By Joy Bergmann
Social services agency Volunteers of America is selling its nine-story building at 340 West 85th Street, forcing the relocation of its executive offices and the closure of its Brandon Residence for Women, a 124-room boarding house-style rental for professionals and students since 1953. The sale will allow the nonprofit to continue its good deeds in a more efficient way, a spokesperson said.
Although VOA of Greater New York is a major provider of supportive housing for formerly homeless veterans, and runs dozens of other housing, vocational and health programs, the Brandon Residence residents are not social services clients. They’re tenants in an unusual setting: a women-only SRO offering two meals a day, private room with shared bath, utilities and 24/7 door staff on a quiet block between West End and Riverside Drive. The price? About $1250 a month, a tough-to-replace bargain in an area where even the rent for studios costs $1800-$3500.
“The residents were told of our decision to sell in early March 2016. Since that time, VOA-GNY has worked with our long-term residents, one-on-one, providing them with the comprehensive and compassionate support they need to find safe, affordable and appropriate housing,” says Rachel Weinstein, Vice President and Chief Development & Communications Officer at VOA-GNY. “We are doing everything we can to ensure a smooth and safe transition for them.” Everyone must vacate by March 2017.
The Brandon’s dissolution represents the loss of over 100 affordable housing units on the UWS and the ouster of a go-to resource for single women in transition (or simply on a budget).
Author M. Jan Holton mentioned her time at the Brandon during the early 1980s in her recent book Longing for Home: Forced Displacement and Postures of Hospitality. “By the time I lived there it was home to a wide variety of women and circumstances. Certainly some of us were students, but there were also some long-term elderly residents or working-class immigrants earning low wages who could not afford an apartment in the already competitive New York City market.”
Another writer who lived in the Brandon in 2014 explained in New York magazine why the place mattered: “A room of one’s own. It’s what I need right now, and it’s what the women in this room before me needed.”
A handful of more recent residents posting on Yelp raved about the pancakes, the view and the staff – though the lack of free, in-room WiFi irritated. “It’s kind of a wacky place,” reviewed Jenny B. “But it’s in a nice, safe neighborhood within walking distance to plenty of places. A block to the train.”
The agency says it will reinvest proceeds from a sale into its core services – noting the building is “no longer practical or economical for VOA-GNY.” Cushman & Wakefield is handling the sale, but the property has yet to appear on any of the major commercial real estate sites. “There is no asking price,” says Weinstein. “And all discussions regarding the sale are confidential.”
VOA-GNY joins the growing list of Upper West Side nonprofits looking to cash in on the recent – if fading – real estate boom, including Collegiate School’s sale at 78th and West End Avenue, and the Salvation Army’s sale of the Williams Residence at 95th and West End Avenue, which will compel its elderly residents to move out by the end of 2017.
Yaay! Another stately Upper West Side building to tear down! High rise luxury condos, just like the East Side, here they come! Yaay!!
Down with the old — however fine it may be — and Up Up Up with the new!! Yaay, progress!
And the residents? ICKY! They’re — gasp! — POOR! Out! Out! Go away!
This used to be such a nice neighborhood.
It’s the Historic District – no tearing down anything. Converting to condos – yes, tearing down – no.
Non profits all over NYC are cashing in on the real estate boom. Many with offices on Park Avenue South have or are planning to sell their buildings.
Speaking of the Gramercy Park area the Parkside Evangeline Building was one of the first all female residences to close and sell off the property back in 2010. They got *only* 60 million then, fast forward nearly ten years later that number probably would be double or triple.
Nice article from New York Magazine from last year about the Brandon and other all female residences in NYC.
https://nymag.com/thecut/2015/03/why-i-live-in-an-all-women-boardinghouse.html
It’s kind of a perfect business model for VoA, isn’t it? Eliminate 100+ units of affordable housing…get some big real estate bucks AND 100+ potential new clients in need of decent housing and fast.
What a pity. God forbid people on their own who are working but earn more limited incomes have a safe and dignified place to live in a stable neighborhood.
Non profits are cashing in alright and pocketing that cash with no taxes. When a nonprofit that has enjoyed tax free status on its property decides to sell all of the taxes previously forgiven should come due and the profit on the sale should also be taxed.
Cashing in? You do understand what “not-for-profit” means, right?
If you’re ever feeling curious, you can even look up their tax returns (https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/) and see for yourself.
Don’t know what to call it, but yes “cashing in” does seem to sum things up, regardless of the distasteful connotations.
It does seem every non-profit and their “mother” is seeking to reap the bounty of NYC’s red hot real estate market.
Besides other issues Saint Vincent’s closed because the land that hospital sat upon was worth more as luxury housing than any other use. The Rudin family stepped in fast and took a firm hand to make sure their “investment” was protected and that they beat down any other offer/proposal for the campus. Beth Israel is going largely for the same reasons.
The Missionary Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary just sold a pair of townhouses facing Gramercy Park for nearly 20 million.
https://therealdeal.com/2016/08/23/nuns-sell-two-gramercy-townhouses-listed-for-18-8m/
Pick a non-profit; Salvation Army, Catholic Church, United Cerebral Palsy, Trinity Church, the Episcopalian Church, etc… all have sold off and or are planning to sell properties. Areas like Gramercy Park and the UWS long a location for many non-profit organizations are being hit very hard.
No one is saying these places do not have the right to maximize their holdings as they see fit. However one hopes someone is keeping track of where all these tens or hundreds of millions in proceeds are going. Some but not all non-profits are very top heavy in staff that earn as much or better than their counterparts in the for profit sector.
Ironic that the home of the Volunteers of America is a block from the home of Frank Costanza (aka Jerry Stiller), honoree of the United Volunteers
I bet many of the NIMBY folks in the area who would violently oppose something like this being placed in their neighborhood did not even know it existed.
This building is a rental residence (plus VoA offices). If marketed today as hip, micro-apartments for professionals who would go NIMBY? SRO rentals for working adults and students are micro-apartments without the PR budget.
I meant that if you tried to locate something like this in the neighborhood today, people would be up in arms, as no one wants SROs. But it is already here and was not bothering anyone. I assume it will be converted into much larger apartments. I hope the DOE is factoring this into all of their rezoning projections (being somewhat sarcastic).
Don’t think these sort of female only residences would generate much objection by communities, even on the UWS.
First of all then and now (for the remaining places) those seeking accommodation are very strictly vetted. These are *NOT* welfare/homeless/shelter types of SROs. Many if not most are run along the same 1950’s or even 1940’s rules that make them seem only slightly different from say a convent.
Being these are nearly always places for females who are employed, at school, spinsters and pensioners again you aren’t going to see the same population mix you’d get say at a shelter.
“Being these are nearly always places for females who are employed, at school, spinsters and pensioners”
well here’s a population if people whose lives will quickly change
There is something so wrong about all of this, especially when we are talking about elderly women who have lived all their lives in the city having to find other affordable housing in New York. For someone young with energy, the house hunt process here is stressful. Imagine for those older. Surely as a city we can do better.
“Surely as a city we can do better.”
As a City, yes we could. But “the city” is now just a collection of real estate and other special interests. They, of course, feed off “the people of the city”.
dannyboy, you’re feeding off everybody else with your rent controlled apartment.
Stop lecturing everybody about how greedy they are until you pay your fair share of expenses.
Stop sponging off hard working taxpayers!
Jose, let’s start with the understanding that Shamir is wrong. Using wrong facts results in bad communications.
Do you understand that?
Then you compound that by presenting your own wrong facts. So now you’re conclusion is 200% WRONG. Can’t beat that.
Jose, I am not surprised that you admite Trump’s communications skills as you both use lies as weapons.
Yes, Trump is an excellent communicator. You and I and many others might disagree with him, but he has convinced millions of Americans to buy into his campaign. He stands for nothing of substance and is an unethical con man but he has convinced them to vote for him and rally behind him. He is a master marketer and communicator. That is part of what is so scary about him.
seriously? you think Donald Trump is an “excellent communicator”? doesn’t presenting fact instead of fiction and/or imagination come into play when you consider someone’s communication skills?
There is a big difference between wrong facts and poorly communicated facts – a brilliant man such as you should know that. For instance, Donald Trump, who you seem to emulate so often, often conveys wrong facts, but even his biggest detractor (such as myself and most others on the UWS) would have to admit he is an excellent communicator. Please stop engaging in wars of semantics. And since you seem to have such strong opinions on how to fix the world, why don’t you get out there and do it rather than wasting your time harassing people on WSR?
Shamir, you’re feeding off everybody else with your Comments on West Side Rag.
Stop lecturing everybody about anything until you develop the communication skills to, well communicate.
Stop sponging off those who think before they write!
I see no problem in Shamir’s communication skills. You might disagree with their message but it was very clearly communicated. As usual, rather than trying to refute someone’s point, you nit pick on the minutia of their comment, thus proving their point. I weep for the students who had you as a teacher, though I have a feeling you spent your career in a rubber room.
“The residents were told of our decision to sell in early March 2016. Since that time, VOA-GNY has worked with our long-term residents, one-on-one, providing them with the comprehensive and compassionate support they need to find safe, affordable and appropriate housing,”
does this mean that they give them the thousand bucks a month that they’ll need to live?
This is a real “human” tragedy. I have personal experience with young women who need a safe home coming to NYC for career choices, and who can’t afford “TRUMP RENT.” This place, along with Evangeline has been a Godsend. I do hope the sponsors have some reasonable explanation for putting the young and the less-young “at the mercy of the open market.” With all that that term implies.
These “young women who need a safe home” will no longer have the safety of the Brandon Residence after March. That is UNSAFE for them.
Whomever is selling this property is only concerned about the money they will get. They could care less about the women in this building. its about money, its always about money. if you don’t have money don’t live in the most expensive city in the entire world. why is this a shocker. this is a city for lawyers, bankers and brokers. end of story.
If these people can afford $1250 a month in rent they can find apartments in other parts of NYC. Are they too good for the Bronx? Two of them could double up and move somewhere for $2500 a month?
The $1250/mo. also covers two meals a day and utilities, plus access to a TV and a few other modest pleasures of life.
I’m trying to think of what kind of miserable human being would begrudge a woman in her 50s the chance to stay in the 200-sq-ft home she’s lived in for years. Capitalism has rotted your character straight through.
While the situation is sad all way around, the young are resilient and can (hopefully) find other options for housing. It is the seniors you want to feel sorry about.
All over NYC from apartments or a room in small/multi-family homes (not RC or RS), to various residences places are selling up and telling the elderly they’ve got to go.
Think many do not know that there is a sizable population of New Yorkers (mostly seniors) living in rooms and or apartments that are basically month to month rentals. This was the common way of finding housing before and or just after WWII and is the reason for instance why rent controlled apartments (IIRC) do not often have leases.
If you are >50 years old and not living in a RC or RS protected unit, there is little to nil stopping a property owner from simply giving you thirty days notice to hit the bricks. As more brownstones/townhouses and other private residences are being purchased and turned back into single family housing, you are seeing more and more seniors literally being kicked onto the streets.
Lovely. Where will these women go? Sounds like corporate doublespeak: “The sale will allow the nonprofit to continue its good deeds in a more efficient way”
” . . . providing them with the comprehensive and compassionate support they need to find safe, affordable and appropriate housing,”“We are doing everything we can to ensure a smooth and safe transition for them.”
Though numbers are rapidly dwindling there are still a few single sex residences in Manhattan.
Depending upon how much juice VOA has they can also try working with NYC to get at least the older residents into NYCHA/City subsidized senior housing. Though the waiting list for such units is long.
This is almost directly across the “donut hole” from us. (We’re on north side of 84th.) I know a woman who lives there, and it will indeed be a loss for the neighborhood. Socioeconomic homogeneity means less vibrancy in my book.