building
Here’s a rumor straight out of The Da Vinci Code…The eight-story pre-war building on the corner of Clermont and Greene has been home to a group of priests for years. According to a tipster who lives nearby, the priests began moving out last week to make room for the building’s new occupants: 155 juvenile delinquents. The Catholic Church reportedly has leased the entire building to the City which obviously feels that Fort Greene is getting too nice. After a neighborhood has spent a couple decades pulling itself up by its heels, why not throw up another roadblock. Anyone have further details?
Update: It appears that the Church is partnering with a non-profit group called ANCHOR to create an urban boarding school, 15 or 20 of whose students will be housed in this building. It’s unclear if the rest of the building will continue to house priests.


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. Stoner, don’t bend on this. Please. These issues are very pertinent and should be discussed and explored. I agree with your post 100%. If true, this is bad news for FG and is devastating for the immediate homes. Why all the PC? Folks spent a lot of money to live in this prime corner and the Church just wiped away $300k of their equity. I wouldn’t take the risk on moving in this section of FG. No way!

    If true, FG residents should do everything in their power to prevent this occurrence: protest, write to local elected officials and definitely sue. Fight with everything you got b/c something this big is going to wreck havoc on the surrounding area. To those who don’t agree with this perspective well don’t tell others to accept this situation unless you’re living next door and it is you, your family and your biggest asset at stake.

  2. As Brownstoner has said before, their perspective on social issues is from a decidedly market perspective, nothing more, nothing less. Context, people, context: It’s not their fault if prisons and detention centers have an impact on real estate values, and it’s fatuous to take them to task for reporting on it or having an opinion about it. And while I agree that it is wise to maintain a certain focus, I personally think it’s great that this blog has become something of a Brooklyn Curbed. It’s the commenters who are pushing Brownstoner beyond its lot lines.

  3. To anon@ 3:22. Race and Class issues cannot be ignored in any debate concerning urban expansion or renewal. It is impossible to sanitize any discussion of architecture in an urban setting thusly. I also think it’s quite unfair to accuse thus blog of class and race baiting at every chance when the brownstone neighborhoods are themselves the focal point of changes in the dynamics of race and class that NYC has experienced since before the arrival of the first European settlers.

  4. Brownstoner,

    Your blog is becoming more and more subjective lately, from your post yesterday regarding Bedstuy, to this.

    I think if you are going to discuss social and economic issues relating to Brooklyn, you should be less opinionated!!

    This blog started out as a great resource highlighting the great aspects of historical brownstone Brooklyn.

    It seems that of late it’s become a forum for what’s wrong with Brooklyn!!

    I think you should go back to your original focus.

    If you want to live in Brooklyn, then contribute to the neighborhoods you live in and stop complaining!!

    Life doesn’t work the way that we want it to, life is about having options and making decisions.

    And for those of you who feel different, why not just buy up Brooklyn, and turn it into everything that it is not!

    Can we get back to brownstones?

  5. Race baiting? That’s ridiculous. Just the opposite. Our position is that any immediate neighbor–regardless of race–would be less than thrilled with this development, if it is in fact true.

1 8 9 10 11 12 14