South of EP: The church at Rogers between Carrol and Crown is torn down. Residential on the way
Comments
-
looks quite a bit different in person than the rendering
-
They might add the yellow later.
-
I hope they don't paint the brick.
-
Above, I guessed they would be done in late fall....unless they are kicking some serious butt inside, I think a safer bet is Jan 1, 2017.
-
I took a slow walk around this site tonight and they are kicking some serious butt.Dry wall is up, kitchens and lighting are going in. At this rate, they could be done be Dec 1, and get their CO by Jan 1.Look for listings around Thanksgiving.
-
Facade now complete
-
Thats one ugly institutional box. At least the yellow would make it ugly with some panache.
-
That was fast.
-
They had to pay some fines along the way, but that is sometimes the cost of business:Now, they await their C of O, and we await ads for the apartments.
-
Scaffolding is now gone. Interior work is roughed.Awaiting installation of PTACs and finish electrical.
-
If anyone knows the folks in opposition, please post contact info. I'd like to contribute to their efforts.
-
Holy eff. Why couldn't they make it all affordable for people coming out of the DHS system? It literally makes NO SENSE to have a brand new building be used for shelter and not for real apartments for real families. Fucking idiots at City Hall.
-
Oh hell no!
-
im guessing as they finished the bldg the developer felt they could not get the rents the sought and got a better deal from the city
-
This building was receiving no exemptions and had no commitment to affordability with the city or state, it was also financed for market rates (right now, about the same rate if not less than what the city pays for the homeless). Big money in housing the homeless, and our neighborhood south of EP probably couldn't sustain this many high end renters, like jong said, so this is probably the developer's safest route for keeping up with the mortgage while still turning a buck. They'll probably turn back to market and boot out these families in a few years if rents and businesses south of EP ever increase to the level of the north side.crownheightster said:Holy eff. Why couldn't they make it all affordable for people coming out of the DHS system? It literally makes NO SENSE to have a brand new building be used for shelter and not for real apartments for real families. Fucking idiots at City Hall.
-
@uglyfloorlamp
The city pays more than market rate to house the homeless? Can you please expound -- what type of rates are we talking (ex: luxury vs not), etc.? -
As I've stated elsewhere, the city is desperate to remain in compliance with the Right to Shelter rulings....having worked in the field, this does not surprise me a bit.And, this developer just scored a funding stream that is constant. S/he will never have to seek rents from tenants or care about how much damage tenants to do to the common areas, or care whether some tenants need to be evicted because they making the building less than attractive to present and future tenants.
-
BTW, those who disliked this new building out of fears that it would lead to gentrification now get to complain about the neighborhood being dumped on
What was going to house 166 small families paying market rent will now house 132 (likely large) families and some space for social workers and security staff. -
So if the developers here aren't making enough to gamble on the market and would instead get money from city, how much could developers of armory getting. Remember they are still having to pay 2 mill a year to rent the space. Just seems like a weird deal for this developer unless this is a really long term deal. "A few years" of homeless tenants in a brand new condo building will no doubt have more wear and tear than the alternative or not even fully occupied.
-
Um, becoming a shelter is a long term deal. The city needs to continue to secure additional space until the population shrinks.Here's the growth of the shelter population since 1981, since the Right To Shelter was first established....the demand for (and funding stream to) shelter providers has been growing for 30 years.
-
Right that's what I figured. The few years comment was mentioned above. Also what qualifies as a family?
-
DHS discusses that in terms of a few typesFamilies with Children
- Families with children younger than 18 years of age
- Pregnant women
- Families with a pregnant woman
- Familes that do not include children younger than 18 years of age, including adult siblings and couples
-
Well, I guess this building is going to have the big effect that @whynot's been predicting all along...though quite a different one from a whole bunch of gentrifiers with money to spend on craft beer, coffee, and tapas.
-
And hopefully whatever school is zoned for this new family shelter gets extra money from the City to help deal with the many challenges of having a large percentage of their student body coming from families that suffer from homelessness. If I was a parent at PS 161 The Crown, I'd be a little worried about the school being able to have enough support staff to support the more needy students and families.
-
The fits and starts "gentrification" of Rogers Avenue will certainly stall out from this. If I owned real estate on the avenue I'd be livid. Businesswise, Shallows Cafe couldn't last anyway. The nice folks at Marker Coffee must be losing sleep. Branch Office is doomed. Probably Food Sermon will be the only thing that survives but I'm guessing the residents won't be paying $16 for jerk chicken.
-
Plus the landlord that just did the very nice speculative high-end renovation to the retail/food space on the corner of Montgomery and Rogers must be flipping out.
-
@jong -- Absolutely. I worry for all the new businesses on Rogers Ave. I wonder how long the City has known that it would be contracting to lease apartments from the landlord at the new building. Was it an opportunity that came up quickly, or in the works for a long time? New businesses that rightly or wrongly relied on the idea of lots of tenants with disposable dollars are screwed.I say this from a stance of believing that emergency shelter is important. And that Lefferts Gardens probably needs more shelter beds, since most of the places where the homeless live in Lefferts is cluster-site housing and that is bad. I fail to see how this is not just more clustersite housing. And if the landlord is willing to house homeless families for the City, obviously the landlord is in a weak spot. And I just don't understand why the City would not exploit this weakness and drive a hard bargain requiring the landlord to, for example, have to accept Section 8 or LINC vouchers for five years or something like that for families transitioning out of DHS.
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds