Movement to Preserve Lefferts Place Gem
When 70 Lefferts Place finally sold last summer to a developer, there was a sense of sadness in the community and, especially, on the block that’s been home to the 1860’s Italianate villa-style home for a century and a half. The developer, Christopher Morris, is planning a 7-story, 25-unit condo development for the site. Although…
When 70 Lefferts Place finally sold last summer to a developer, there was a sense of sadness in the community and, especially, on the block that’s been home to the 1860’s Italianate villa-style home for a century and a half. The developer, Christopher Morris, is planning a 7-story, 25-unit condo development for the site. Although neither the block nor the house is landmarked, the block association is making a push to prevent the demolition by spear-heading a last-minute letter-writing drive to LPC. Instructions and addresses for those wishing to participate are on the organization’s website on the link below. Time is of the essence. We’re going to write our letters tonight.
Help Save 70 Lefferts [LeffertsPlace.org] GMAP P*Shark
Civil War Era Gem Facing Wrecking Ball [Brownstoner]
I do not understand the motivation for this even from a profit point of view. The sell out on this site at $550/ft (Current Condo Prices in Clinton Hill)… about $8.8 which leaves this guy in debt for $172,000 after working on this for 3years. At best.. is the market goes up he makes $500K.
With 25 units he is building something like 622 sq ft 1 beds.. they will go in the $300’s.. about $350K… in a really strong market $385K.
There is no viable rental option.. He would have to rent the 622 sq ft units at $2000/mo just to cover the interest and bills (not making any money). I rent a 1000 sq ft beautiful one bed plus den across the street and it’s $1500/mo.
If two houses across the street just sold at $1.5… he could just get a letter of no action and sell two 4000 sq ft townhouse condos with minimal investment and get out of this deal at in a few months with a reasonable profit… few hundred thousand.
There is no way this is going to work even from a financial point of view. They are going to tear that beautiful building down.. get in the ground.. . And figure out that to build anything these days it’s running close to $300/ft. And then they will abandon the project. And we will have a gaping hole in the ground.
Who is advising this guy? I looked at this site. I ran the numbers. They just do not work as a condo project.
Jobs! Affordable Housing! you’re all NIMBY scum! we’re in a land of skyscrapers! go back to the sticks! welcome to the hood!
oh, sorry, wrong discussion. preservation is good! appropriate scale! save the neighborhoods!
-r
i looked at that house when it was on the market 6 or 7 years ago. it was a legal 2 -family at the time. making it into multiple units should not have been alllowed by the building code…did someone get away with something? should that be allowed or condoned?
TheRabble, the place is now empty because the woman who sold it did not renew the leases of the people renting the aparments inside the house so she could sell it to a developer and recognize a huge profit. Get your facts straight.
You obviously do not understand the motivation of those living on this street in the protest over this demolition.
I think it will happen in any event, it’s too late, so we should focus on landmarking the Clinton Hill South Historic District and hope the proposed zoning changes for residential blocks in Clinton Hill and Fort Greene go through too. That way people can feel comfortable with more contextual development on the empty lots while preserving the 19th century streetscapes.
Right on, Anonymous 4:38. The elitists who comment on this blog–and the one who runs it–never hesitate to side with the developers if they want to toss low-rent paying PEOPLE out of their homes, but let them try to tear down an empty house…and we’re all supposed to start writing letters.
Don’t be so mad at the developer. What about the people who sold the place to the developer? And why didn’t someone besides a developer buy it, and, like, put their money where their mouth is?
5:29 you’re right, it is their right to complain its their right to be outraged. that’s their rights, they may exercise them and they have. its HIS right to demolish this building, or save it or sell it for a dollar to a crackhead, he may exercise his right to demolish and he probably will.
Anon 4:38, let me try to understand your point. Are you saying that the new owner of #70 Lefferts place is totally within his right to knock down a beautiful historic home to build cheap condos but the brownstone owners from across the street who have to live and look at this soon be developed POS everyday have no such right to complain and perhaps protect their community from the onslaught of shoddy condo development that’s presently engulfing their entire neighborhood? If you lived in this community you’d be doing everything in your power to save this house. It is the jewel of the neighborhood!
Mr. Morris, at the last LPCA meeting, made various promises to incorporate the façade into the new building. IMHO, his statements were patronizing and disingenuous. Mr. Morris, as the novice developer he is, has absolutely no intention of preserving anything. AND HE KNOWS IT! According to Property Shark, the guy owns a few modest townhouses in the area. He doesn’t have the experience or resources to do this property any justice. He’s simply going to knock it down and build a square POS without any character or redeemable qualities – the type of new condo development that’s sprouting up all over Clinton Hill and Bedford-Stuyvesant. Why should the community stand idle as its most beautiful treasure is destroyed by some rookie developer aimed at squeaking out as much profit as possible from his blind investment? To destroy this home is immoral and I would not trust this man to build a sound and safe building, up to code, that would in any way shape or form live up to the memory of this beautiful house or the community in which it exist. Residents are within THEIR RIGHT to be outraged!
I never said that brownstoner owners were rich, its just a simple fact that everyone can’t own a brownstone and there should be accomodations for those people too. however, what I find most interesting is the arguement that middle and low income families will be misplaced by these condos. how is that even remotely possible? they couldn’t be anymore expensive than owning a brownstone in that neighborhood so what exactly is the argument?
Actually, Anon of 4:38 and 4:42, if you actually read the lefferts place civic association letter, part of the concern is the displacement of middle and low income families and renters. The proposed condo building will serve to speed this process up even more, so your anger is misplaced. Lefferts Place is a tight knit three blocks where most people, new and old residents, know each other by name, or at least by sight, say hello to each other and generally watch out for each other. Prior to selling the house in question, it was used by multiple renters in the various units it was divided into. They were not the rich brownstone owners you are complaining about, and now they no longer live on the block because they were kicked out to make way for new condos.