Why aren't old abandoned mental hospitals demolished?

Factual Questions
1

TL;DR in advance: Why are the rotting hulks of mental hospitals (other buildings too, but it seems mental hospitals in particular are prone to this) left to stand for years, in many cases decades, without being destroyed?

Backstory version: I’ve long had sort of a morbid fascination for abandoned mental hospitals. Maybe because my grandmother’s sister was institutionalized back in the late 1920s and spent the rest of her very long life–she was nearly 100 when she died–at the somewhat well-known* Kings Park Psychiatric Center.

(Hers is a sad yet interesting story, but I’ll save it for a rainy day… or at least until the main question is answered. This post is long enough!)

Like a not-insignificant number of other mental hospitals, Kings Park had its resident patient roster explode in the mid-20th century, and then quickly dwindle (as people were shuttled out of the system, shuffled elsewhere, or just died out); staff were let go, buildings were closed off, then finally the center itself was shut down and left as an inanimate corpse.

Also in common with other abandoned mental hospitals, it became a super popular ‘tourist’ site for urban explorers who enjoyed the creepiness factor.

Anyway. One of my other equally morbid fascinations is unsolved crimes** and I was indulging in the documentary Cropsey, about a bunch of missing kids in Staten Island, which seems to focus a lot of attention on the Willowbrook State “School,” another notorious dumping ground for the mentally ill that was exposed in the '70s (by a super-young Geraldo Rivera) for horrible care of its resident kids. [The exposé, which is NSFW or really anyone who’s easily triggered by nudity and horrible negligence/cruelty, is available here on YT.] Willowbrook’s been abandoned for decades, and still stands, with tunnel systems where homeless seem to live and possibly is the site of some heinous activities.

(I’m only halfway through Cropsey now–it’s on pause because my mind started to churn with this question and I just had to get it out. But as an aside, thus far it’s compelling as hell and I highly recommend it for true crime fans, especially for those interest in documentaries like Netflix’s Making a Murderer, HBO’s The Jinx or the extraordinary TV series The Staircase.)

So to repeat the TL;DR version of my question: Why are these creepy places–usually massive acreage in some rather nice settings (if you ignore the horror-show monstrosities decaying away at the center)–still standing?!

Willowbrook is a perfect example. It sits in the middle of a large forested area on Staten Island–New York City, where real estate space is precious and undeveloped land a rarity. As a Manhattanite I know part of me thinks, “yeah, but it’s Staten Island, so ew,” but that’s just rank snobbery. Living on an island comes with beautiful views and the parkland/woods surrounding the building is pretty. The land seems to be owned by the state as far as I can tell.

So why wouldn’t this place be razed and developed? Why did it take decades for the same to happen to King’s Park? KP*** was appallingly irresponsibly abandoned, with patient records strewn on the grounds, patients’ personal belongings tossed aside, rotting equipment left to decay further, and everything left ripe for thrill-seeking explorers (who were often arrested for trespassing, but it didn’t stop 'em). And that’s on Long Island, another extremely valuable area.

Seriously, WTF is up with this?

I understand this stuff happening in the UK; they have a more stringent guideline as far as what can be demolished and what can’t. Example: The North Wales Hospital, aka Denbigh Mental Asylum, is one of my favorites (I’m using it for the setting of a novel) for pure Victorian creep factor. It’s still standing despite having been falling apart for decades because it’s a Grade II Listed Building, which means it’s protected from destruction or alteration due to its history or significance, at least unless the local planning council approves of the proposed changes.

But the U.S. isn’t as protective of its history–and we’re also more litigious, so it seems to me that the governments would’ve had these places torn down purely for safety reasons, if not for financial ones. I understand it’d take a lot of money to raze and restore the area, but there are plenty of developers with massively deep pockets who’d surely bid high for the job.

Any answers here? Is it as banal as “red tape makes government shit work slowly”?

*At least, it’s well-known if you’re into Urban Exploration or abandoned mental hospitals!

** Yeah I know I’m coming across as some goth weirdo. I am so not! I just enjoy the oogy feeling I get when watching this stuff. Also, the less-seen side of humanity interests me as a writer. At least that’s what I tell myself when I don’t want to feel like a goth weirdo.

*** A former patient of the hospital came back thirty years later, now a filmmaker, to film a documentary called “Kings Park: Stories from an American Mental Institution.” I haven’t seen it yet, but am looking forward to it. If you’re also interested in this stuff, you might wanna check it out as well.

2

To answer the tl:dr, because it costs money to demolish them. Money thar an already failed endeavor doesn’t have.

3

It must depend on the ins and outs of ownership and local land and property markets. A gloomy old “funny farm” out in the sticks will struggle for anyone to find a usable purpose, irrespective of heritage listings and similar complications. But in the big cities, structures like that are catnip to property developers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friern_Hospital

and in more civic-minded times to public projects:

http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol25/pp76-80

4

Yeah but this is New York City (Willowbrook) and Long Island (Kings Park) land, and as I brought up in the admittedly very TL;DR post), which is some of the most valuable acreage in the U.S. The Staten Island facility is a short commute to Manhattan, the destination for millions every day. It’s surrounded by water, so taller buildings would have fantastic views. There are property developers who pay $600 million to develop sites in Manhattan, and I can’t imagine this would cost nearly that much compared to the value.

Kings Park is a bit more of a commute to NYC, but it’s still quite close, and Long Island is rife with wealthy shoppers and residents, and the land itself is spacious and near enough to local amenities like retail, schools, restaurants, etc. We’re talking extraordinarily valuable property here.

Of course you’re right, though: these are failed endeavors… as state-run mental hospitals. I’m not sure that failure should be considered a factor, or is likely to jinx, a for-profit venture like a massive shopping mall or a new luxury residential complex. Or am I wrong about that?

I suppose if there are rumors that these places are haunted (and admittedly there are some issues that could cause problems, like gravesites/cemeteries that might not be allowed to be disturbed), that could put some people off. Poltergeist and The Amityville Horror might have affected too many real estate developers!

Thank you for the links! And you’re right of course. If the hospitals are too far out-of-the-way to be worthwhile, it likely would be a slow process, especially if it seems unlikely to reap any financial rewards. Guess it’s more the ones that seem to be in prime areas that really make me go “WTF?”

5

Also a lot of these old hospitals are pretty architecturally special. Certainly in the UK many of them were built in Victorian times, often in the extravagant gothic style that was popular at the time. Old buildings like this are often listed, which means they can’t easily be demolished. Of course, old empty buildings often mysteriously go up in flames, or at least fall into dereliction, so being listed doesn’t necessarily help them.

Many old mental hospitals in the UK have been or are being converted into apartments. The one in Surrey where the writer Bill Bryson worked in the 1970s was converted in the 1990s.

6

Going along with the poster who mentioned cost ---- some of these buildings bring a lot of baggage with them. Asbestos to possible graves/burials on the property and none of it very well documented. There can also be an issue with the land itself that made it less than ideal for use from the beginning. Examples of reusing/developing such sites around here has mixed results from stunning failures (Dixmont) to Retreat State Hospital which became a rather good jail.

7

I’ve been in a couple of them, to measure them and get some preliminary plans made and see if we can turn them into something – dorms or apartments I think. Pretty scary places, especially the top floor of one with pigeons walking in the ductwork and a thick crunchy layer of their droppings on the floor… but I digress.

The one with the pigeons was in the midst of a built-up medical center in the city. There was new construction everywhere as the easier empty lots were filled in. It was just a matter of time that this building would get rebuilt. As said, it costs money to demolish a 10-story concrete building, especially if you’re building essentially the same building in it’s place. I don’t know how many years after (it’s been at least 15 years I was in it) but now it looks like an office building.

The other “hospital” building was perhaps more of a problem. It was near medical areas (not the same area as the “pigeon” building) but not conveniently so. I don’t know who owned it but they sat on it for years after I was in it until someone had a use for it, and the money to clean it up. On Google maps it looks like some sort of specialized medical center.

There are two more hospital type complexes I know of in the countryside, still abandoned and slowly getting busted and burnt out. They may collapse and turn to dust as they are not valuable properties or locations.

Tl;dr: It’s just a matter of someone that needs a building right there, and has the money to do it.

We had a building in London that we were converting into dorms. The insides were made bright and shiny clean and new. The outside was historic and could be cleaned but no changes to the exterior could be made. I think there was a whole discussion/meetings/committees about updating the windows into the 21st century.

8

A lot of those Victorian mental hospitals were listed buildings, but that hasn’t stopped them being sold off and torn down. For the most part, they were not really suitable for redeveloping into dwellings, but they did usually stand in extensive grounds. The land and buildings were owned by the NHS, so there was considerable incentive to sell them off.

The one near me accommodated up to 700 patients, and is mostly gone now. The Admin building is preserved and fits really well into the housing estate that it is now part of. The Chapel is now home to a firm of architects.

What wasn’t generally known, was that many of these buildings were stuffed with valuable antiques, and many of them just vanished with no one to pursue the culprits. The chapel I mention above, had some magnificent stained glass windows. A reputable dealer made a good offer for them but bureaucracy procrastinated and then vandals destroyed them. They had a rare “committee table” and 24 matching chairs. No one could say where it went - I suspect that it was broken up and the chairs sold as sets of four or six.

9

Here is an example of an abandoned building: Crookham House in Berkshire in the South of England which had various uses over the years before becoming a private school.

Unfortunately child abuse took place there and once finally discovered led to an immediate closure in the late 1980s. The understable haste meant the building was left with all the school stuff (books, sporting gear, science equipment) in place.

And

Why would it be left to rot? Initially it was still owned by one of the eventually jailed child abusing teachers. However there have been attempts to redevelop it and the story linked below provides an explanation of the (rather prosaic) problem.

Local Government will approve these sorts of redevelopment only if the redeveloper agrees to guarantee some of the new homes created are suitably priced for the less well off. Which becomes a poison pill. It reduces the profit which can be made.

TCMF-2L

10

In Traverse City, Michigan, some of the century-old buildings have been restored as luxury apartments, and tours of un-restored buildings are becoming main attractions on the northern Michigan tourist trail.

11

In Willowbrook’s case, the lack of development may be due to area residents not liking the idea of a major project bringing in lots more people and traffic congestion. Much smaller projects have been vigorously opposed:

"“Why should we lose a beautiful wooded area because [the builder] speculated that he’d be able to put up all these units,” questioned Frayne. “We all realize he’s going to do something with this land because he bought it, but are we going to let him tear up these woods and this beautiful area?”

12

As others mentioned, money. Huge concrete and/or brick buildings are going to take some serious expense to demolish. They higher they go, the more expensive. The thicker the walls, the more heavy equipment needed. Issues like asbestos (quite common) are just icing on the cake.

13

In Buffalo the psych center designed by HH Richardson is a beautiful reclaimed project like what the OP is asking about.

Took years to get started because anytime public land or structures are involved for private redevelopment political corruption seems to happen. Lots of money going all over. Not always, but seems like it.

Another issue I remember while following this project was the NIMBY people and the IWANTS. I want my idea to the exclusion of all others or no deal. Committee after committee, hearing after hearing. Meanwhile the building continues to fall apart.

14

I worked for a while for the Minnesota State Hospital system. We had many facilities that were campuses of several buildings in beautiful settings, with only 1 or 2 buildings used – often a newer building recently added.

These were generally very well-built structures. (Many built by WPA workers during the Depression – no other construction work available, so the workers took their time and built them really well.) So they are correspondingly hard (expensive) to demolish.

Some of them in my hometown have been sold (for $1) to a technology company that was going to remodel them, and provide jobs to the area. It turned out that remodeling to current standards was tough (asnd expensive) too.

The builkdings were built with 8-10 steps up to the entrance from ground level, and stairways between floors. No elevators, and no access for handicapped people. They had to tear off the end of the building (tough – foot-thick concrete with bricks on the outside of that), and put on an addition containing a lobby & elevators. Expensive. The buildings had been designed to house patients in large open wards; not suitable for individual offices, those had to be built. And the building was very short on electrical power & outlets for current standards. They also wanted to add phone lines, network cabling, etc. into each office. That turned out to be real hard to do given the thick concrete walls all thru the building. So the compasny ended up spending much more to remodel these buildings than they had expected.

Also, I think that some of the reason these facilities were left is that the people running them knew that the Reagan policy of just dumping mentally-ill people onto the streets really wouldn’t work, and we would end up with a large impoverished, homeless population. They had expected/hoped that this would be recognized by later politicians, and they would refurbish & reopen some of these needed facilities, so they left them available for that. Alsas, that never happened.

15

Because, you might need them, again?

16

One of the big spooky ones was the Danvers State Insane Asylum built in the 19th century in an ornate Victorian style that stood empty and abandoned for many years. There are some great photos at the link, both historic photos and pictures of the abandoned interior falling into ruin. It has since been demolished, but while it was standing in its abandoned state it was the setting for several movies including the horror movie Session 9. One of the poignant pictures that I once saw that I can’t find at this site was the wall of a former patient’s room or cell, tattered and in ruins, on which the long-gone patient had scrawled, “Even the weariest river winds somewhere safe to sea”.

17

Again: Asbestos. This stuff is everywhere. :frowning:

18

Some US sites are too far off the beaten path or have been added to historic registries. I used to commute by the Willard Asylum for the Chronic Insane every day for the two years I lived in Ovid, NY.

is an example that was added to the Natl. Historic Registry. It’s in a beautiful location overlooking Seneca lake but there’s not much going on there during the 6 months of winter.

Here’s a creepy tour - An Inside Tour of 'Willard Asylum for the Chronic Insane' - Ovid, NY - Exploring Upstate

19

Our local one is a Robert Mills building; it’s historic. They’re finally redeveloping it but that whole area has been Creepy Haunted Quarter for decades. Now it’s Creepy Haunted Quarter With Surprise Baseball Stadium.

20

Not quite on topic but this episode of the Planet Money podcast shows how difficult it can be to tear down buildings even when pretty much everybody in a position of authority wants to do so and the money is on hand.

Epsidoes 721: Unbuilding a City