some basement and attic apartments. Since the apartments will not be located in areas of the building that

183

have the most historic significance, there will be greater ability to make units that efficiently use the available space.

Even with these considerations, the project still faces a large gap. The rehabilitation of the

building is just too expense to support any proposed use. The $13 million of stabilization expenses cannot be supported through any achievable rent level. New York State’s willful negligence towards maintaining the property has created substantial structural damage that has to be repaired before any new use can take place inside the buildings.

Potential Additional Funding Sources Empire State Development Grant Funding

Empire State Development Grant funding becomes available once a year through the

Consolidated Funding Application. The goal of ESD grants are to promote economic development across New York State and works toward leveraging multiple funding sources to create impactful projects that help create jobs and restore economic vitality to struggling areas. In the 2019 funding round, up to $150 million of grant funding was available to help fund projects across New York State.81 The grants are given as a way to help advance the mission and strategic direction of New York State as a whole. Preference is given to projects that support the Downtown Revitalization Initiative and Strategic Community Investment, in addition projects that improve access to child care and that incorporate environmental justice practices. Eligible applicants include for-profit and not-forprofit corporations, local governments and industrial development agencies, as well as many other institutions and groups that help drive economic development.82 There are generally three categories of investment. These include (1) Strategic Community Investment, (2) Business Investment, and (3) Economic Growth Investment. Grant funds may be used for a variety of purposes.83 These include the acquisition of land or buildings, demolition and environmental remediation, new construction or renovation improvements, acquisition of furniture and fixtures, soft costs up to 25% of total project costs, and planning and feasibility studies for a specific project or site. Ineligible expenses include developer fees and residential development. The grant can be up to 20% of the total project costs based on the eligible expenses.84 It is encouraged to have other funding sources present to limit the grant request for each project. The Empire State Development requires a minimum of 10% cash equity to be contributed to the project by the developer based on total project costs.

There is a potential to use an Empire State Development Grant for the rehabilitation of the

Richardson Complex. However, the grant funding does not apply to residential development. In the case of renovating the entire buildings of 38, 39, 40, and 41 into senior housing, there would be no opportunity to apply for ESD grant funding. McGuire’s current plan of having commercial space on 184

the first floor of Building 41 only results in approximately 5,000 square feet of commercial space.

As a percentage of the total project, this commercial portion is miniscule to the entire complex. It is unlikely that applying for a grant for such a small space is worth the effort. If the use of the buildings is changed to a commercial purpose, such as office space or restaurant space, there is a possibility to make a sizable request for an ESD grant. Based on the current estimated project costs, the grant request could be over $5 million. An award of a grant this size is unlikely. There is fierce competition through the grant application and the previous awards do not support a grant of that amount. A more plausible grant award would be approximately $2,000,000 based on a previous grant to the former Mount St. Mary’s Hospital property to revitalize the abandoned historic hospital building into a hotel and commercial space. An award of $2,233,395 was given to the project during the 2018 funding round.

The Empire State Development grant poses another problem for McGuire. It requires a

minimum 10% of cash equity of the total project costs. This equity cannot come from loans or from other government grants. It is not explicitly specified whether federal and state Historic tax credits would qualify as cash equity, since the current plan for McGuire is to syndicate the credits.

The syndication will result in cash to fund the project, but this equity is not coming directly from McGuire. The current anticipated developer equity is less than 1% based on project costs of over $50 million. If the current gap in funding is filled with donors to the project, it is possible that those cash contributions could be considered a developer cash infusion to the project.

Greenway Funding

Erie County Greenway Funds have been made available through the relicensing of the

Niagara Power Project, totaling $9 million per year within the Niagara River Greenway. This fund includes $2 million of funding per year to be distributed to various projects within Erie County. The City of Buffalo is located within this greenway, and there is a possibility for the project to utilize these funds to improve the site. The maximum award for an individual project is 20% of available funding, or $400,000 per year. Projects can only receive funding once. Preference for funding will be given to projects improving public access to the waterfront, improving and sustaining existing resources, and that are consistent with established Master Plans. The grounds of the Richardson Campus were originally designed by Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux. At their present state, the grounds of the campus are disconnected from the surrounding neighborhood and are not being used to their fullest potential. A Greenway fund award could be used to help increase the use of the grounds and reconnect them to the surrounding neighborhood. It is important to make it known that the grounds have historic value as Olmsted design. This Greenway Fund award will help to fund the site work that is not a qualifying expenditure for Federal and State Historic Tax Credits.

185

PILOT

The City of Buffalo currently has a favorable Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) program for

mixed use projects. Under the City of Buffalo tax law, Section 485-a is a tax exemption on a declining 12 year PILOT from real property taxes for nonresidential real property that has been converted to a mix of residential and commercial uses. The rehabilitation of the property into a mix of commercial office and residential will qualify for this PILOT program. This will help decrease the operating expenses for the project over a 12 year period, with full property taxes realized at year 13. The decrease of property taxes will help raise the Net Operating Income (NOI) for the project. There is another PILOT program through the Erie County Industrial Development Adaptive Reuse Program.

This program applies to non-residential buildings that have been vacant for three of more years and are 20 years old or more. This will help to further reduce the operating expenses for the project.

Low Income Housing Tax Credits

There are no current incentives for market rate senior housing. The only option for receiving

senior incentives would be constructing affordable senior housing and seeking Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC). Making affordable units is not part of the current program for McGuire. The project also would not meet the requirements set in place by the New York State Department of Homes and Community Renewal (DHCR). There are strict guidelines in place regarding the design of the affordable units and the common space in the building. The rehabilitation of the building using historic tax credits will not allow for the adherence to these design guidelines. The Design Handbook issued by DHCR requires common space to be less than 20% of the total square feet of the building.

The expansive corridors and circulation space results in buildings with common space of 50% or greater. Additionally, it is not possible to design each unit to adhere to the requirements for kitchen, bathroom, and bedroom design. The character defining features of the buildings makes it impossible to use the building for LITHC funded units.

Private Fundraising The hope to acquire additional funds through private fundraising is a hard sell. McGuire is a for profit development company, not a nonprofit doing work based on a mission. It may be possible to spin the project into the Richardson Center Corporation looking for funding to help stabilize the complex to help make each building structurally sound and ready for rehabilitation. The $13 million of structural stabilization construction expenses are having a large negative impact on the viability of the project. Based on previous charitable giving donations in Buffalo, it is extremely unlikely that there will be enough private giving to fill the gap on this project. A notable example in Buffalo to prove this lack of charitable gifts is the restoration of the Darwin Martin House. The total restoration of this Frank Lloyd Wright designed complex cost over $52 million and took 27 years to complete.

Out of the $52 million spent on the project, only $21 million was raised through private fundraising.

186

While the Richardson Complex is a historic landmark, the building is not being restored as a museum to its history. It is being adaptively reused into the previously completed hotel, along with the McGuire proposed use of senior housing and Savarino Company’s proposed use of affordable housing. This new proposed use limits the appeal of charitable giving. The project is being developed by a for-profit developer and the buildings are being altered and undergoing a change in use. These conditions make private fundraising under the necessary development schedule highly unlikely.

Additional Developer Equity

McGuire currently has an anticipated developer equity contribution of around $400,000.

This is a very small percentage of the total project costs and leaves McGuire very minimally exposed financially. The desire to make a return of a minimum of 15% on contributed equity may have to be broken to help fill in some of the gap. The extremely small developer equity makes it possible for McGuire to walk away from the project without much to lose financially. This will be a concern for potential lenders for both construction loans and permanent loans. The increase of developer equity to 10% of total project costs will allow for the utilization of the Empire State Development Grant and work towards closing the gap further. This equity contribution will still produce a return during stabilized occupancy.

Conclusions

The rehabilitation of the Richardson Olmsted Complex faces many challenges. There are a

significant amount of character defining features in the buildings that limit its potential new use.

Federal and State Historic Tax Credits will provide some equity into the rehabilitation project, but the available funding will not be enough to pay for the very high costs. The deteriorated state of the buildings has created exorbitant stabilization and core & shell construction costs that cannot be supported by projected rental income. McGuire’s proposed use of University based senior housing poses issues in projected rental income and the ability for the market to support this new product.

Changing the use to a mix of commercial office space and senior housing provides more income to the project, but still does not close the funding gap. At the current state, it is not likely that a for-profit development project will be feasible in these buildings.

187

188

Endnotes 1 Goody Clancy. (July 2008). Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.

Buffalo, NY: Richardson Center Corporation 2 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

3 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

4 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

5 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

6 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

7 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

8 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

9 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

10 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

11 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

12 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

13 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

14 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

15 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

16 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

17 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

18 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

19 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

20 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

21 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

22 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

23 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

24 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

25 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

26 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

27 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

28 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

29 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

30 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

31 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

32 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

33 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

34 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

35 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

36 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

37 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

38 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

39 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

40 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

41 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

42 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

43 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

44 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

45 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

46 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

47 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

48 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

49 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

50 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

51 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

52 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

53 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

54 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

55 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

56 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

57 State, Preservation League of New York.

“Historic Tax Credits.” accessed October 10 2019. https://www.preservenys.org/tax-credits.

58 Ibid 59 “Qualified Expenses-Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service.” National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the Interior.

Accessed October 14, 2019. https://www.nps.gov/ tps/tax-incentives/before-apply/qualified-expenses.htm.

60 “Longview/IC Partnership.” Ithaca College.

Accessed October 10, 2019. https://www.ithaca. edu/gerontology/longview/ 61 “Ithaca College Partnership.” Longview Ithaca. Accessed October 14, 2019. http://www. longviewithaca.org/about/ithaca-college-partnership/ 62 “Ithaca College Partnership.” Longview Ithaca. Accessed October 14, 2019. http://www. longviewithaca.org/about/ithaca-college-partnership/ 63 “Ithaca College Partnership.” Longview Ithaca. Accessed October 14, 2019. http://www. longviewithaca.org/about/ithaca-college-partnership/ 64 “SUNY Buffalo State.” U.S. News & World Reports. Accessed October 10th, 2019. https:// www.usnews.com/best-colleges/buffalo-state-2842 65 “Monthly Club Fees for 2019.” Cordiatc.

Accessed October 10th, 2019. https://www.cordiatc.com/independent-living/monthly-independent-living-club-fees/ 66 “Monthly Club Fees for 2019.” Cordiatc.

Accessed October 10th, 2019. https://www.cordiatc.com/independent-living/monthly-independent-living-club-fees/ 67 “Welcome to the Garret Club.” Garret Club.

Accessed October 13th, 2019. https://www.garretclub.com/membership-edited 68 Sommer, Mark. “Plans unveiled for five more Richardson Complex buildings.” The Buffalo

News, June 4th, 2019.

69 Sarah Stevenson, “List of University Based Retirement Communities - UBRC,” List of University Based Retirement Communities - UBRC, October 4, 2018, https://www.aplaceformom.com/ blog/9-3-14-seniors-head-back-to-school/.

70 Retirement Living, “College-Linked Retirement Communities,” Retirement Living, accessed October 14, 2019, https://www.retirementliving. com/college-linked-retirement-communities.

71 “Buffalo State: The State University of New York,” Programs | SUNY Buffalo State College, accessed October 15, 2019, https://suny.buffalostate. edu/programs.

72 Social Explorer, “ACS 2017 (5-Year Estimates),” Social Explorer (Social Explorer), accessed October 14, 2019, https://www.socialexplorer.com/ tables/ACS2017_5yr/R12338982.

73 Esri, “Age 50 Profile,” STDB (Esri), accessed October 14, 2019, https://www.stdb.com/dashboard.

74 The Highlands at Pittsford. https://www. highlandsatpittsford.org 75 “There’s So Much to do Here” The Highlands at Pittsford. https://www.highlandsatpittsford.org/activities/ 76 Jordan, John (May 2018) “Purchase College Moving Forward with $320 Million Senior Project.

Real Estate In-Depth. http://www.realestateindepth.com/news/purchase-college-moving-forward-with-320m-senior-project/ 77 “Preliminary Market Study Proposed Senior Mixed Income Housing Development” (September 10, 2019) Newmark Knight Frank.

78 Symphony Circle Active Living. https:// symphonycircleactiveliving.com 79 “Louis Sullivan’s Guaranty Building” Hodgson Russ Attorneys. https://www.hodgsonruss. com/Louis-Sullivans-Guaranty-Building.html 80 “Available CFA Resources 2019”. Regional Economic Development Councils. Page 5. https://regionalcouncils.ny.gov/sites/default/ files/2019-04/2019ResourcesAvailableGuide_0.pdf 81 “Available CFA Resources 2019”. Regional Economic Development Councils. Page 5. https://regionalcouncils.ny.gov/sites/default/ files/2019-04/2019ResourcesAvailableGuide_0.pdf 82 “Available CFA Resources 2019”. Regional Economic Development Councils. Page 5. https://regionalcouncils.ny.gov/sites/default/

files/2019-04/2019ResourcesAvailableGuide_0.pdf 83 “Available CFA Resources 2019”. Regional Economic Development Councils. Page 5. https://regionalcouncils.ny.gov/sites/default/ files/2019-04/2019ResourcesAvailableGuide_0.pdf 84 Goody Clancy. (July 2008).

189

190

Appendix Back of the Envelope

II 191

Destination Retail

192

193

Fitness Center

194

195

196

Appendix Pro Forma

III 197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

References 205

Works Cited 1.

500 Seneca, “Developers Convert Another Larkinville Warehouse into a Mixed-Use Facility,”

500 Seneca St., March 16, 2015, https://www.500seneca.com/developers-convert-another-larkinvillewarehouse-into-a-mixed-use-facility/) 2.

Angie’s List. “How Much Does It Cost to Lay Sod?” Angie’s List, 4 Sept. 2018, www.angieslist.

com/articles/how-much-does-it-cost-lay-sod.htm.

3.

Ann Gourlay Gabler, et all. “About Barns.” In The Hudson Valley Regional Review. 55-59

4.

Beverage, http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/olmsted-theory-and-design-principles/

olmsted-his-essential-theory 5.

Black Button Distilling, “Buffalo Distillery: Black Button Distilling: Locations,” Black Button

Distilling, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www.blackbuttondistilling.com/buffalo) 6.

“Cap Rate Survey-Fitness Centers.” Net Lease Advisor, June 28, 2018. https://www.

netleaseadvisor.com/tenant/fitnesscenters/.

7.

CES. “Small Commercial Kitchen.” CES, 3 Apr. 2019, cesdfw.com/small-commercial-kitchen/.

WebstaurantStore. “Antique Rustic Solid Pine Furniture.” WebstaurantStore, www.webstaurantstore. com/flash-furniture-xa-farm-6-gg-hercules-40x-108-x-30-antique-rustic-solid-pine-folding-farmtable-with-twobenches/354XAFARM6GG.html?utm_source=Google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_ campaign=GoogleShopping&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI8ouCzOri5QIVC3iGChOZAwYrEAQYASABEgL3e 8.

Charles E. Beveridge, http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/olmsted-theory-and-design-

principles/olmsted-his-essential-theory 9.

Clancy, Goody. “Historic Structures Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.” 2008.

10.

Cole’s Restaurant and Bar, “Cole’s Restaurant and Bar, Burgers, Beer, and Pub Food in Buffalo

NY,” Coles, accessed November 17, 2019, http://colesonelmwood.com/) 11.

Corbett, John M. “A Last Look at Historic Wood Windows.” Wood Window Restoration -

Marlowe Restorations LLC, www.marlowerestorations.com/window_restoration.html.

12.

Corporation, Richardson Center. “Richardson Olmsted Campus Wayfinding RFP.” 5. Buffalo,

NY: Richardson Olmsted Campus, 2019.

13.

Corporation, Richardson Center. “South Lawn Improvements Create Community Recreational

Space.”

14.

CostHelper. “How Much Does Asphalt Removal Cost? - CostHelper.com.” CostHelper, home.

costhelper.com/asphalt-removal.html.

15.

D’Avolio , “Gourmet Olive Oils and Balsamic Vinegars,” D’Avolio, accessed November 17, 2019,

https://davolios.com/) 16.

Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor. 2019. Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor.

Accessed 11 17, 2019. https://eriecanalway.org/learn/history-culture.

206

17.

ESRI, “Demographic and Income Profile - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019)

18.

ESRI, “Disposable Income Profile - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019)

19.

ESRI, “Market Profile - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019)

20.

ESRI, “Retail Demand Outlook - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019)

21.

ESRI, “Retail Market Potential - City of Buffalo” (Buffalo, November 4, 2019)

22.

“Fitness Center.” Design Cost Date, October 30, 2018. https://www.dcd.com/articles/category/

estimating/fitnesscenters.

23.

George Tatum, Andrew Jackson Downing: Arbiter of American Taste, 1815-1852 (Princeton

University, 1950), 144.

24.

Heritage Landscapes. “Cultural Landscape Report: The Richardson Olmsted Complex.”

2008. States News Service. Governor cuomo announces design for transformation of Landmarked Richardson Olmsted complex in Buffalo.” States News Service, August 20, 2013 25.

Historic Structures Report the Richardson Olmsted Complex. Goody Clancy for the

Richardson Center Corporation. July 2008. Page 19-24.

26.

Hometown Demolition. “How Much Does Demolition Cost per Square Foot?” Hometown

Demolition, 5 Sept. 2019, www.hometowndemolitioncontractors.com/blog/how-much-doesdemolition-cost-per-square-foot.

27.

HomeAdvisor. “Learn How Much It Costs to Install New Plumbing Pipes.” HomeAdvisor, www.

homeadvisor.com/cost/plumbing/install-new-plumbing-pipes/.

28.

HomeAdvisor. “Learn How Much It Costs to Repair Asphalt Paving.” HomeAdvisor, www.

homeadvisor.com/cost/outdoor-living/repair-asphalt-paving/.

29.

Hotel Henry, “Hotel Henry Urban Resort Conference Center in Buffalo, NY,” Hotel Henry

Urban Resort Hotel Conference Center in Buffalo NY, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www. hotelhenry.com/) 30.

House of Olives, “The House of Olives - The House of Olives, Imported Virgin Olives Oils and

Vinegars,” the house of olives - The House of Olives, imported virgin olives oils and vinegars, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www.thehouseofolives.com/) 31.

http://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/collection/LIB-005/ (accessed 20 November 2019)

32. http://www.olmsted.org/the-olmsted-legacy/frederick-law-olmsted-sr 33.

Labatt USA, “History: Labatt USA,” History | Labatt USA, accessed November 17, 2019, https://

www.labattusa.com/history/) 34.

Laura Wood Roper, FLO: A Biography of Frederick Law Olmsted, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

University Press, 1973), 124.

35.

Lazarus, Richard. “Recommendations for Appropriate Repairs to Historic Barns and Other

Agricultural Buildings.” New York State Barn Coalition, 16 Oct. 2002, www.barncoalition.org/?page_ id=138.

207

36.

Mewis, Bob. RSMeans Commercial Renovation Cost Data. RSMeans; 37th Edition, 2015.

37.

Mr. Goodbar, “Mr. Goodbar,” Mr. Goodbar, December 4, 2018, https://mrgoodbarbuffalo.com/)

38.

Neighborhood Needs Interview, Tony Masiello, November 4,2019.

39.

“Neo Gifts Studio,” Neo Gifts - The Art of Gifting, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www.

neogifts.com/) 40.

Patricia O’Donnell, Carrie Mardorf, Sarah Cody, Cultural Landscape Report (Heritage

Landscapes: 2008), 2.

41.

Ro Home Shop, “Ro,” Ro, accessed November 17, 2019, http://www.rohomeshop.com/)

42.

RestaurantSupply.com. “Commercial Restaurant Supplies & Equipment.” RestaurantSupply.

com, www.restaurantsupply.com/?keyword=restaurant%2Bsupply&gclid=EAIaIQobChMInqTBxs_ z5QIVjJ-zCh3ikQr9EAAYASAAEgILVvD_BwE. 43.

“Room,” room, accessed November 17, 2019, https://www.room-buffalo.com/)

44.

Roy G. Finch, State Engineer and Surveyor. 1998. The Story of the New York State Canals. State

Engineer and Surveyor, State of New York, New York State Canal Corporation.

45.

Saglian, Mark. 2019. Buffalo State Asylum and Hospital Site Plan Maps.

46.

Shibley, Robert G., Schneekloth, Lynda H., and Olmsted, Frederick Law. The Olmsted City the

Buffalo Olmsted Park System : Plan for the 21st Century / Edited by Robert G. Shibley and Lynda H. Schneekloth ; Developed Under the Direction of, Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy ... [and] with the Consulting Support of the Urban Design Project, University of Buffalo, State University of New York ...

Trowbridge and Wolf Landscape Architects, Wendel Duchscherer Architects and Engineers. Buffalo, N.Y: Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy, 2008.

47.

Staff, Hotel Henry. 2019. “100 Acres at Hotel Henry Menu “. https://www.100acresbflo.com/

menu.

48.

The Buffalo Evening News, A History of the City of Buffalo Its Men and Institutions, (Buffalo:

The Buffalo Evening News, 1908) 49.

Thumbtack. “How Much Does It Cost to Frame a House?” Thumbtack, 22 Dec. 2017, www.

thumbtack.com/p/cost-to-frame-a-house.m 50.

Tomes, The Art of Asylum-Keeping: Thomas Story Kirkbride and the Origins of American

Psychiatry, 1984 51.

Tommyrotter Distillery, “Home,” Tommyrotter Distillery, accessed November 17, 2019, https://

www.tommyrotter.com/home) 52.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1995. Table 9. Population of the 100 Largest Urban Places: 1860.

June 15. Accessed November 17, 2019. https://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/ twps0027/tab09.txt.

53.

Yanni, Carla. The Architecture of Madness Insane Asylums in the United States / Carla Yanni.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2007.

208

209