Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Senior Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bridge Street urges action to preserve HUD Section 202 senior housing in Brooklyn
Summary
Bridge Street Development Corporation presented a preservation plan Dec. 2 to Brooklyn Borough Board, saying Brooklyn has 83 HUD Section 202 properties and faces a capital shortfall of roughly $2–5 million per building; the group seeks owner outreach, technical assistance and new funding sources to keep units affordable for seniors.
Bridge Street Development Corporation told the Brooklyn Borough Board on Dec. 2 that preserving HUD Section 202 senior housing in Brooklyn requires urgent, coordinated action from owners, elected officials and funders.
"There's no place like home," Gregory Anderson, president and CEO of Bridge Street Development Corporation, told the board as he opened a presentation on the 202 Preservation Project. He said the organization aims to connect owners with financing, technical assistance and planning help so buildings remain affordable and residents can age in place.
Panelists said the HUD Section 202 program — created in 1959 — includes about 246 properties citywide with roughly 26,710 apartments; Brooklyn accounts for the largest share, with 83 properties and about 8,800 apartments. The panel said the waiting list for Section 202 housing in New York City exceeds 200,000 and is roughly five years long.
Panelists described a preservation toolkit that offers building assessments, funding and financial assessments, and technical assistance for owners. "We can give them a property assessment, a funding and financial assessment," a presenter said, adding that the project also aims to build an advocacy coalition that includes groups such as LiveOnNewYork.
On costs, presentation materials and answers in the Q&A estimated a funding shortfall of roughly $2 million to $5 million per building for needed capital repairs and upgrades, with the total need across the city in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Presenters said capital work will be phased and that energy upgrades to meet Local Law 97 goals are part of the scope.
Board members pressed presenters on relocation planning and tenant protections. Panelists said they aim to minimize displacement through phased work (for example, renovating floor by floor and using existing vacant units) and that relocation budgets and utility allowances can be negotiated into project plans when temporary moves are unavoidable. Mark Benoit, on the advisory committee, said the group has construction and relocation specialists available to design tenant‑sensitive approaches.
On ownership and conversions, presenters said many Section 202 properties operate under long‑term HUD regulatory agreements that restrict conversion to market rate and often require oversight such as Attorney General review when federally funded housing is sold or refinanced. Presenters also said some owners are faith‑based or mission‑driven nonprofits that may need technical or leadership support.
The panel detailed early funding sources: a grant from the Congregational Home Legacy Fund, two‑year grants from New York Community Trust and the Robin Hood Foundation, and city council funding through the speaker's initiative in fiscal year 2026. Presenters said they are pursuing additional philanthropic, bank and federal resources and plan a pilot of five to 10 properties to demonstrate feasibility.
Presenters and board members acknowledged uncertainty about federal HUD funding and program changes. Panelists said some approaches — such as raising debt backed by rent increases paid through rental assistance programs — may be affected by federal budget decisions and are working to coordinate with HUD and other agencies.
The panel asked community boards to help by sharing owners' contact information and by using local committee meetings to prioritize senior preservation. "We would love for as many of you to be here, and your respective council members to join us," Gregory Anderson said, noting a follow‑up meeting planned for Dec. 16 and offer to distribute property lists for community boards.
The Brooklyn Borough Board thanked the panel and said staff would follow up on outstanding data requests and next steps. The presentation produced detailed community questions about vacancies, tenant counts, capital cost estimates and owner outreach plans; panelists committed to supplying additional data on tenant counts and the number of senior units in alternative city programs.
