Its Happend in Bklyn...Unsold Condos Become Shelters

and so it begins...

this is a perfect example of a developer over developing for the neighborhood. you can buy a 2 br for under $200K or a house for $400K, why would anyone buy a brand new condo for same as a house???

there will be plenty more of this kind of thing going on, but only in the marginal neighborhoods where condos should not have been built in the first place.

I know that it seems like a win-win for both the homeless and the developer at the moment. But, what are the time limits to live in shelters in NYC? I ask, because what is the incentive to get a job and get out of the shelter, when the shelter is nicer than almost anywhere else in the neighborhood? I have a friend that lives in CH, and his $600 a month studio isn't near as nice as those apartments. Plus, when the city's contract ends in 10 years, who is going to want to buy an apartment in a former homeless shelter?

ab_11218: The developer probably thought he could get people interested in the easy commute. CH is on both the A and the 4 express stops. 30 minutes from Utica to midtown. The commute is great; most parts of CH, however, are not so wonerful.

Should a homeless person opt for a condo in Brooklyn or a brownstone in Harlem ??...decisions..decisions.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/377816-townhouse-136-west-123rd-street-central-harlem-new-york

I wonder if broker Todd Stevens is asking for financial statements from prospective buyers before showing the squatters' quarters.

http://www.urbandigs.com/2009/04/countertrend.html

HDLC, you should start a new thread with that one. Awesome. So what do you think the going rate should be for reduction per squatter? according to Todd's listing, it seems that he thinks each squatter reduced the price by about $200k.

"A midtown view, a brownstone canvass and true profit are three goals you can achieve in your ownership of 136 West 123rd Street. While the area’s most recent sale of a 17 to 18 ft wide townhouse was $1,100,000, we just ask $700,000 for this townhouse with two, non-paying squatters. This is an 18 x 52 built, 18 x 100 lot townhouse."

For sale: Beautiful building in Park Slope - needs minor renovations as previous tenants have ripped out all the copper piping from the walls. Only 3.5% down!

Wow, how terrible for the (greedy) investors, but this was bound to happen. Some of those new developments are in TERRIBLE, terrible areas. The idea of turning them into shelters does not offend me, although I'd be pissed if I had already purchased a unit in those bldgs.

I saw some new B'lyn developments (very nice ones, too) in areas like South Slope, Fort Greene, and Downtown B'lyn, but it was as though they purposefully selected the most economically distressed areas...and they weren't even THAT cheap. Certainly, I saw some homeless around those developments and it would be a smooth transition for those developmental for the homeless to move in...

Here are some I think would be perfect as shelters:

* The VUE: low-ceiling cookie cutters--not even big, in the middle of warehouses, junkyards, and tenements, priced at $800/f...who's going to buy that?

* Suite Sixteen: Ditto, except that these units were actually larger and had higher ceilings (some were even duplexes)...but, still...

* 475 Sterling Place: Not too far from the nicer areas of B'lyn, but surrounded by warehouses, junkyards, tenements, drug dealers, hookers, and (auto) body shops, these units had decent squarefootage but w/ low ceilings. I think the homeless had already moved in there when I paid them a visit. Of course, the security dude was trying to get them out.

It's not too terrible for the developers - did you catch the part in that article that the developers are getting paid $2700/month per unit?

LOL, terrible deal for the city - 2700/month.

"475 Sterling Place...I think the homeless had already moved in there when I paid them a visit. Of course, the security dude was trying to get them out. "

I've looked at new condos and had the broker address schedule for finishing incomplete work in common areas, build to suit particulars for the unit, concerns related to nearby development, etc., but NEVER have I heard anyone say "pay no attention to those homeless people in the living room" and have them shooed away as I take the tour. That would definitely kill the deal for me.

with $2700 per month, the developer is making out very well. i would by a unit for $250K knowing that for the next 10 yrs the gov't will be paying me that.

that $2700 per month includes the costs for the social services, etc., provided by the not-for-profit. too bad they didn't parse out the actual rent number.

aboutready is right -- non-profit is being paid $90/night ($2700 for full occupancy, which doesn't seem to be guaranteed). But only part of that is the rent that the landlord wouldn't disclose. The rest is specified in the article as "social services, housing help and job counseling", and presumably security.

It's an outrage that they're providing free job counseling in this high-unemployment environment. Who needs homeless people stealing jobs from decent people? Damn liberals! j/k

more "liberal crap" from me. sad.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/06/04/2009-06-04_mike_layoff_cuts_wont_hurt_acs_kids.html

I guess Christine Quinn wasn't bluffing. BTW, the president of REBNY lied. Shocker.

"It appears to be the first time a faltering upscale building has found a new purpose as a shelter, said Steven Spinola, president of the Real Estate Board of New York."

In the Rockaways:

"Because they consider their investment already lost, many speculative developers have struck deals with the city to house the formerly homeless in order to recoup at least some money."

http://www.citylimits.org/content/articles/viewarticle.cfm?article_id=3568

Just keep in mind that it is not the city who is paying for it, it is you and me..

You knew this was coming....

And another, this time in Bed Stuy:

http://curbed.com/archives/2009/06/15/another_new_brooklyn_building_becomes_a_homeless_shelter.php

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/brooklyn/2009/06/14/2009-06-14_homeless_sweet_home_bedstuy_residents_furious_over_condo_project_once_slated_as_.html#ixzz0IVXzMldX&D

NIMBY in Bed-Stuy.

I wonder how long the list is of folks rolling over in their graves over that.

see people, I was right all along when I said that lower house prices will detroy the quality of life in NYC. Let's see how much the SE bears like low prices when the condo buildings next door to them becomes halfway houses.

alpine: Low prices are not the reason those condos and others like them did not sell. The piss poor economy, leading to a lack of income to buy them, did. That and the fact they were speculative housing in CH and Bed-Stuy. Not exactly Manhattan.

"see people, I was right all along when I said that lower house prices will detroy the quality of life in NYC. Let's see how much the SE bears like low prices when the condo buildings next door to them becomes halfway houses."

A couple of years ago I was talking with a black Doctor and his wife, both of whom had grown up in Bed-Sty. They were both aghast that younger couples were buying basically crack houses and renovating them into an owners duplex and 2 floor thrus. And they were doing it with little $ down and below market rate 9initially anyway) financing and expecting high rents. they spent the entire first part of their lives struggling to get out of Bed-Sty and could not believe that just to own something "these foolish kids" were headed for disaster.

OK: ruining the quality of life in NY? Let's see: if we put shelters ANYWHERE in NY, it will ruin the quality of life in NY. Let's just shoot all the homeless people then? WHERE THE FUCK SHOULD YOU PUT THIS TYPE OF BUILDING (homeless shelters)?????? It seems they can't go ANYWHERE anymore, because some idiots decided to overpay to live in bad areas and THIS is what's going to do them in, as opposed to their stupid choices.

put the homeless on Governor's Island. Or maybe we can build a nice big shelter on Riker's Island.

I would expect that there will be plenty of more condos that were built in Bed-Sty, Crown Heights, Bushwich, East New York, etc will end up the same. Only the brain dead were buying in those areas during the boom. There are not enough brain dead people in this economy, let alone in NYC to fill up those crack house blocks with yuppies willing to pay top dollar.

I always said that when people buy one of those condos or houses, they should get a few bullit proof vests to go with them at the closing. At least they will get something worth while from the transaction....

But you know, one sees quite a few apt listings that say they are in Prospect Heights, when in fact technically they are in Crown Heights.

And likewise, one sees quite a few listings that claim to be in Clinton Hill, when really they just over the border into Bed-Stuy.

So when you see something like this happen to new luxury construction in Crown Heights, it isn't necessarily confined to that neighborhood. There could be a ripple effect in the "nice" neighborhoods that are oh so near by.....

HDLC you can actually list a property WITH squatters? Amazing. Does this go on everywhere or just NYC?

GraffitiGrammarian: It seems as if you are saying that since brokers lie and put listings that are actually in worse neighborhoods as in better neighborhoods it might mean the reverse can happen as well and maybe some of these condos are actually in better areas than they are being advertised as?

Isn't this really just poetic justice?

How many SROs and stabilized apartments and shelters were turned into high priced RE.

I guess the developers were just doing a public service and taking it away so they could fix it up for them.

that could be, 30yrs, you make a good point. I guess the main thing is, these neighborhood boundaries can get blurry.

Happy Tuesday all,

I called it.

Hey, alpine, sounds like you can finally afford NYC!