Action,
Don't be so quick with your glee. The reality is that the BSA is doing what it has always done - Make lawyers rich.
I would bet that in the end they will grant the variance. With some alterations or modifications - of course - so as to make believe that they have done the community a favor.

Posted by: sowhat at November 18, 2009 8:48 PM in response to BSA Smacks Down 580 Carroll Hardship Claim...For Now

cmu,
try 60 units PLUS another 45 up the block (the VUE) and another 100 and change down the block (the Regas on 4th) and you have just increased the population by as much as 7 times what it was 5 years ago. All with no increased infrastructure (sewer, gas, electric, sanitation, etc.)needed toaccommodate all these people.
PS: lets not forget that the parking lot at the VUE has a vacate order for almost 1 year.

Posted by: sowhat at November 18, 2009 8:19 PM in response to Development Watch: 169 16th Street

denton said:
"I actually do have a driveway....I never use it. I park in front of my house.... I can go to Lowes or whatever, come back and my spot is there, waiting for me."

Like I said - NIMBY.
Also - Please don't make assumptions about my (or any ones) political persuasions given that you are obviously one who professes to be what ever suits the situation.
As for Bo. Thanks! He happens to be a neighbor and a friend who I am proud to be compared to.
I will be sure to let him know that you send your regards.

Posted by: sowhat at November 18, 2009 6:49 PM in response to Development Watch: 169 16th Street

IMBY and all -
That's right. Some local nut job fired off 9 rounds from a 40 caliber semi-automatic a few months ago.
Of course nothing was done about it and none of the realators will bother to mention it.
Why tell the truth when it is so much more profitable to sell lies?

Posted by: sowhat at November 18, 2009 5:29 PM in response to Development Watch: 169 16th Street

Those who have a problem with the neighbors complaints about a "Traffic nightmare" are really showing the NIMBY side of themselves.
The fact is that the "provided" parking (for both these 60 and the 45 units @ the VUE)only amounts to a fraction of the new cars that will be moving in. Not to mention the fact that nothing is "Provided" for free.
I would bet that denton and some of the others has a driveway and/or garage. So it's easy for you to poo poo the destruction of others quality of life.
I hope your house gets undermined by one of the slim balls (or their cousins) who have destroyed the lives of others in the nabe. Then we will see how quickly you change your tune.

Posted by: sowhat at November 18, 2009 5:25 PM in response to Development Watch: 169 16th Street

HappyResident,
You are either a shill for Mr's Katz & Katan or have been drinking to much of the water that is leaking into the building.
Regardless - Take note of your own words -
"Our block could use some help but the neighborhood as a whole is up and coming"
and
"I am really glad that my child is going to grow up amongst such wonderful people."
You bought into a block that you are not too happy with but you want it to change to be more to YOUR liking.
And you want us to believe that you have a child and are glad that your child will grow up on a block that "could use some help"
Why should the block (or neighborhood for that matter) change to suit you.
If you had done your homework you would have known what "the block" was like.
The fact is:
You are so full of s**t.
You couldn't care less about the neighbors and have no intention of raising your child in that 10 by 10 apartment that couldn't comfortably fit more than one adult for any extended period of time.
You bought that piece of crap hoping to flip it for a profit and now are stuck with it.
Or (as mentioned) you are a shill.
Keep drinking that water.

Posted by: sowhat at August 16, 2009 7:27 PM in response to Vue in South Slope

The place is a dump and the Realtor (along with the developer) should all be put in jail for the fraud that they are perpetrating on unsuspecting buyer's.

Just read this crap:
"At VUE you will tan in the lush landscaped gardens, workout in the fitness center, and enjoy sunsets on private balconies.

And VUE offers private storage rooms, two elevators and onsite parking. It’s the perfect balance of an artful unique aesthetic… and the freedom to make it your own.

Your life, your vision, your VUE of life!"

The lush landscaped gardens are in the parking lot that is vacated and full of crap, because it is about to fall into the adjacent yards.

The Developers have a trail of law suits and default judgments against them.

The Architect (Radusky not Karl Fisher or any other of the lie's that they have tried to sell) lost his self-certification privileges because of his penchant for violating the building code.

The engineers have been indicted.
One of the contractors (MMG) owes the city over 1 million dollars in fine. And that's only for the violations that they were able to make stick.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out how screwed anyone would be to buy into this hell hole.
The fact that the City has allowed these frauds to take place is a crime against every tax paying citizens.

Posted by: sowhat at August 13, 2009 11:56 AM in response to Vue in South Slope

To those who want "more teeth" (In other words - pass more laws and spend more taxpayer funded dollars to enforce them.)
This plays right into the hands of those who are the most well equipped (financially or otherwise - IE. well connected) to "work the system".

No matter how many laws are passed or how much money is spent to enforce them - nothings will change as long as those with the responsibility to enforce them are:

1 - Not qualified (or incompetent) to match wits with the assortment of lawyers and other professionals that are hired by the real criminals, to find ways to "work the system".

and

2 - Told by their superiors (who are told by there well connected - or financed - friends) how to interpret and enforce the laws.

A few years back "more teeth" were given to DOB
More money was spent. More people were hired. More OT was handed out.

The results - Not much has changed.

Just look at this quote from the article:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

City sends in the big guns

In May 2008, the Buildings Department sicced its Special Enforcement Team on Grasso. The unit was formed in 2007 to "disrupt the business models of those who intentionally or carelessly put the public and workers at risk," the department says.

Some disruption. The team issued Grasso just one $12,000 violation for unsafe work at a tear-down on Staten Island. She then went on to wreak havoc at 11 more building sites, including one on Manhattan Ave. in Morningside Heights where her penalties total a whopping $113,000.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In fact one of the points that was not made in the article (and I challenge Mr. Kates - or anyone- to look into this) is that the amount of money spent on enforcement and collections is disproportionate to the actual intent of the law and it's biggest (and most serious) offenders.

In other words:

More time and money is spent (proportionally) going after and penalizing those less likely to purposefully (and more catastrophically), violate the laws than those who the laws were intended to curtail.

No, we don't need any "more teeth" (laws and wasted money).

That's like saying:

The building (Dept.) is on fire so lets throw some more money into it.

NOT.

We need those that are paid (Handsomely) by our tax dollars to enforce the laws, that are already on the books. To stop wasting our time and money and start to enforce the laws in their true intent.

They have the “Teeth”.

They need to use them on the right piece of meat. Not the little fish.

Be careful what you ask (wish) for.
If we do as they want (give them “more teeth”), the only people who will suffer are those who have been suffering.

Posted by: sowhat at May 18, 2009 7:34 PM in response to Scofflaw Contractors and Developers Thumb Nose at DOB

Polemicist

I am almost tempted to agree with some of what you say - But I have to ask you which minority you speak of.
The fact is that the Rich have managed to buy off the poor which leaves everyone in the middle (the true minority) to pay for everything on both ends.
This is not to say that the poor (who happen to be the majority in this country) have it much better than the middle class, but that they have been paid off to believe that the likes of Mr. Bloomberg are looking out for their best interests. In return they allow for people like Mr. Bloomberg to dictate policy which results in the giving away of trillions of tax dollars (and who pays taxes - not the poor or the rich but the middle class) to billionaires who have run out of ways to steal from the rest of us so now they just tell the government to give them our money outright.
As for the Government services that you mention - Yes much of it is wasted but this is just another form of welfare designed to keep people stupid and appeased. The fact is that with regard to the building code and enforcement (specifically) the rich developers rely on the continued allowances by the DOD to violate the law for their continued Greed.
If the likes of Mr. Bloomberg really wanted to, they could (at any given time) tell the people running the DOB to enforce the law by it's true intent. And if man power is lacking then they should not be giving out permits and C of O's UNTIL the manpower can catch up with the work load.
It's like giving out guns and licenses to your friends and then justifying it by saying that you didn't have the time or man power to do the proper background checks first.
This lack of manpower and resources is nothing more than an excuse for the rich and our politicians to allow for the violations of the laws.
Why is it that there is no shortage of resources and manpower when it comes to giving out parking tickets and such?
But if a developer builds a building that is 5 stories to high - all of a sudden there isn't enough manpower or resources. And lets not forget the amount of money (Tax Dollars - and again Who pays them) that the city spends to justify it's illegal acts of complicity in many of these projects.

Posted by: sowhat at December 9, 2008 9:17 PM in response to Buying Only What they Build

The fact is that Developers (With the help of our DOB) have been taking advantage of a misinterpretation of the building code (Hello DOB) where-by many buildings were given temp C of O's and then occupied without a C of O.
Thus putting the new owners in a quagmire. Then the Developers and there partners in crime (DOB) could use the excuse that to hold back on the C of O would only hurt the "Poor" new owners.
In reality the issuance of these C of O's ends up hurting the new owners even more because then they are left to pick up the pieces from the garbage that the Developers (with the help of the DOB) have created.
Developers shouldn't be allowed to sell and occupy buildings that do not have a C of O. The reality is that in order to continue the Ponzi scheme which they call the Real Estate Market , The DOB continues to screw the new owners.
Just ask some of the people who have bought Condo's in the last 8 or so years and are now caught up in endless legal battles to try to keep from losing there life's savings.
Case in point - 162 16th street.
In yesterday's brownstoner:
http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2008/12/watermarks_at_t.php#comments

Posted by: sowhat at December 9, 2008 2:13 PM in response to Buying Only What they Build

Please allow me to redirect you to a Brownstoner - blog from Feb. 11th 2008

http://www.brownstoner.com/forum/archives/2008/02/anyone_go_to_th.php

I wonder if the last writer ("The VUE did a really good job with the quality - from the flooring to the sound proofing to the appliances.") is one of people who is now complaining about the building.
Like I said previously - I have no sympathy for anyone who can be so arrogant as to think that the neighbors (and not the criminals who sold them the crap) are the enemy.
Get over it - You've been had by known criminals and now you need to start being less arrogant and more open to the sad truth.
What matters is that the truth is being said and not any elitist beliefs about who is saying it .

Posted by: sowhat at December 8, 2008 8:05 PM in response to Watermarks at the Vue

Those people are so screwed.
But you know what - I don't feel sorry for them.
They bought in blindly and did not heed all the warning.
Even after they bought in - the signs were all around.
After all that has been printed about that building and the developer's treatment of the neighbors, all they had to do was ask anyone on the street and I am quite sure they would have been told to "get out while you still have your pants on".
This situation proves that they either - never asked (shame on you) or were too arrogant to listen to the folks who were trying protect them from themselves.
Either way they have only themselves to blame and as long as they stay in bed with the people (DOB and the development team) who perpetrated this lie, they will continue to be screwed.
The way I see it - they, collectively, spent many millions on worthless property.
Property that will most assuredly end up costing them many millions more over time.
Why not put all that money together and sue the DOB and the developer (I'd even add the Realtor - Aguayo & Huebener) for Fraud.
But the first step to any recovery will be their admission that they were idiots to begin with.
By The Way -
Isn't it nice to know that the violations were cleared based on the assurances of the development team.
That is the reason that everything about this building is illegal.
The assurances of a developer and architect who are established liars and the continued culpability of the DOB.
Anyway - Winter is coming and this is only the beginning.
I can't wait for the next round of stupididy.
Anyone else who is thinking of buying into a Katan, Katz, Radusky (might as well add Boymelgreen - Katan's partner & Cousin) building should do beware.

Posted by: sowhat at December 8, 2008 5:21 PM in response to Watermarks at the Vue

I have a simple rule of thumb:

New development + South Slope + Apts still for sale from sponsor = Controversy

If there are any exceptions, I'm not aware of them.

Posted by: slick at August 14, 2009 5:05 PM in response to Vue in South Slope

I live at the Vue and although there have definitely been problems, we could not be happier with our apartment or our decision to buy here. In fact, if given the chance, I would buy here again, even with the knowledge that there are some issues. We've had absolutely no problems with our unit. I have several friends that have also bought in new developments (Williamsburg, Cobble Hill and BK Heights) and unfortunately it seems that these issues tend to come along with new constructions. That being said, we looked at 30 (yes 30!) apartments in the surrounding area and most of what we saw was run down, falling apart, outdated and not worth the $$. Every single person that we've had over to our apartment comments on how beautiful it is (including a few of our architect friends that work in Manhattan). As an added bonus, we couldn't find a nicer group of people than we have in the building...all young, hard working families. I am really glad that my child is going to grow up amongst such wonderful people. Our block could use some help but the neighborhood as a whole is up and coming and has several wonderful mom and pop shops! I suggest you talk to some of the people that live at the Vue and I'm sure you'll hear much of the same.

Posted by: happyresident at August 14, 2009 10:18 PM in response to Vue in South Slope

HappyResident,
You are either a shill for Mr's Katz & Katan or have been drinking to much of the water that is leaking into the building.
Regardless - Take note of your own words -
"Our block could use some help but the neighborhood as a whole is up and coming"
and
"I am really glad that my child is going to grow up amongst such wonderful people."
You bought into a block that you are not too happy with but you want it to change to be more to YOUR liking.
And you want us to believe that you have a child and are glad that your child will grow up on a block that "could use some help"
Why should the block (or neighborhood for that matter) change to suit you.
If you had done your homework you would have known what "the block" was like.
The fact is:
You are so full of s**t.
You couldn't care less about the neighbors and have no intention of raising your child in that 10 by 10 apartment that couldn't comfortably fit more than one adult for any extended period of time.
You bought that piece of crap hoping to flip it for a profit and now are stuck with it.
Or (as mentioned) you are a shill.
Keep drinking that water.

Posted by: sowhat at August 16, 2009 7:27 PM in response to Vue in South Slope