Area building getting renovated

Or so it appears.

ATP has noticed this building on Rogers Ave. between Lefferts Ave. and Sterling St. for its cuteness on more than one occassion.  We like the building's facade, both the details and color (which, for all of our color-blind readers, is green).  The building has sat vacant for our entire tenure in PLG, but recently the plywood came off of the windows and a dumpster appeared in front.

We're a little worried about what might be going into this cute structure, however.  Our intial thoughts were optimistic - that the owner is renovating to provide permanent housing.  But after reading PPLG's piece on the development of a so-called "apartment hotel," which translates to "homeless shelter" in normal-speak, we fear that this building could be going the same way as 205 Parkside Ave. 

ATP is all for dedicating a portion of units as Section 8, but we do not think that what PLG needs is an SRO.

Anyone have the scoop on what's going on in the building pictured above?  There was no one around for us to ask when we walked by.

Comments

[Ed]

Frankly, I don't think we need Section 8 housing AT ALL or an SRO or anything like that!!!

We have Ebbets Field looming over us day and night. That's plenty of low income housing nearby. Let's get some affordable condos or apartments for people with jobs!!!

Let's encourage responsible people who have their *%$# together to move into our neighborhood.

[roger]

check property shark. you'll find the name of the owner and he is living on rogers ave too.

[Alexandra]

Amen to that, Ed.

[anon]

Ah... the voices of intolerance.

[livin 11225]

They have 2 stop work orders from the DOB on there. Looks like they need to get some work permits perhaps...

[Ed]

I think our neighborhood tolerates plenty of subsidized housing. Why should we take on more when we already carry more than our fair share?

Furthermore, what's so bad about wanting neighbors who have jobs, ambition, and a healthy outlook on life?

[Ceelledee]

Most of our neighbors in PLG have jobs, ambition and a healthy outlook on life. Among those who don't, I would wager that most of them pray, wish and struggle for their lot in life to improve in a manner that is both lawful and self-respecting.

Seems to me that the worst elements of our community are the small groups of criminals, slumlords, and newly-arrived intolerants. Although they constitute a minority of the population, they each force hugely negative impacts and impressions upon the rest of us. The thing that each of these groups have in common is that they don't give a damn about anyone's interests other than their own.

[Ed]

Why would any resident, longstanding or otherwise, might prefer an increase Section 8/subsidized housing? We already have tons. We are doing more than our fair share! I don't understand what's so unreasonable about what I am saying.

[Ed]

Why would any resident, longstanding or otherwise, prefer an increase Section 8/subsidized housing? We already have tons. We are doing more than our fair share! I don't understand what's so unreasonable about what I am saying.

[anon]

Ceelledee - you seem to be deeply embittered by both change and new residents coming to the neighborhood. You've assaulted their character (likening some of them to criminals), and you've equated improving the quality of life in our neighborhood with leading a life intolerance and selfishness.

Are you that nasty woman on Midwood Street who never says hello to anyone?

[livin 11225]

What about those old intolerant people let's not forget them, there are plenty of them here too...

I know what people are saying about no more subsidized housing in the nabe. A little history about this building might help a little. It was a rental building (gotta believe it was rent stabilized) that had a fire maybe a year and a half ago. Been boarded up since then and it is right next to another building that has been abandoned for over 5 years.

My understanding was that the building sold in the past year and while I'm excited that they are renovating it, I'm a little concerned about what happened to all the displaced tenants? Is this some sort of scam to get around the rent stabilization rules? I really hope not, but I wouldn't be suprised if this was.

[Ceelledee]

Yes, livin 11225, I agree with you. Intolerance is not to be found only among some newcomers to our community. For sure, there are some oldtimers among us who can be, and are, intolerant as well. None of it is good.

When I think about those things that work against our quality of life, I see neither subsidized housing nor poor people as being at the root of the problem. In fact, I come from a school that says, how we treat the least among us says alot about who we are as a people. And, but for the grace of God. . . there go I.

And when, for example, we can tolerate humongous tax breaks for the rich and all kinds of corporate welfare ad nauseum, but can't tolerate a lousy rent subsidy for the poor and working poor of this city (and PLG), that suggests to me that we have a much bigger societal problem. And, btw, why is there not more concern about, and outcry against, the greedy absentee slumlords who take these subsidized rents but then do nothing to maintain their buildings?

[Ed]

The root of the problem is probably capitalism, which tilts the playing field in the favor of some, but not others. Accordingly there have to be safety nets, programs, etc. Of course tax cuts for the wealthy are insane!

But the presence of a safety net doesn't mean we can take it easy. We all have to take responsibility for our own lives if we want to make them better.

Young people all across America are making grave mistakes in how they plan for their lives (and so are their parents). It's not just happening in PLG.

We can all start by getting an education and a decent job, carrying ourselves in a mature fashion (unless we're performing onstage for a living), and not having babies until our lives are in order!

[Adrian Lesher]

Is there any reason to allow hit and run messages like that of the anonymous poster above, who mischaracterizes Ceeledee's post, insults her, and then is afraid to leave his name?

SOME new residents are intolerant. It's a common phenomenon: a not particularly tolerant person is drawn to a neighborhood like ours by the affordability, then starts wishing that the neighborhood would bend to his or her prejudices and quirks. Obviously this is not true of ALL moving into the neigborhood, though "anonymous"'s thin skin makes me think he might be one of these intolerant people.

[Ed]

ALL OF US SHOULD BE INTOLERANT - Intolerant of crime, disrespectful behavior, destructive behavior, unlawful behavior, etc. There is nothing wrong with the residents of a neighborhood wanting to improve the neighborhood's quality of life. That's not the same as wanting a neighborhood to bend to someone's unique prejudices and quirks.

What exactly did you mean when you refer to these "unique prejudices and quirks"?

The point is this: No one owns this neighborhood. WE ALL DO. Rather than seeing newcomers as a threat because some may be "intolerant" of things which bring down our quality of life, perhaps we should see them as a blessing, because they may bring things to the neighborhood that help it improve. Lord knows that PLG has a gang-ridden, drug-laden past, and to this day, there is graffitti all over the place.

[Dan]

"What exactly did you mean when you refer to these "unique prejudices and quirks"?"

I don't know what was meant by "quirks" Ed, but I think it is fair to say that you have pre-judged those who receive government assistance with their housing costs as people without jobs or ambitions, who have an unhealthy outlook on life, don't have their &*^% together and are taking it easy by not taking responsibility for their own lives.

There are plenty of lower-income people who receive gov't assistance who are not the troublemakers or parasites you urge us to be intolerant of - working families, immigrants, elderly people, the disabled - law abiding people who simply don't earn enough to get by. I would be careful not to paint everyone with one brush - the existence of these assistance programs is already very threatened.

[Ed]

Look - of course there are many decent, law-abiding people on public assistance. And it's certainly not my intention to make anyone feel bad.

However, as harsh as it sounds, I think it is safe to say that unless you have a disability or are elderly, you're on public assistance because you you don't have your act together, by virtue of the fact you can't provide for yourself. You got into something too deep or didn't prepare properly. That's ok - we all screw up from time to time and need to get back on track - and it's not an easy road to stability. Unfortunately, our public assistance system fails at rehabilitation and has created a system of dependance.

One more thing - as awful as it may be to accept, there are high correlations between crime and poverty, drugs and housing projects. This doesn't clarify a causal relationship. Clearly, not not everyone is a criminal. But it DOES means there is a tendency for certain things to exist in the presence of others, and this becomes a problem when a neighborhood is trying to make its streets safer.

I never said we should wipe out public assistance in Lefferts Gardens. But I DID say we already carry our fair share, so why should we take on more? This is such a reasonable statement that I don't understand why anyone is disagreeing.

[Ed]

And by the way - as a rule, people don't consciously intend to end up in bad situations which require assistance, and shouldn't be blamed personally for being there.

But it certainly is everybody's responsibility to take a good hard look at their lives when they go astray, and say "I don't want to be this way." Then it's time for good judgment and hard work to make things better. We need to have a system that rehabilitates better.

[Adrian Lesher]

It seems to me that we have few housing projects compared to neighborhoods like Boerum Hill and Park Slope (Gowanus and Wykoff Projects) and Fort Greene (the various projects along Myrtle Avenue and the ones near the Navy Yard).

Ebbets Field Houses has at least some subsidized housing, but my understanding is that it is privately owned.

It certainly is not listed on the NYCHA site.

[nic]

You never know someone's story, and can't know the reason someone doesn't have their #$%@ together. But make no mistake about it, in the next year or two, many of the Section 8 building in our neighborhood will turn over, and all kinds of people will lose their homes-- grandmothers in poor health, families trying to get back on their feet, 2 year olds, etc... It's not just the drug dealers being forced out. That's the reality of gentrification. I'm as gulity as everyone else for making it happen, but I'm not trying to fool myself into thinking all the changes we're bringing are good ones.

[Ed]

Aren't people who receive housing subsidies entitled to the same priveleges as every citizen in NYC? In other words, in a rent stabilized building (6 or more units), tenants are entitled by law to a lease renewal and limited rent increases, regardless of the source of their funding. Tenants even maintain a right to stay put during a condo/co-op conversion. In fact, the only time they can be asked to move (as far as I've heard) is if a building owner intends to occupy units for their own use - but this is subject to lots of restrictions and usually results in litigation.

Of course, if you live in an unregulated apartment (like virtually every building with fewer than 6 units - and most brownstones) your landlord is NEVER required to renew your lease and there are NO restrictions on rent increases. In these scenarios, a tenant's ability to maintain a reasonable rent is based on the market and the the generosity (or naivete) of the owner of the house. None of us are safe in this environment regardless of the source of our funding. In fact, I was once forced to move from an unregulated because my rent was increased by 20% in one year. I know of others that were forced out because they owner wanted to occupy another floor of their townhome.

[My view]

Section 8 housing is not only for people that are "on public assistance because you you don't have your act together, by virtue of the fact you can't provide for yourself. You got into something too deep or didn't prepare properly"

When I was in college I befriended several students that were parentless. A couple had been foster kids who aged out of the system, and one was the son of a single mother who died while he was in school. All of them worked to support themselves and pay their way through school. Through a quirk in the Section 8 laws at the time they discovered that they were eligible for section 8 housing stipends. We attended school in a major metropolitan city and the school did not guarantee housing for upperclassmen.

These kids were able to get a subsidized apartment in an 80-20 building. Their neighbors never knew that they were receiving subsidies and they fit in well with the young professionals and families in the building.

Subsidized housing does not have to equal bad tenants, bad neighbors or a reduction in the quality of the neighborhood. What makes people good neighbors is when they believe they have a stake in what happens and that they control their own destiny.

[Ed]

Wow - lucky them. I had to work like a dog and take out student loans to put myself through school. It took me many years to pay them off! Maybe I should have applied for Section 8 as well. I never looked into it because I thought, since I was able-bodied, I should let limited funds go to folks who were more needy.

[Nativegal]

Sure Ed, but if you own, I'm sure you have no problem taking your mortgage deduction. What's the difference?

[Ed]

What's the difference between the mortgage deduction for homeowners and Section 8 Housing? The former is a tax break to encourage and facilitate working folk to own their own homes. The latter is a safety net to help people who have gotten off track and can't provide for themselves. One encourages people to progress, the other provides a cushion for people who are regressing, so that they may get back on track. This is where rehabilitation comes into play. Eventually, a recipient of Section 8 should be able to own their own place and receive the mortgage deduction.

Does that clear it up for you?