Hope for Notorious Slope Building?
We stumbled across an interesting tidbit of information browsing last month’s CB6 minutes: “Chairperson Kummer informed that Board that he recently met with Council Member Steven Levin…He was very pleased to hear that the Council Member was most receptive to our need to put our heads together to come up with a way to motivate…
We stumbled across an interesting tidbit of information browsing last month’s CB6 minutes: “Chairperson Kummer informed that Board that he recently met with Council Member Steven Levin…He was very pleased to hear that the Council Member was most receptive to our need to put our heads together to come up with a way to motivate property owners and developers to make their properties safe and remove blighted conditions from our community. It was reassuring to hear that their office was already in touch with the owner of 187 7th Avenue at the corner of 2nd Street, which has sadly become a poster child for exactly this type of challenging situation.” We spoke with Council Member Levin’s rep Hope Reichbach, who confirmed she’s been in touch with the property owners. Reichbach said the “owners seem open to start a conversation and move forward with the site.” Right now talks are very preliminary and no action has been taken thus far. Options with the long-blighted property include assistance for the owners to make necessary repairs or marketing it to a private buyer. These options, however, are entirely dependent on how discussions go with CB6, local politicians, the community, and the owners of 187 7th. Last month a listing popped up advertising the availability of the building’s ground-floor space.
Will Infamous Slope Ruin be Reborn? [Brownstoner]
Doings at the Dilapidated 7th Ave & 2nd St Building? [Brownstoner] GMAP
Holy naive Batman!
Yeah sure-the owner just needed a kind word from a low level political hack and all would be rectified!
Give me a break – the only hope here is for the DOB to slap the building with tons of (readily apparent) violations, and then when the building owner fails to remediate; fix the building themselves under something like the Alternative Enforcement Program. Once the owner if forced to pay $, they will likely sell or develop the building.
I am sure this Hope Reichbach is very nice (Judge Reichbach’s daughter I am guessing) but clearly she is not too experienced in real life
“I happen to think that if someone is willfully neglecting their property, waiting for the neighborhood to improve before spending money, or waiting for nature to do the job of a demo company, especially in the case of landmarked properties, then the city should be able to force a sale, or take the property. ”
that’s a very slippery slope
Every time this topic comes up, whether in regard to this, or another building, the same arguments come up. If a building owner is practicing “demolition by neglect” of a landmarked, or even unlandmarked building, is it within his/her “rights” to do that? Should the city, in order to protect the populace, be able to seize the building? Or does an owner have the right to “do whatever they damn well please with their property”, as often gets written here?
I happen to think that if someone is willfully neglecting their property, waiting for the neighborhood to improve before spending money, or waiting for nature to do the job of a demo company, especially in the case of landmarked properties, then the city should be able to force a sale, or take the property.
If someone is in economic hardship, and is trying to keep the property up, but just can’t, that is a different story, and they should be able to access funds/grants/loans or some kind of program. That’s a totally different story than some of these properties that are just being warehoused because someone is playing the market, or just doesn’t give a damn. When it affects public safety, something should be able to be done, before someone gets hurt.
I can think of several buildings in my neighborhood that people have expressed great interest in buying, but the owners, some of whom are LLC’s and shell companies, can’t be reached, don’t return calls, and are just sitting there, paying the taxes in some cases, and letting their buildings rot. It’s certainly not good for the neighborhood, is prevented the needed development of the area, and costing us a better tax base, and homes for people who need them, albeit on a relatively small scale. But even if we’re only talking 20 new families, that’s 40 or so new consumers who could be buying goods and services in the neighborhood, and several buildings that go from looking like Dresden after the war, to being part of a vibrant and attractive neighborhood.
can’t believe councilperson is falling for “opening a conversation” — what a rube.
This conversation is been going on for longer than he’s been around.
There is an overriding issue of lawsuits and countersuits, mentioned in many previous threads, yet repeatedly unmentioned by Brownstoner in successive threads.
WTF, now they are able to get in touch with the owners????????
You gotta be kidding???? Where were the owners all these years???? hiding under a rock, now they are taking phone calls.
I wish this building would have burnt down to the ground and just weeds grew on the property…..
Me alone has made about 100 calls to 311, but obviously nothing was done, and I am sure I wasn’t the only one who has made these calls.
I guess the City was just waiting for glass to fall out of the windows and kill someone.
Isn’t there an overriding issue regarding the sanity of the owners?
im surprised there are 3 of these buildings (that i know of) in a place like park slope. the other i know is on berkeley b/w 5th and 6th. how many are in other neighborhoods i wonder
I love that building, but it always seemed like a victim of the “Detroit Syndrome” where beautiful buildings are left to rot until they pretty much collapse onto themselves – or someone sets them on fire.