State to Evict Holdouts in Seven Properties in Atlantic Yards Footprint
You may have thought everyone in the Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park footprint had already moved, but nope, there are a few households still left. The state already seized title from seven of the remaining properties, a few of which are residential, above, and there are at least two families still living in them. One of these…
You may have thought everyone in the Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park footprint had already moved, but nope, there are a few households still left. The state already seized title from seven of the remaining properties, a few of which are residential, above, and there are at least two families still living in them. One of these has a newborn. Also, the three houses at 491-495 Dean Street, above, are good-looking 19th century buildings.
And guess what? The remaining families want equivalent homes somewhere else in Prospect Heights, which would cost about $3,000,000 or so each. The state says they should be satisfied with a $1,500,000 property in Bed Stuy or Crown Heights, said the Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park Report, which attended a hearing on the matter Thursday. One of the owners pointed out his property is worth even more as a development site for a skyscraper.
We were surprised to read all this, knowing that condo owner and anti-Atlantic Yards activist Daniel Goldstein and others got much more for their slighter holdings.
By the way, P.C. Richard and Modell’s will also be condemned, to make way for a 250-foot tower.
What do you think would be fair compensation for the homeowners?
Nearly All in Atlantic Yards Footprint Have Left; State Moves Toward Residential Eviction [AYR]
Photo by AYR
Thank you for enlightening PHR, cedarsider but you shouldn’t have. It will just prompt him to spew more fact-free propaganda. Must say though, you opened him up like a cantelope LOL.
@housenut ha! Spot on re: Modell’s
So sad about my BK and F emminent domain. Is this a hospital , a school a park ?
Similarly, you overlook, what seems a clear commercial rationale for not making a market value offer to residents in phase II: there was no immediate plan to develop that parcel. Further, as FCR had succeeded in condemning the entire footprint prior to breaking ground there
would have been no incentive (certainly not financial) to make offers and outlay capital for property they had effectively condemned already. As you should be aware (you wax lyrical about everything else), the Phase II order of condemnation was entirely procedural, by 9/14 all legal hurdles had long been cleared.
With all due respect, there is a certain schizophrenia to most of what you’ve written in this thread. This theory you’re floating about residents, moving to prospect heights 60 years ago to “wait and see” when they could get a “windfall”from FCR is just – well, silly. To think you wasted all these key strokes and bandwidth on discrediting families that did nothing wrong but assiduously avoided every promise broken and lie FCR told to take these residents homes and cheat our community. If you are schilling for FCR you really ought to do a better job. The sort of tone deafness you displayed in this thread is what sparks the city wide outrage that stalls a project. Please keep it up!
PHR, it’s breathtakingly obvious now, the only thing you don’t find “hard to believe” is FCR propaganda.
This thesis of yours though, that FCR saying something publicly and on more than one occasion makes it true, defies logic. They also said AY will provide 15, 000 construction jobs, 2100 ‘affordable and middle-income’ residential units [at the project site] with another 10 percent set aside for seniors. “Jobs housing hoops” was almost a mantra and then of course there was the 8 acres of open space, mixed-use 15-tower development and we can’t forget the meditation room. LOL. All of these promises were made publicly and on multiple occasions too and not one of them held true. So, as NeoGrec pointed out, these assertions of yours are without factual support.
P.C. Richard and Modell’s are no landmarks, but I will choose them any day vs 25 floors glossy boxes. I don’t understand where and when 4th ave style stops.
Don’t mention it NeoGrec. It’s the least I could do. As I said, both of the families living in these townhouses couldn’t be nicer I couldn’t sit by and let them be maligned in the manner some were attempting in this thread.
You’re very welcome Montrose Morris and you’re absolutely right. The house has been in the family for three generations and the grandson is out there just about every morning watering the plants, sweeping the sidewalks. It truly is a delight walking by there in the morning, particularly in the summer. Crepe myrtle in bloom, birds chirping. They will be missed.
Generally speaking, yes. And there have been ED flops in that regard. But for a project like this, that was a smart bet to make and one that paid off big. That makes plenty of sense. Ultimately, though, my argumenent is a normative one. Still, that aside, it isn’t clear to me what is meant by present day market value. Does “present day” mean the market value the day the check is cut or market value the day that legal proceedings to force a party out commence or market value at the time a first buyout offer is made? That isn’t clear and I haven’t seen strong evidence to support either point (this is a matter of law, and so isn’t really up for much interpretation).
When the value increase at the time condemnation will occur is largely due to the ED domain project, yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. I’ve already explained the rationale behind my thinking in prior posts. We don’t have to agree on this. That’s fine. But that’s my view.