« Red Hook Containerport to Stay A Look at the (Rejected) House of D Condo-Retail Plan »
February 15, 2008
Goliath Crushes David in Greenwood Heights
Greenwood Heights isn't known as the Wild West of the development world for nothing! A couple of weeks ago, things went badly off track at the site of 227 34th Street, a new seven-unit building squeezing into the lot next to the modest two-story house at 229 34th Street. The offending site was slapped with a Stop Work Order, which is still in effect. The exact offense? "A partial collapse of concrete block parapet wall onto roof of adjacent property causing sever [sic] damage to bldg." The family next door was forced to relocate and, get this, hit with a violation for, we hear, an illegal extension. Ouch! Talk about kicking a man when he's down. If anyone knows more about the details of the accident, please let us know. GMAP
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/3899
Comments
That is a real shame. The Developer should offer to buy the house at market price and give the family a free condo in the building.
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 9:52 AM
Perfect example about how rules that should be enforced for large developments end up hurting the average person.
Posted by: Mrs. Limestone at February 15, 2008 9:54 AM
This is brooklyn- why aren't people finding these developers where they live and beating the crap out of them and knocking their houses down?
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 10:09 AM
i dont see any extensions on the house.....where is it?
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 10:13 AM
I think they use that red car as a bedroom, 10:13. Big no no with the DOB...
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 10:19 AM
Jeeze, I'm going to have to wear a hard hat when I walk around that neighborhood.
Especially with all those red arrows falling from the sky!
But seriously...
"That is a real shame. The Developer should offer to buy the house at market price and give the family a free condo in the building."
Uh, 9:52am, that's kinda the point here. It's no big secret that a common tactic in Bklyn with new infill buildings that's it's very easy to get sloppy with a front end loader or a cement block or two falls from the roof, damaging adjacent property's structural soundness, or in this case taking out half the house.
Then the developer, out of the goodness of his heart, offers to compensate the adjacent property owner by buying their damaged home.
Then knocking it down as well and throwing up either another building or enlarging the footprint of their existing project.
Happened at least 10 times in the South Slope in the past 2 years and continues to happen on 16th Street up to this very day. Just take a walk around. Then there's all those Scarano-related projects in Billyburgh, 'effing up properties left and right and back.
Truly sickening.
Posted by: Action Jackson at February 15, 2008 10:48 AM
not sure i'd call that nabe greenwood heights. isn't that straight up su(nset)pa(ark)?
Posted by: pluvious at February 15, 2008 10:53 AM
34th Street is definitely Sunset Park.
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 11:06 AM
Not to start up the old debate on boundaries on this blog, but this block faces both from 34th Street and 5th Avenue.
If that's not "Greenwood" I'm not sure what is.
Just my 2 cents.
Posted by: Action Jackson at February 15, 2008 11:08 AM
Crap, I meant to say "but this block faces Green-Wood Cemetery both from 34th Street and 5th Avenue."
Now, that makes a wee bit more sense.
Posted by: Action Jackson at February 15, 2008 11:10 AM
This property will be worthless....actually, with that huge hole in the roof and monstrosity next door, this property probably already is worthless. It has more immediate problems that AY.
Posted by: Brooklynnative at February 15, 2008 11:14 AM
The extension is now the open roof to the sky. It is an illegal roof deck.
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 11:18 AM
What the F does AY have to do with any of this Brooklynnative?
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 11:21 AM
would hate to be the unsuspecting buyer who buys in the condos after the physical damage is repaired. "honey, i brought a fruit cake to our new neighbors and they told me to f*@# off". "i told you we should have kept renting in the slope..."
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 11:27 AM
Hey Action, I know that the Scarano-designed "Maze" condo on Humboldt nearly killed its neighbor and caused the house to be condemned. Don't see any new construction though, nor benefit to the developer, who apparently abandoned the project until it was taken up almost 1.5 years later.
What other Scarano project destroyed its neighbor?
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 11:41 AM
If the neighborhood had a clearer sense of identity, a clear name, and clearer boundaries, developers would have a tougher time jerking it around and knocking down it's houses.
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 12:24 PM
This is actually a new trick for an old dog. When contractors attack it's usually from below, undermining and cracking their foundation. Much more subtle than dropping a ton of bricks through their roof. I'm going by the above photo but isn't that masaonry work at least 40' feet above ground without proper sidewalk shed or bridging to protect the persons/property? Scaffolding no where to be seen?
Lancaster has to make a trip out to Brooklyn one day and see first hand what kind of collateral damage these local cowboy contractors are inflicting on the neighbors. These folks in that little house will have to scrape together the funds for the emergency repairs. Hopefully the contractors have insurance. It is not a given.
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 12:30 PM
Why would anyone with a house to themselves even want to live in a multi-unit condo building with strangers? Not to mention next door, and in the house that ate your home? Talk about adding insult to injury!
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 12:31 PM
Why aren't people throwing bricks at the developer?
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 12:37 PM
The new construction needs to be torn down. The ironwork is not square. It's actually listing toward the west, away from the damaged structure. I'm not kidding!
The cinderblocks making up the parapet wall fell over because there was nothing holding them in place. That tells you what 'quality there is in it.
Ms. Lancaster, tear down this wall!
Posted by: guest at February 15, 2008 12:58 PM
Poor dear little house with porch, like a sweet little paralyzed orphan left in his wheelchair in the middle of the Interstate.
Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at February 15, 2008 2:13 PM
I live around the corner (acutally half a block away) from this place). The 'developer' that is building this place actually owns the building to the right and was planning on pulling it down anyway as it was falling apart.
What exactly happened was during those very gusty winds a couple of weeks ago (they were in the 50 mph range) some of the cement blocks from the roof blew over and fell into the rear of the house next door. From what I've heard in the hood noone was really upset but they were all just really happy and thankful that nobody got hurt.
But, this is The Brownstoner blog so I'm sure everyone will think it was intentional and/or some kind of conspiracy. You people need to get over your initial need to attack every developer for every project.
Posted by: guest at February 17, 2008 8:55 PM
The wind didn't tilt the ironwork. Nor can it blow over cinder blocks if they're tied into the structure as they should have been.
Sometimes we get it right on people pretending to be 'developers'.
Posted by: guest at February 17, 2008 9:57 PM
ACTUALLY,
BOTH 8:55 PM AND 9:57 PM ARE RIGHT.
THE TWO PROPERTIES ARE TIED TOGETHER...AND THE FRAME HOUSE IS FALLING DOWN OF ITS ACCORD ALREADY....
HOWEVER, NO REBAR, AS EVIDENCED IN THE PICTURE, = VERY VERY DANGEROUS. VERY LUCKY THAT NO ONE GOT HURT.
STRANGE THING IS, THE APPROVED DRAWINGS ON FILE AT DOB CALL FOR METAL STUD PARAPET....
I TEND TO BLAME THE CONTRACTOR MORE THAN THE DEVELOPER.
PERHAPS CONTRACTORS LICENSE SHOULD BE MORE STRICT...IF YOU AREN'T GOING TO BUILD TO PLANS AND PUT PEOPLES WELFARE ON THE LINE, YOU SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT...
AND NO, I'M NOT THE DEVELOPER...
Posted by: guest at February 18, 2008 8:44 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.