This sounds like a MAJOR SCAM!
3
Well, the pastor should build apartments on his parking lot. Or perhaps it should have been seized years ago. That area of Brooklyn can use more housing. Not that there aren't projects all over the place. And we'll never have enough housing unless people don't start having only the number of children they can support on their own.
As for gentrification: That's just the taking back of old, formerly nice neighborhoods from the people who made them littered and unsafe. I'm all for it. I remember Flatbush and Fort Greene before they went seedy.
People just don't understand that areas like Flatbush were lovely into the late 1960s. They resent it when the new newcomers try to make streets cleaner and quieter (and safer). If The New York Times had written articles about what was really going on back in the early 1970s -- the drugs, fights, stenches, noise, litter, broken light bulbs, shattered glass everywhere in those days -- those conditions that drove my family, for example, off of Ocean Avenue -- and not blamed everyone but those responsible for the mayhem, perhaps people would not have excoriated Senator Moynihan for his sound, realistic assessment of welfare.
6
Affordable housing can't be built because of what "must" be included in rental property. It must have at lest 1.5 baths, a micro-wave, range, oven, refrigerator, 200 amp electric service, cable for TV and Internet, and security not to forget modern air-conditioning. The cost of building is expensive.
In 1946 my parents came home from the service to a two-room apartment at 353 Cypress Ave. the Bronx. I was born to that.
It had one bath and one closet. The windows leaked in the winter and ice formed thickly on the glass. There was fire-escape for air conditioning in the summer. The range was a 4 place gas stove with small gas oven. We had a small 6" fan to supplement the open windows in the summer. Heat in winter would sometimes require banging on the pipes to tell the "super" that it was getting cold upstairs. There was no micro-wave, no cable, no Internet and note too, this was a walk-up...no elevator.
The rent was $50 a month and mom and dad thought they had something special...they did not have to live with their parents after the war!
Frankly, I don't believe that gentrification is bad. In fact it raises up a neighborhood and compels change. Not the change this church wants but change nonetheless. Why build low end housing that costs a fortune? To perpetuate poverty and unemployment? Only the developer makes money and a renting population stays poor. Gentrification pays for itself. It would be better to compel/set aside 20% of the gentrified apartments for low rent.
8
"Councilwoman Inez Barron, whose district includes the church, said the plan was ambitious and had great potential. She initially raised concerns about the proposed heights of the buildings, which the developers eventually modified: Most will be 13 to 15 stories high, lower than the looming towers of Starrett City."
What? These buildings should be taller than those part of Starrett City. It makes no sense to not build as tall as economically feasible here.
NYC needs to build much more dense, and this is an opportunity.
5
The article underestimates the political power of this church. It is one of the most powerful political organizations in Brooklyn. The former District Attorney was a member. The subsidized apartments will provide a government funded revenue source for the church while the church will decide who gets to live in these subsidized apartments. This is nothing unique. The separation of church and state is dead in America. If government funded programs were removed from churches, 90 percent would close because they couldn't afford to keep the roof and heat on. Many think these programs are good. I believe the mixing of government and religion harms both the integrity of the government, our elections, and the teachings of the churches. As to the issue of gentrification. This neighborhood is being gentrified just not by White Americans. Over the last 40 years, the African American community which existed there has been replaced by a middle class Caribbean community. It was simply a different color gentrification.
6
I am born and raised in East New York. We have lived through the highest murder and crime rate in NYC for the past 45 years. We have lived through Police officer michael down and the molten commission. Anyone remember the Palm Sunday massacre? 10 dead and the guy just got released on parole. How about the Sckenk Ave massacres? Nobody wants to remember what this neighborhood has gone through. Charles Barron and his wife are not representative of this area. They are a blight to us. We welcome the builders and the influx of non criminal people.
10
I understand we need affordable housing, but why build a building and you will get dictate about how much apartments be set aside for low -income people and tenants. As someone who left New York City (Brownsville) a few years ago for Lehigh Valley, PA my quality of life has greatly improved. I am basically making the same amount of money over here, my apartment is 60% cheaper here, and my car insurances is about 80% cheaper than when I was in New York City. The city and the state will continue losing people and more members of Congress unless they change the quality of life there
Why buy a 2 family house in Brooklyn that's 2200 square feet for $700.000 and you can get a house over here that's 2400 square feet and pay less than $300.000 or you can get an apartment with 3 bedrooms for $1200 compare to New York City, you can get an2 bedroom apartment for $2400 per month.
5
Rev. Calvin Butts from the Abyssinian Church said the same thing. Instead this church has been financial mismanaged for years, still is sitting on empty lots that have not been re-developed as was promised to the community. The church also closed the largest supermarket on 125th street. "For decades" this property was not utilized. How about the city start collecting some revenue for those who leave their lots vacant for decades?
11
I don't know when it happened but how did neighborhood investment and improvement with new residents moving in who actually pay their way become a bad thing ? Did I miss the memo, NYT that "gentrification" became synonymous with "scourge" and "blight". Hardly. first I can assure you that the "gentry" will not be moving to East New York anytime soon. If that is code for "white people" well thats another story. Yes these New Yorkers who happen to be Caucasian may indeed move BACK to formerly heavily Jewish and Italian East New York (Goodfellas anyone?) I couldn't imagine a NYT article written trying to keep the people of color out who replaced them as a good thing. Well its two way street and would benefit all if there was a mix of folks of all races and income brackets.
BTW, a lot of people like what has "happened" to Williamsburg. What was formerly a lot of underused industrial is now a thriving community that attracts many from all of Brooklyn and NYC. Many
Housing is supply and demand. Demand is high so we need tens of thousands of new units. Tying them up with years of approval and red tape of income requirements just make the pipeline slower and less housing, therefore higher rents. economics 101.
Florida builds practically all free market and there is an oversupply, and rents go down and apts are improved to attract tenants. See how that works? Can work in NYC too.
16
Pope Frances and the Catholic Church should follow the lead (and Christlike altruism) of Rev Bernard and maybe start to redeem following the abuse by their priests.
(Of course the Vatican Cardinals, Bishops and other hangers-on will violently protest)
3
Good luck. A mix of incomes, and educational levels, would go a long way in preventing these new buildings from turning into vertical slums. One comment below is worth noting: not turning the area into an overly congested neighborhood with little breathing space and parkland for a sizable population.
Otherwise, go for it. Gentrification run amok is tragic for a city that needs different income levels/different types of workers and jobs in order to survive.
10
This sounds terrific -- a creative approach to a series of tough problems. One tension that the article reveals, through the quote from Ms. Barron, is in the question of whether people currently living in East New York should be preferred over other income-eligible applicants for this sort of housing. If so, how long should you have had to live in East New York to qualify for the preference? What if you grew up there but moved away? Should someone living near, but not in, East New York have a preference over someone in a further away part of the city?
1
Sounds like a wonderful and ambitious plan. I hope it moves forward. And to the local opposition - gentrification is happening all over the city whether you like it or not. At least this is a local spearheading it who has vested community interests of his congregation at heart. It could be a lot worse.
11
The article states 30 percent of the apartments will be subsidized but doesn't state by who and by how much.
I don't believe this project will ever get built as described in this article.
The wealthy will never move to east New York which this project needs to be viable .
This is where Amazon should move to.
The City should extend the L train down Flatland's ave to this area of the city as this area has almost no access to mass transit
Amazon can put one of their buildings in this location and still have room for parking.
If Amazon won't move there they can build a prison which isn't as crazy as it sounds if they really do close down Rikers
4
@lucky
Hi lucky,
I'm Luis - one of the reporters on the story. All of the apartments would be rent-stabilized and residents would qualify according to their incomes. As the article points out, the developers have not yet said how many units would be reserved for each income band.
The developers are planning to tap into city programs that help finance the construction of all-affordable buildings.
Thanks for your comment,
Luis
10
@Luis Ferré-Sadurní
This is a scam.
Even if everything goes as planned it won't be finished before 2035.
We know if that is what is planned then with delays that always occur a more realistic date of completion will be after 2040
If the drawings are in anyway how this project will be built the cost of building it will be over 2 billion dollars and won't fit on the land the church owns which I believe can not be 10 acres in size. That's ten square blocks each block being 200 by 200 feet.
No lending institution will give you that kind of money for a project that is so risky and will not see any money to pay back that loan before 2040.
Something might get built but what gets built will be nothing like what this article describes.
1
@Luis Ferré-Sadurní
First Reporter Luis, I commend you for replying to readers' comments. What I would like to see is some more balanced reporting from the NYT.
Easy to demonize real estate developers, but what is the alternative? government only housing. How is that working out over at NYCHA?
As someone else stated, the City regulations to build and maintain housing are archaic, overly regulated, bureaucratic nightmare and cost a fortune compared to other cities. Why not report on why it costs so much to build here? Once your build the taxes are enormous as well charges for water, sewer, electric, etc. AND then the demand is the rent is too high. Well it is, but again we need much more supply to meet the demand.
Also - I think the public deserves the clarification that in New York, "Affordable housing" means subsidized housing, subsidized by other taxpaying New Yorkers. "Luxury Housing" means free market, unsubsidized housing. Most would not be considered Luxury in the true sense of the word.
1
Hope someone is planning to provide parking for the 43,000(?) parishioners.
2
@Norah Robb
Hi Norah.
The developers have said they are planning to build two separate parkings for residents and churchgoers.
One would be underground and the other would be a garage several stories high.
Thanks for your comment.
Luis
6
"Build it, and they will come." Attempting to house the homeless is hopeless for local governments.
4
@David
Absolutely true. Some homeless are "ours," some are from other cities and states; some are so unstable that the best thing for them would be to put them where they can be given their medication, whether they want it or not.
Some homeless people continue to give birth to babies despite having been on welfare and other subsidies; and still they end up homeless because they cannot function even when being provided for.
6
Churches do not pay property tax or income tax.
The article does not mention if this project is part of a church related development making use of some tax loophole
21
This article fails to mention a lot. Did you know East New York was/is homicide capital of NYC. A truly brutal crime ridden neighborhood!
3