Off-Site Affordable Housing Moving Along on Quincy
Under inclusionary zoning codes, a developer putting up a big market-rate tower in downtown Brooklyn can put up an even bigger market-rate tower if he agrees to build some affordable housing. The kicker is that he doesn’t even have to include the affordable portion on site: He can stick the affordable units in a cheaper…
Under inclusionary zoning codes, a developer putting up a big market-rate tower in downtown Brooklyn can put up an even bigger market-rate tower if he agrees to build some affordable housing. The kicker is that he doesn’t even have to include the affordable portion on site: He can stick the affordable units in a cheaper part of town and still earn the market-rate bonus. Which is how 15 Quincy Street came to be. Instead of including the 48 affordable units in its 40-story tower at Myrtle and Prince, BFC Partners is putting them on Quincy across the street from the Salvation Army. Do you think developers who benefit from inclusionary housing should be able to build the affordable portion off-site?
Development Question on Quincy [Brownstoner] GMAP P*Shark DOB
PACC Keeps Busy, Breaks Ground on Quincy [Brownstoner]
Two Towers, One On, One Half Off (Site) [Downtown Star]
Thanks everyone for all the comments, and while I do feel that the homeless should be given the opportunity to start anew, my real concern was not about the moral character of those who will live in the building but rather the stigma attached to a building of that sort, and how it’s going to most likely frighten away potential buyers.
I don’t believe that homeless people are criminals or drug addicts – but do believe that a building set to house the homeless will certainly have a negative economic effect on my property.
I guess all I can really do is wait and see, maybe it won’t be so bad – but I don’t want to suffer because of this by not being able to sell my property that I worked very hard to get.
I think it was unfairly “dumped” on my block when it should have been included in the main tower.
bren, you’re entitled to your opinion naturally, but please don’t lecture me or anyone else.
On the front of giving a homeless person a place to stay, I agree. However, the whole “gentrification causes homelessness” is such utter bullshit. Homelessness was higher (sky high, really) in the 1970s when you could live in SoHo for pocket change.
spare me.
Many homeless families are hard working people … they have been displaced from their homes and end up in shelters across the city due to reasons beyond their control, one reason being rapid gentrification and development, and no, I’m not against development, or new folks moving into Brooklyn… just wanted to clear up some misconceptions.
Homeless families are not all drug addicts and criminals, they have dreams and aspirations for themselves and their children just as you do for yours.
This city desperately needs genuinely priced affordable housing for the majority of low to moderate income folks who are taxpayers, and make up the majority of folks populating Brooklyn and the other boroughs.
Open up your hearts and minds a bit folks, step past some of your fears about folks in different circumstances than your own… you might be pleasantly suprised.
6:21: i’m sorry but your post is ridiculous. “major serial killers” are obviously not the kind of crime most people in the nabe are concerned about. it’s clear that you are hell bent on focusing on race. i’m sorry for you that you’re so angry.
Common Sense: i agree. we’ll have to wait and see. it may be that homeless are less likely to be criminal but drug abuse does lead to crime and we all know that rehab programs often fail. also mental illness is obviously a big problem with homelessness and the mental health system obviously sucks but that doesn’t mean i don’t mind when raving lunatics stumble by me on the street or subway; it’s frightening.
Gee- I guess it’s only poor folk who have drug problems or commit crimes> Of course no one remembers Peter Braunstein? Son of Sam? richard Speck?(I could go on but isn’t it interesting that the majority of major serial killers in this country are white men?)All your snotty rich friends who had to have plastic surgery to repair their noses. who do you think buys the stuff that funds the drug business? Hint: People with money. Yes- they are so much better than poor crime ridden minorities. But I guess when you’re above a certain income level or a certain color, it’s not considered criminal.
Bye amy- we’ll miss you 🙂
That may be true, but generally, homeless are far less criminal than regular NYCHA applicants. I believe if I’m not mistaken that durg treatment is done before being placed into transistional services.
We really have to wait and see what’s up here. Homeless housing is a very real need in this city, and as long as it doesn’t affect the surrounding community, I feel we should welcome the chance to get these people off the street.
and p.s.–thanks for your sensible post. very refreshing.
4:43: i totally agree with you. i recently bought on washington and was relieved to see this is at least a few blocks away but i still don’t like it and feel exactly as you do about having invested in the neighborhood, etc. (and i don’t care if people curse me out as a gentrifier, etc. as many love to do on this site.) i’m sorry that it’s right on your block. and let’s face it, this isn’t even so-called mixed-income housing; it’s the “affordable” housing portion of a tax break. and “transitioning out of homelessness” means occupants who are not even working class families or something similar. you’re right, it’s definitely the wrong direction for the neighborhood.