City Planning Approves FAC Project at 575 5th Ave
The Fifth Avenue Committee won the latest battle in the war over the 49-unit supportive housing project it is seeking to build on a municipal parking lot at 575 Fifth Avenue in the South Slope when the New York City Planning Commission blessed the project yesterday. Back in April, Brooklyn Boro Prez Marty Markowitz came…
The Fifth Avenue Committee won the latest battle in the war over the 49-unit supportive housing project it is seeking to build on a municipal parking lot at 575 Fifth Avenue in the South Slope when the New York City Planning Commission blessed the project yesterday. Back in April, Brooklyn Boro Prez Marty Markowitz came out publicly against the project, siding with a certain faction of neighbors who were concerned about the unseemly residents it would bring into the area. FAC addressed this issue in its press release: “The City Planning Commission’s vote in favor of the project is an important step in preserving the diversity in our Park Slope community and ensuring that everyone regardless of race, income or medical history can live with dignity in the neighborhood.” The press release also contained details about the composition of the units: 24 are slotted for formerly homeless people living with mental illness, 5 for formerly homeless individuals living with HIV/AIDS, and 20 for low-income community residents. Next step: A City Council’s Land Use Committee hearing. GMAP
Marty DK’s Fifth Avenue Housing Project [Brownstoner]
City Planning Considers 5th Ave Housing Facility [Brownstoner]
FAC Development at 575 Fifth Avenue [Brownstoner]
ALL THE PEOPLE HERE SUPPORTTING THIS PROJECT ARE MARGINAL, SOCIALLY RESENTFUL PEOPLE WITH LOW BUDGET SOCIALIST MENTALLITY. DON’T BOTHER TO REPLY, I’M NOT INTERESTED IN WHAT YOUR TINY BRAIN CAN PROCESS. GO COLLECT FOOD STAMPS WHICH IS THE WAY YOU LIKE IT (FREELOADERS)
ActionJackson, you wrote:
“FYI, the property was a DOT parking lot…owned by the “government.””
I know that. But I suppose you think since the dawn of Brooklyn it was a DOT parking lot. You can be sure there had been a dilapidated building on that site that was bulldozed after the city took it from the owner who had skipped his property tax bill for 20 years. Those days are past.
You wrote:
“The “government” deemed it underutilized and better utilized through a supportive and affordable housing facility.”
Your intelligence is awesome. The “government” deemed it was under-utilizing its own property and subsequently awarded it to another gvernment entity that will impinge even more on taxpayers. Sounds like Dumb and Dumber to me.
The parking lot required virtually no maintenance or expense. The new facility will generate many bills, both financial and societal.
You wrote:
“The “government” is awarding it to a not for profit with an excellent track record.”
How noble. The government is once again ensuring the under-utility of the property. The facility will be a net drain on city tax revenues. Furthermore, none of the residents will earn taxable incomes and the property will not generate property taxes. Brilliant. Projects that are financial losers should be sited in areas where land prices are lowest. Not in one of Brooklyn’s hottest neighborhoods.
By the way, how about providing some supporting information for your claim that the non-profit organization is as wonderful as you believe.
You wrote:
“As far as “drain tax revenue from the public fisc,” 99.9% of the new market units built in the South Slope fall under the Quality Housing or 421-a tax abatement programs, so guess what “neighborhood for nuts,” the tax payers are getting even more screwed there than by a conversion of property the “government” already owns.”
Not at all. Those who live in the new buildings pay income taxes, they pay for utilities and they contribute to the economic well being of their neighborhood by patronizing local establishments. Moreover, the tax-abatements are not permanent, nor do they eliminate all taxes. And they attract more development to the area.
Fourth Avenue has come a long way, but there’s still some distance to cover. Third Ave and the side streets are next.
Who pays the municipal bills? The mentally ill who need supervision and heavy medication to get through the day? Drug addicts? Mothers with children, no jobs and apartments at 5th & 16th? Or taxpayers?
You wrote:
“Please do some research before spouting your Libertarian rhetoric.”
Research what? How cities pay their bills? I know the answer to that. What it means when deeply troubled people are dropped into a rebounding neighborhood? I’ve seen it many times. They are resented and eventually a move to boot them begins.
There is no neighborhood in the city that seeks facilities like this one. Why is that?
Could it be that the reality is always bad and many people know it? Could it be that part of the decision to use this piece of real estate is based in corruption that will line the pockets of the builder with unwarranted taxpayer funds?
Will the “Re-elect di Blasio Fund” receive a nice chunk of change from those who benefit financially from this idiotic project?
“Instead, this valuable property has been seized for government purposes that will drain tax revenue from the public fisc.”
FYI, the property was a DOT parking lot…owned by the “government.” The “government” deemed it underutilized and better utilized through a supportive and affordable housing facility. The “government” is awarding it to a not for profit with an excellent track record.
As far as “drain tax revenue from the public fisc,” 99.9% of the new market units built in the South Slope fall under the Quality Housing or 421-a tax abatement programs, so guess what “neighborhood for nuts,” the tax payers are getting even more screwed there than by a conversion of property the “government” already owns.
Please do some research before spouting your Libertarian rhetoric. But wait, as stated in your above posts, you don’t live in the South Slope.
The man behind the curtain wrote:
“I hope this project works out as advertised.”
It won’t. Here’s why: the mentally ill and criminals with substance abuse problems are not reliable people. The mentally ill often skip their meds because life is often more exciting when they are in the manic phase of their bi-polar lives. Just ask. They’ll tell you. Schizophrenics also feel more human when their brains are not stupified with various suppressive medications.
Meanwhile, whatever the initial role for this building is, well, it will change. If it’s intended as a temporary site for those on the road to recovery, you can be sure that temporary phase will last until the residents expire of old age or are hauled off to new digs due to criminal activities.
You wrote:
“I hope the FAC keeps all their promises and manages the facility in a professional manner.”
What if they don’t? What recourse exists? Here’s the answer: None.
You wrote:
“It will be interesting to come back here in three years and see what people have to say about this project.”
The neighbors will have plenty of complaints. But most people won’t notice a thing. Thus, they’ll willfully ignore the complaints of the facility’s neighbors.
You wrote:
“I did not support this project and still have my reservations about it but I do trust Bill di Blasio who gave his personal assurances he would stay involved with the process and didn’t dismiss our views as the FAC did.”
What value is there in di Blasio’s “personal assurances?” He’s an elected official who may well lose his office in the next election. Who knows. Maybe his support for inserting criminals and nuts into rebounding neighborhoods will become the pivotal issue in the next election.
Moreover, what motivation initiated the drive to create this facility? It shouldn’t come as news to anyone that the occupants of this facility will not pay taxes or improve the community with their presence. But a market-rate condo building would fill up with tax-paying members of society who would add to life in the community in every way. Instead, this valuable property has been seized for government purposes that will drain tax revenue from the public fisc.
It is not the job of government to find the most expensive strategy for providing services. However, the motives for appropriating this piece of property might involve far more than some bizarre altruism.
man behind the curtain – Wrote:
“That is the democratic process…… I hope the FAC keeps all their promises and manages the facility in a professional manner….. I … still have my reservations about it but I do trust Bill di Blasio who gave his personal assurances he would stay involved with the process and didn’t dismiss our views as the FAC did.”
“democratic process” My ass. Having meetings and discussions with only 3 or 4 people – PLEASE
Keeping promises and working in a professional manner – Is that what you call the way this was handled by 16th st action and deblasio?
Trust – a man who makes decisions based on how they effect 3 people, and won’t be in office in another year.
Dismissed by who? The changes were made by the developer to satisfy your demands – the only people who were dismissed were all the others (business’s etc) who were taken for a ride.
The only people who will get egg on their face are de blasio and those who incited the masses while only looking out for themselves and their own bigoted views.
I was at the meetings and heard all the talk of looking out for the community and the business’s. I supported 16th st action cause I believed that they were community orientated. When all was said and done the only people that they and Mr. De blazio looked out for is the 2 or three instigators.
By the way – I don’t know what curtain you are hiding behind but I don’t think you will be coming out any time soon.
Kielbasa wrote:
“Why did they move the entrance?
To satisfy 3 bigots?
What about the rest of us?
Now the rest of the nabe and the businesses (who the NIMBY’s were so concerned for) will have to suffer so that the idiot’s who live directly across and next to it, can have their way.
If there is any justice they (the NIMBY’s who demanded all the changes) will all end up in the same place as Boymelgreen and Ratface.”
————————————-
You really make me laugh. You and your ilk had no problem with being a NIMBY when it came to private development in this area. You are a hypocrite. If this development wasn’t going to have an impact on the so called bigots then why will it effect the people on 5th Avenue now that the entrance was moved? Make up your mind. I also hate to remind you that there were over 600 signatures on a petition against this project not just the “three bigots”. Many people had real concerns about this project and worked with Councilman di Blasio to get this deal done. We didn’t just sit behind a keyboard hurling insults at our neighbors. You are sadly mistaken if you don’t think we had the resources to kill this project in the NYS courts. There were many people who wanted to go that route and were willing to put their money where their mouth was but for many others it was never a matter of killing the project. It was a matter of wanting more input into the development process. Many of the people on these blogs judged anyone who questioned this project in very harsh ways. The fact of the matter is the direct neighbors wanted assurances the project would be done right. Unlike some people we didn’t give the FAC a blank check to do as they please.
Through negotiation with our Councilman we came to an understanding with the FAC which made the majority of people who had concerns more comfortable with the project. That is the democratic process. The only Nazis I detect are the ones who are so politically correct they have no common sense and have to resort to name calling with anyone who doesn’t share their world view. I hope this project works out as advertised. I hope the FAC keeps all their promises and manages the facility in a professional manner. It will be interesting to come back here in three years and see what people have to say about this project. I did not support this project and still have my reservations about it but I do trust Bill di Blasio who gave his personal assurances he would stay involved with the process and didn’t dismiss our views as the FAC did. The way many community groups in this area have treated their neighbors who had valid concerns has made me reevaluate my opinion of them. I am not implying people had to agree with the point of view of community members who were in opposition to this project but to defame people because they have a differing opinion than yours is not very community minded. In my opinion that was far more ignorant than the people who questioned this project. I purposely signed this post with a name which you may recognize (Because I know “you know who I am”)so the next time you see me in the street you can stop me and remind me I am a bigot. At that time I will tell you what I think of you to your face rather than on this Blog. Lets all hope this project works out well because if it doesn’t a lot of community groups in this area are going to have egg all over their face.
Though this place is being built in the south slope not greenwood heights. When the wind turns you will surely be affected by what is going on downhill.
i think the city council would be handing him an application with a “to the head of the line” indication on the top for a place in this building!!!!