A US example:
Agnews Developmental Center - Wikipedia.
Yeah, when it’s smack in the middle of a lot of desirable real estate, it gets repurposed pretty quickly.
I don’t tink there’s anything special about derelict mental hospitals or such. I’ve seen many abandoned more mundane large buildings : hotels, thermal spas, obviously many factories, warehouses, etc…
But since people, like the OP, are more fascinated by places with a sinister feel, like those mental hospitals, they visit them, make videos, talk about them, and so the OP or others hear about them and are aware of their existence, while they’re unaware of the similarly abandoned hotel 5 km away and don’t wonder why those dozens of other more usual buildings are left to crumble.
In any case, unless the land is highly valuable and almost entirely developed already, hence you have no other choice, I don’t see why a developer would want to add the cost of demolishing an existing building rather than use any nearby empty land.
The only reason why you could have an interest in this old building would be if you could somehow refit it for cheaper than building anew (which seems very unlikely for older buildings) or if the building is attractive enough in itself (say, a beautiful historical building) to be a sale point (which is going to be highly dubious for a mental hospital).
Queen of Angels Hospital stood empty in Echo Park, near the heart of Los Angeles, for about a decade, until it was taken over by a pentacostal church for their charity activity. It’s a huge building, I often wonder if they’re using all of it.
Huh. Doing research, it looks like they also have Angelus Temple. That’s a lot of L.A. history in one organization.
They look like they’re doing good work, though. Good for them.
Another issue for governments is land-banking and strategic planning.
Just because there is no justification / current demand for a big mental health facility now, does not mean that there will not be one in 10-50 years time. If the land is sold off it will inevitably cost far more to buy a comparable site in the future, if even possible. Same goes for future road easements and other strategic planning measures.
There are opportunity costs for not being able to make money from an asset now, but also long-term consequences for losing future potential as well. In this context the demolition cost is usually deferred until there is an actual trigger of site development being approved and proceeding to justify the big spend required.
Our company purchased a building that used to be a mental hospital for children (location: 39.733271, -84.163436). I worked in this building for many years. Parts of it are quite… creepy. There is a (very small) courtyard in the center where I assume they allowed some of the children to sit under the sun.
Portions of the Willowbrook property are still in use by the city, according to Wikipedia. It may be that the city has no use for the particular building referenced by the OP but cannot sell that portion of the property for development without affecting the other current uses.
Here is a story from yesterday which is timely: Demolition Crews Tear Down Belhaven Hospital Building.
The Harrisburg State Hospital complex now houses state government offices. If there’s an office address I don’t recognize, I’ll plug it into Google Maps and nine times out of ten, it’ll be in that complex.
There’s also the Pennsylvania State Hospital for Crippled Children in Elizabethtown, which was established to care for kids with polio, TB, and other orthopedic problems. The hospital was closed in 1990, but the Department of Corrections bought it in 1991 and now uses it as a training academy for Corrections and Board of Probation and Parole staff. I’ve given training there and it’s a great old building. It would have been a shame to tear it down.
I can’t speak to the historical aspect but just from a commercial real estate perspective taking down large buildings, especially brick and steel structures is often quite expensive and some of these remote locations the OP cites as being beautiful make it even more expensive to get the men and equipment on site and then do an environmental inspection for asbestos and buried tanks, remove the debris and then pay the dump fees etc. etc . We could easily be talking 6 or 7 figures in many cases.
So, if there is no immediate need for the property *who *is going to pony up that cash? The state and county aren’t going to burn up valuable tax payer dollars taking down private structures unless they are causing immediate problems. An old building in the woods is not going to be on anyone’s must tear down radar. Also, why wouldn’t a hotel needing a nice woodland site simply buy and clear some land vs taking on the huge PITA and cost factor of buying property with an old structure and then taking down and disposing of an old POS building before they can build? Unless the price is compelling enough to absorb that cost there may be better alternatives. Just because land is valuable does not mean there are no competing properties that are less of a hassle to develop.
Right. The OP seems to imply that this is particular to mental hospitals. Actually, in general, many large structures (schools, apartment buildings, hotels, malls, theaters, etc.) on old abandoned properties get left standing. Maybe the owner wants to make the future buyer pay for demolition, or maybe the owner is hoping that the structure could add value for a future buyer who might refurbish it. But this isn’t something that is unique to mental hospitals.
There is a massive ancient Egyptian themed cinema near the Court Complex where I appear regularly. Derelict for 20 years. The city finally contracted it out to a developer this year who is converting it to a multiplex with the same theme. From one 1500 seat hall to 3 500 seat screens and two of three smaller screens as well.
So yeah, the local authority might well want/hope it can one day be reused for its original purpose.
I’d love to hear the story!
The only ones you see are the ones they didn’t tear down.
The asbestos situation plays a bigger part than you might think. It will need to be remediated whether the building is remodeled or demolished, which is a very expensive proposition no matter what, and it can be highly destructive as well. This is especially so if it’s in the plaster and not just pipe or duct insulation. So you’re faced with a very expensive remediation and demolition on the one hand, or hoping someone wants to buy it to use it for something on the other, but who will then have a very expensive remediation, repair, and remodeling to do. Neither of those are particularly good sells.
Any sort of conversion that might seem to make sense on the surface (hospital to assisted living, dormitory to apartment, etc.) can be faced with many code issues that are equally difficult to reconcile. Especially in assisted living or any sort of caregiving situation, codes about hallway widths, egress routes, accessibility, and the like are almost certainly going to conflict with a 100 year old building that’s not going to be easy to modify. Apartments or condos also have rather specific desirability requirements that might not fit within what’s already built. It’s a shame though because these are usually quite handsome structures, but if the economics don’t work out there’s not a whole lot you can do.
Large buildings built just after WW I are sometimes built of very solid reinforced concrete. It costs a mint to take them down, and the materials have no salvage value.
Large concrete buildings build before WW I are sometimes built to stone/masonary design standards, rather than using sky-scraper design methods. If so, they have walls 5’ thick at the base, and cost a mint to take down, and have only limited salvage value.
Modern buildings are basically pretty easy to demolish. There is a subset of older concrete buildings that are basically really difficult to demolish. Old open-ward hospitals are strongly represented in that subset.