In total, three properties on the east side of Second Avenue between Second Street and Third Street are coming down.
The former La Salle annex was first...
As previously reported, Gemini Rosemont Development has plans for an 11-story mixed-use building for this newly created parcel.
According to the new building work permit still awaiting approval by the city, the development will feature 88 residences (condos?) and 9,600 square feet for retail.
Last year, Gemini Rosemont bought the former La Salle annex at 38 Second Ave. and Second Street. The $14.5 million purchase of the four-story building was the third of three contiguous plots that they acquired. The Los Angeles-based commercial real estate investment company closed on 42-44 Second Ave. and 46-48 Second Ave. (the former Church of the Nativity) in March 2020 for $40 million.
The Church of the Nativity closed after service on July 31, 2015, merging with Most Holy Redeemer on Third Street. The Cooper Square Community Land Trust had explored buying the former Church of the Nativity to use as low-income housing.
12 comments:
So they take away three properties for one?
This may not be the tallest building in the neighborhood but it still has a massive footprint. Rich people 1, the rest of us 0
Terrible.
Check out the website for Fogerty Finger Architecture, the firm designing this. It doesn't get blander. Expect another ugly, boring, unimaginative, eyesore blighting our neighborhood. Why do these developers, when given the opportunity to shape the future, always fail us with their lame provincialism and lack of taste? It is infuriating. This is going to be a another ugly box like the ones found in industrialparks near airports across middle America.
Don’t forget the several stop work orders that have already taken place because of safety issues.
Take? These properties were purchased for massive amounts of money. The sellers made a lot of money. Nothing was taken.
@10:49am: So as long as the buyers & sellers made out well, that's all that matters?
No: what has been taken is the low-rise nature of the area, and the solid & beautiful architecture of the buildings that were destroyed. What else has been taken is the possibility of affordable housing in this area. EVERYTHING has been taken, IMO, by heedless greedy people whose taste runs to fugly glass buildings.
Why didnt housing providers buy the buildings? Why did the sellers take these peoples money? It takes two to tango. Affordable meaning what exactly? Many old buildings have terrible plumbing and wiring. They arent wheelchair accessible. The floors are uneven. They arent green certified. You cant stay low rise and not expand the housing stock and claim to care about affordable housing.
trying to turn Manhattan into Santa Monica - as if!
Great more $4,000 a month apartments with constantly vacant ground floor commercial storefronts. Just what the neighborhood needs.
thought that Community boards and elected officials can do something about these high ticket high rises proliferating in one area but doesn't seem like they do much to prevent it bloody hell
less transient rental buildings, Genuinely Affordable long term Housing Now!
October 13, 2021 at 1:59 PM
Because New Yorkers can't even afford it anymore. What are we supposed to do, the ones who've been here since day one that at the time had been trying to just afford living here, are not bought out by people who've been doing this same thing in underdeveloped neighborhoods before us? Shit, if we had known we could do this, we would have, but that's exactly how gentrification starts. Keep the people from the neighborhood down, then sweep them out as hard as you can. If we had known, we'd keep the establishment. You think we want these fucking remote working coffee drinking 4am wooing Wisconsin kids here? 15 years ago these type of people were afraid to cross Ave A, we simply had to. Now it's all peechy keen. We endured a lot to live here, and the only thing that drives us out is money.
Post a Comment