Three Year Study of Former KPPC Released - What Happens Next?

By Erica Jackson

photo by S.TroccoliThe New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation has released findings of a three-year study that explored the cost factors for restoring 368 acres of the 521-acre Nissequogue River State Park to pristine condition. The study, conducted by Dvirka & Bartilucci Consulting Engineers, a private firm, concludes that it will cost $215 million to cleanup the property, which is located in Kings Park.

“The two hundred and fifteen million dollar figure represents what it would cost to return the 368 acres of the former Kings Park Psychiatric Center property to open space by demolishing and removing all vacant buildings and addressing contamination issues,” read the report.  The cost does not, said the report, include costs associated with “constructing any new facilities in the Kings Park Psychiatric Center property.” 

Breaking down the $215 million price tag, the study says $186 million is needed to demolish the 57 vacant buildings that sit on the property by first removing asbestos and other hazardous materials from them.  Another $29 million is needed to remediate asbestos and demolish five miles of underground steam tunnels that crisscross the property; excavate contaminated soil at various locations on the property; and remove waste materials that were dumped or buried on the property before state parks took over the land.

With the numbers in hand, the State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation is already in the process of preparing specifications to bid a project that would result in the demolition of 15 buildings at the park.  Eleven of those buildings are located on the 368-acre piece, which the state parks department acquired in 2006 from the state office of mental health.  The other four buildings sit on a 153-acre parcel that the state dedicated as parkland in 2000.

According to the study, the buildings slated to be demolished have “deteriorated to the point that there is no potential future reuse of the structures.” It is estimated that the cost to demolish the 15 buildings is $14 million. Funding for that portion of the project is expected to come from a 2006 state senate appropriation.

According to Eileen Larrabee, spokeswoman for the State office of Parks and Recreation, there are no funds available to demolish the remaining buildings and no decisions have been made as to the future of those structures.

While the study provided an estimate on demolishing all the buildings, it also stated that some of the buildings can be remediated for future use, however,“asbestos would need to be removed from each building prior to any action being taken.” The report went on, “Even with the asbestos removed, the cost of rehabilitating buildings can be significantly higher than demolition.”

“At this point, we put this information out and now that we have it, a conversation can take place,” said Larrabee.  “It all depends on the availability of funding.”  Commenting on the report, George Gorman, deputy regional director of Long Island State Parks, said “We have to take a hard look at the costs.  Buildings may be able to be reused, but it may be cost prohibitive.”

Mike Rosato, Chairman of the Nissequogue River State Park Foundation, said he is unsettled by the report’s findings.  “I thought it was unusual that the state discussed a figure before the state issued a request for proposal for the cleanup,” said Rosato.  “Why set such a high benchmark before bidding has even taken place?”

Rosato further questioned the state’s decision to commission an engineering study before a creating a master plan that would explore uses for the entire park.  “A master plan would cost between two and three hundred thousand dollars opposed to the three million the state spent on the engineering report,” said Rosato.

The Nissequouge River State Park has long lobbied for a master plan of the park and has offered to provide funding to that end. However, Rosato said the state has refused. 

“It is very frustrating,” said Rosato, “Nothing makes sense when it comes to this.”

Since it’s inception, the Nissequogue River Park Foundation has raised thousands of dollars for the park though a variety of fundraising activities. It has championed for a master plan that explores a private/public partnership that would bring sports fields, a spa, wellness center, hotel and conference center, a community playhouse, a vineyard, a healing garden and a band shell to the park.

Aware that community members are advocating for a master plan, Larrabee said, “We needed a comprehensive study so we are aware of the costs associated with the remediating that would be needed.   Until now, there was not any kind of accurate assessment on costs.  We can’t make decisions with a  lack of information.”

Frank DeRubeis, Smithtown planning director, agreed that the engineering report is beneficial when thinking about redeveloping the property; however, he said going forward, a master plan is needed. “But that is not what the state is going to do,” said DeRubeis.  “They don’t do things like that. They don’t do planning.”

With a vast knowledge of planning and the property, DeRubeis said that given the cost factors, the state should look to sink money into a redevelopment over a period of time.

“The property’s value is in the negative before you even do anything,” said DeRubeis. “Everyone is looking at a quick fix to redevelop it.  Instead, the best approach would be to break it up into manageable sections. Then, it could be doable over a period of many years.”

Smaller projects to improve the property, however,  can be done right away so there is some public benefit, said DeRubeis.  For example, DeRubeis said there is a piece of the property that sits along 25 and across from the Town Parks bldg. that can be transformed into soccer fields.

The state could also, said DeRubeis, look to reuse some of the buildings on the property to bring money in.  He has long-advocated for the conversion of Building #93, the tallest building on the site.  He said it could be transformed into a luxury condominium complex.  

“The views from the third floor up are just phenomenal,” DeRubeis said. “One would hope that with a new state administration, officials will take a different approach on how to redevelop this property,” said DeRubeis.  “Maybe they could say to the town, we will give you some money to come up with a plan.” 

Update on Tuesday, November 16, 2010 at 6:55PM by .

Kings Park Psychiatric Center Remediation Study Summary November 5, 2010

Executive Summary

In 2006, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) received jurisdiction over 368 acres of the former Kings Park Psychiatric Center (KPPC) property, which was previously managed by the Office of Mental Health. The property is adjacent to Nissequogue River State Park.

In 2008, OPRHP contracted with a private engineering firm, Dvirka & Bartilucci Consulting Engineers (D&B), to conduct a comprehensive study of the costs of remediating environmental hazards and demolishing the 57 vacant, deteriorated buildings on the 368 acres. This document summarizes the findings of the study.

The D&B study determined that the total cost of remediating the environmental concerns on the 368 acres is $215 million. Addressing the 57 abandoned buildings accounts for most of the cost. Of the total $215 million estimate, $186 million (86 percent) is comprised of the cost of removing asbestos and other hazardous materials and then demolishing vacant buildings. The remaining elements of the $215 million estimate are primarily associated with: a) remediating asbestos and demolishing the five miles of underground steam tunnels that criss-cross the property ($26 million); and b) a variety of actions to address site-specific environmental concerns, such as excavating contaminated soil at various locations on the property and cleaning up 38 debris piles containing C&D (construction and demolition) and other waste materials that were dumped on the surface or buried before the property was transferred to OPRHP ($3.7 million).

The $215 million figure represents what it would cost to return the 368 acres of the former KPPC property to open space – demolishing and removing all vacant buildings and addressing contamination issues. The cost of constructing any new facilities on the KPPC property would be above and beyond this amount.

As described below, OPRHP is developing plans and specifications to demolish 15 abandoned buildings on the former KPPC complex – of which eleven are located on the 368 acres. With the exception of the eleven buildings, no decisions have been made regarding whether any or all of the remaining 46 buildings on the 368 acres should be demolished, as opposed to retaining some buildings for potential future reuse. However, under state law and regulations, asbestos would need to be removed from each building prior to any action being taken, regardless of whether the building is demolished or

1rehabilitated in the future. Even with the asbestos removed, the cost of rehabilitating buildings can be higher than demolition. Therefore, the cost of rehabilitating some or all of the KPPC buildings may be significantly higher than the $215 million baseline cost of demolishing all existing buildings on the 368 acres.

The $215 million cost estimate for the 368 acres is in addition to the cost of remediating vacant buildings on the 153-acre Nissequogue River State Park, which was transferred to OPRHP in 2000. In 2007, OPRHP contracted for a study of the costs of remediating vacant buildings in the 153-acre park (note: the vacant buildings on the 153 acres are small in comparison to the buildings on the 368-acre tract). The study concluded it would cost $7 million to remediate asbestos and demolish 19 vacant buildings. The actual cost of remediating the 19 vacant buildings is likely higher than $7 million, because the study is now three years old and it did not fully address the cost of remediating asbestos in underground steam tunnels on the 153 acres.

OPHRP is preparing plans and specifications to advance a $14 million project to conduct a first phase of building demolitions at Kings Park, focusing on 15 relatively small buildings that have deteriorated to the point that there is no potential for future reuse of the structures, as well as removing certain derelict structures such as the smokestack, piers, and tanks at the former power plant. Of the fifteen buildings identified for demolition, eleven are on the 368-acre transfer and four are located on the original 153-acre transfer.

Combining the two properties, the total cost of remediating the former KPPC complex is estimated to be at least $222 million. OPRHP anticipates funding the $14 million demolition project from an appropriation initiated by the state Senate in 2006 for Kings Park remediation. No state funding has been identified for the remaining $208 million of remediation costs for the 368- and 153-acre properties.

Background

The former Kings Park Psychiatric Center campus covers 521 acres in the Town of Smithtown in Suffolk County, Long Island. At the peak of its operation in the 1950s, the Kings Park campus was operated by the New York State Office of Mental Health (OMH) as one of the largest mental health institutions in the world, with 10,000 patients housed in a self-sufficient “city” with staff residences and dormitories and its own police and fire departments, railroad line, power plant, sewer system, farms, and manufacturing facilities.

OMH decommissioned the KPPC facility in 1996. Today, more than 80 buildings constituting approximately 2.85 million square feet exist on the property. The abandoned buildings range in size from small, single family homes to very large institutional buildings including a 13-story former resident and treatment facility and an 8-story hospital facility. Virtually all of the buildings are boarded up, power and utilities were long ago turned off, and the campus’ numerous derelict buildings, dormitories, wards,

2

hospital buildings, and residences, some of which are very large structures, continue to deteriorate.

Over the past ten years, jurisdiction over most of the former KPPC campus has been transferred from OMH to OPRHP:

1. In 2000, 153 acres were transferred to OPRHP, establishing Nissequogue River State Park. The State Park provides waterfront access to the Nissequogue River and various open space recreational park amenities and receives approximately 85,000 visitors annually. The 153 acres includes 23 buildings comprising a mix of former treatment facilities, administrative buildings, dormitories, and staff residences. OPRHP has adapted several of these structures for parks use, including a park office, maintenance facility, and greenhouse. In addition, four deteriorated vacant buildings are included in the demolition project currently being planned. OPHRP has not identified appropriate adaptive reuses nor received funding to address the remaining 15 structures within the 153-acre State Park. They remain vacant and are slowly deteriorating.

2. In 2006, OMH transferred an additional 368 acres to OPRHP (OMH retained jurisdiction over 4 small parcels totaling approximately 30 acres, on which OMH continues to operate several mental health facilities). For the past four years, OPRHP has undertaken basic property management functions, such as patrolling the grounds, boarding up vacant buildings, and mowing lawn areas. However, OPRHP has not developed any public recreational facilities nor formally managed the 368 acres as a state park.

3. In 2009, OPRHP identified 15 vacant, deteriorated buildings on the former KPPC property for demolition. Eleven are on the 368 acres transferred in 2006 and four are in the 153-acre park originally transferred in 2000. This first phase of demolition focuses on relatively small buildings that have deteriorated to the point that they are structurally unsound (e.g. they have been condemned) or have no potential future adaptive reuse. The demolition project also includes several derelict structures such as the smokestack, piers, and tanks at the former power plant. The preparation of plans and specifications for the demolition project has proceeded on a parallel track with the comprehensive Remediation Study. Funding for the demolition project, when initiated, will come from a $25 million 2006 New York State Senate item appropriated in 2006 for remediation activities at KPPC.

Goals of the Comprehensive Remediation Study

Since 2007, OPRHP has taken the position that it is essential that the agency secure an accurate analysis of what it will cost to remediate the buildings and address the environmental concerns on the former Kings Park Psychiatric Center – prior to making decisions on the future of the 368 acres.

3

During 2007, OPRHP compiled and reviewed all available reports and studies that had evaluated the KPPC property. This review determined that while previous studies catalogued the universe of potential environmental problems at KPPC – no study had ever been completed that provided reliable, accurate estimates of what it will cost to clean up the site.

Therefore, in December, 2007, OPRHP released a formal RFP to hire a qualified engineering firm to do a comprehensive remediation study for the 57 buildings, comprising approximately 2.5 million square feet of floor space, and associated structures on the 368 acres. Utilizing standard state procurement practices, in the summer of 2008 OPRHP selected the private firm Dvirka & Bartilucci Consulting Engineers to conduct the study. D&B is a Long Island-based firm that has 45 years of experience in environmental engineering and science.

During the fall of 2008, OPRHP and D&B finalized the detailed Scope of Work for the project. In February, 2009, OPRHP received final contract approval from the Office of the State Comptroller, and D&B initiated the study in March, 2009. The cost of the study was $3.6 million. Funding for the study came from the $25 million New York State Senate allocation for KPPC remediation efforts.

Remediation Study Scope of Work & Findings

The purpose of the Remediation Study was to develop a comprehensive estimate of what it would cost to restore the 368 acres of the former KPPC property to open space by demolishing and removing all buildings, cleaning up the site, and addressing sub- surface contamination issues.

As part of the study, soil and groundwater samples were collected at locations throughout the 368-acre property. Each of the 57 buildings, comprising a total of approximately 2.5 million square feet of floor space, was thoroughly inventoried. Thousands of samples of potential asbestos-containing materials and other potentially hazardous materials, including lead, mercury, other heavy metals, were collected and analyzed. The amounts and types of asbestos-containing and hazardous materials were carefully catalogued for each building, as was the amount of demolition materials that would be generated for each structure. This information was used to develop detailed remediation and demolition cost estimates for each building.

The study concluded that the total cost of these actions is $215 million. The majority of the this cost – $186 million, which is 86 percent of the total cost – is the cost of removing asbestos and other hazardous materials and then demolishing vacant buildings.

It is important to note that (other than the initial demolition of 15 derelict buildings and several associated structures), no decision has been made on what buildings should be demolished and which should be retained for potential future reuse. The purpose of the study was to develop a baseline cost for remediating the site. In the event

4

that some buildings are rehabilitated, or new facilities are developed on the property, these costs would be above and beyond the $215 million baseline remediation cost.

The Scope of Work assigned to D&B included the following components, that resulted in the $215 million remediation estimate:

1. Remediation of Asbestos & Other Contaminants in Vacant Buildings 2. Demolition of Abandoned Buildings 3. Remediation & Demolition of Underground Steam Tunnels 4. Other Contamination Issues

5. Subsurface Contamination at the Power Plant 6. The Closed Coal Ash Landfill

The results of each study component are summarized below:

1. Remediation of Asbestos & Other Contaminants in Vacant Buildings = $67.1 million. The 368-acre property contains 57 abandoned buildings, each one of which contains asbestos. Asbestos is found throughout the buildings in insulation, roofing materials, floor coverings, mastics, gaskets, caulks, fire protection coatings, cement board, and other building materials. Under NYS laws and regulations, asbestos must be removed – by trained personnel using stringently controlled procedures – from buildings prior to rehabilitating them for future reuse or demolishing them. Many of the buildings also have relatively small amounts of other hazardous materials, such as mercury and heavy metals in thermostats and lighting fixtures, that must be removed and properly disposed prior to demolition. The total estimated cost of remediating all asbestos and other hazardous materials in the 57 buildings, in full compliance with state regulatory standards, is $67.1 million. Asbestos removal accounts for most of this cost. A small number of the largest buildings account for a significant proportion of the remediation cost. For example, two large building complexes, #7/21/22 (hospital facility) and #41/42/43 (Geriatric and Ambulatory) make up 48 percent ($32.4 million) of the total asbestos remediation estimate.

2. Demolition of Abandoned Buildings = $119.0 million. The demolition of the 57 buildings (after asbestos and other hazardous materials have been removed) is the single largest element of the remediation cost estimate, totaling $119.0 million. The largest buildings account for a significant portion of the demolition cost. For example, two large building complexes, #7/21/22 (hospital facility) and #41/42/43 (Geriatric and Ambulatory), account for 36 percent ($42.4 million) of the total cost. The demolition cost estimate assumes that some C&D material, such as concrete and bricks, will be used as fill on site, for example to fill in basements of demolished buildings and steam tunnels after asbestos is removed. However, most of the C&D material will be shipped off-site for reuse, recycling, or disposal consistent with state solid waste regulations.

5

Of the 57 buildings, 11 relatively small buildings have been identified for demolition as part of the $14 million project currently being planned. No decision has been made on whether the remaining buildings should be demolished or retained for future reuse. However, it is important to note that rehabilitating abandoned buildings for adaptive reuses can be more expensive than demolition. To the extent that some buildings are slated for reuse, this may significantly increase the cost of addressing the former KPPC property.

3. Remediation & Demolition of Underground Steam Tunnels = $25.6 million. The former KPPC property is crisscrossed with more than five miles of underground steam tunnels. The network of metal pipes that run through the tunnels provided steam heat generated in KPPC’s central power plant to all buildings throughout the complex. The tunnels are sizable – in most cases large enough for maintenance staff to walk through. The pipes throughout the 5+ miles of tunnels are wrapped in asbestos. Under state regulations, any activity that disturbs a segment of tunnel would require the immediate removal of asbestos from that section of tunnel. Encapsulating the asbestos in place is not allowed. While state law does not require immediate remediation of the tunnels (asbestos remediation is required only if the tunnels are disturbed), leaving them in place poses current and future safety and contamination risks.

The tunnels are of varying age and construction methods. The D&B study recommends remediation techniques tailored to various tunnel segments’ size, construction materials, and depth. The study determined that the cost of fully abating all of the tunnels on the 368 acres is $25.6 million, comprised of $11.5 million for asbestos abatement and $14.1 million to fill the remediated tunnels with clean C&D material and/or concrete along with site restoration.

4. Other Contamination Issues = $3.7 million.

The remediation study identified a number of additional environmental concerns that require attention. The cumulative cost of these actions is estimated to be $3.7 million. Examples include:

 The study identified 38 debris piles where C&D waste and other waste materials were previously disposed of on the 368 acres. In some instances the waste material is lying on the surface; in others it was covered with a thin layer of soil. The study makes specific recommendations to address these locations. In most instances, material from the existing debris piles needs to be excavated and removed from the property for proper disposal at permitted solid waste facilities.

 A number of buildings were historically painted with lead paint. Peeling and deteriorating paint has resulted in elevated lead concentrations in the soil directly adjacent to some buildings. In other instances, caulk containing trace amounts of PCBs was used on the exterior of some buildings. To address

6

 Testing conducted as part of the study identified soil contamination underneath certain building basements from sources such as sumps and drywells. Sumps and drywells should be properly closed and contaminated soil should be removed beneath certain buildings as part of the demolition process.

 A number of additional buildings once existed on the KPPC property. These buildings were demolished prior to the property’s transfer to OPRHP. In many cases C&D material was bulldozed into the buildings’ basements and covered with 6 to 18 inches of topsoil. The study concluded that these buried materials are not causing groundwater contamination and therefore do not require remediation. The only step needed is to place additional topsoil over certain locations so that there is a minimum of two feet of clean topsoil above the basements (this assumes that these sites will not be disturbed by future construction activities).

5. Subsurface Contamination at the Power Plant. The KPPC facility had its own power plant, which burned coal until it was converted to natural gas in the late 1980s. At that time, NYSDEC required the former coal storage pile area, located to the east of the power plant building, to be paved with asphalt to prevent rainwater from flushing contaminants into the groundwater from coal materials that had previously been buried at the site. NYSDEC also required that groundwater be monitored downgradient from the area. As part of the remediation study, D&B collected and analyzed groundwater samples from the monitoring wells. The sample results did not indicate any contaminants that exceed applicable state groundwater standards (with the exception of a few metals typically found in Long Island groundwater). DEC has indicated that groundwater monitoring is not needed in the future and no further action with regard to this area is necessary.

6. The Closed Coal Ash Landfill. Ash generated from the burning of coal at the facility’s power plant was historically landfilled on the KPPC property. The NYSDEC required the ash landfill to be capped in the mid 1980s, and groundwater monitoring wells were installed at that time (NYSDEC discontinued the monitoring requirement some years ago). As part of the remediation study, D&B collected and analyzed samples from the groundwater wells. The sample results did not indicate any contaminants that exceed applicable state groundwater standards (with the exception of a few metals typically found in Long Island groundwater). No further action is necessary regarding the closed ash landfill site.

7

The $215 million figure represents what it would cost to return the 368 acres of the former KPPC property to open space – demolishing and removing all vacant buildings and addressing subsurface contamination issues. The cost of constructing any new facilities on the KPPC property would be above and beyond this amount.

Comments

[Maureen Riegger]

Such a frightening article. The price tag NOT to do something about this land, is far greater then the $215 million,
stated to clean up this land. Thanks for you article relating "what's happening" with Kings Park Hospital grounds.
What's next?