Emergency Demo at 100 Clark Clears Tenants
[nggallery id=”21618″ template=galleryview] After years of neglect, the beautiful brick building at the corner Clark Street and Monroe Place in Brooklyn Heights was partially torn down over the weekend due to conditions that were deemed “imminently perilous to life”; two floors of the 15-unit building were torn down following a 311 call that reported visible…
[nggallery id=”21618″ template=galleryview]
After years of neglect, the beautiful brick building at the corner Clark Street and Monroe Place in Brooklyn Heights was partially torn down over the weekend due to conditions that were deemed “imminently perilous to life”; two floors of the 15-unit building were torn down following a 311 call that reported visible buckling. “It’s been a very, very badly neglected building,” Frank Folisi, landlord of the building next door, told The Post. “Everyone who has owned this building has taken money out of it and not put any money into it. I don’t walk on that side of the street anymore.
The theory over on the Brooklyn Heights Blog is that owner Penson Companies, which bought the building for $3,650,000 in 2006, had a strong financial incentive not to step in sooner to save the building. Why’s that? Because condemnation was the only way to get free and clear of the three remaining rent-stabilized tenants. The marketing document (excerpted on the jump) Penson has been using in recent months to try to sell the building (the price had started at $4.45 million but had recently gotten as low as $3.5 million) reveals that the tenants were paying monthly rents of $550, $617, and $575 and that approved plans had been approved by Landmarks for a rear extension that would have taken the size of the building from 8,000 square feet to 9,750 square feet. So we’re talking about the difference between the building being worth $3.5 million and $10 million. Sound like reason enough to look the other way? Now, many questions remain: What happens to the homeless tenants? Will the rest of the building be torn down? What will Landmarks require for rebuilding? Are there any criminal consequences for this type of neglect? Enquiring minds want to know.
Tenants Flee Buckling Heights Building [NY Post]
Penson to Brooklyn Heights: Drop Dead [Brooklyn Heights Blog]
‘Dereliction of Duty’ in Brooklyn Heights [Brownstoner]
Photos 1-9 by Ali Lovell; 10 by Chris in the Heights
Oh rats, 2:41! I really like the Iron Chef House, but now you’ve given me pause to order from them again. Hopefully they don’t like sushi!
The City and the Hgts Historical Society need to be held accountable for the condition of this building along with Penson.
Back in 2004, the City erected scaffolding…the lights didn’t work and it was allowed to stay up long after the permit had expired and nobody did anything…oh, maybe some tickets were left on the door. I wonder if the City even took down the scaffolding! No work other than to repair what had fallen from the Monroe St. side was ever done.
Please imagine the number of rodents that have been evicted into the neighborhood…
…watch out, Iron Chef! Watch out next door! Rats, mice and soft cuddly squirells are on the way!
Since the City, et al allowed the problem to sit and fester for 4 years before a significant “bulge” made them act, how long will the remains of 100 Clark sit and attract more vermin, homeless,etc.? Answer:until the pretty hi-rise comes!
That building is toast. Top to bottom.
Maybe Scarano will design a nice new “contemporary statement” for that corner. Something in titanium I hope.
12:17 first of all, failure to act has always been considered very differently than an intentional act. Compare first degree murder to involuntary manslaughter. Second, how does an owner know when a building has reached the point where the facade might collapse? If the owner didn’t know shouldn’t he be treated differently than if he did know? So, you may be talking about an owner who did nothing, knew nothing, (perhaps through lack of trying to find out) and then the wall came down. Landlords are not necessarily engineers.
Meanwhile the tenants who live there and pay well under market and pay less than it probably costs to heat their apartments, complain that the landlord should have done more. Well, what actions did they take other than paying their amazingly cheap rent? Did they offer to bear part of the cost of repair? I doubt that.
12:17
you want to criminalize ownership? Karl Marx would have loved you. “ownership is crime”
What does that have to do with the morality and legality of neglecting a building intentionally, 11:57?
Whatever you think of rent control in NYC politically, it should be a CRIME to neglect a building so much it can potentially hurt tenants, passers by, or if it falls down or burns down and takes other buildings with it.
If landlords neglect a building consciously and intentionally they should be charged with 2nd degree murder if someone is killed. They know the potential consequences of their actions or non-action and that it could kill someone, and they do it anyway. That’s not just manslaughter to do that. A drunk driver is sometimes charged with murder if he kills someone, depending on the circumstances. So why not in a situation like this?
Government regulations are OK if they are reasonable and have some connection to reality. The rent regulations in NYC are neither.
This leads to the odd scenario of rental tenants clinging ferociously to buildings that are basically uninhabitable. A squatter’s mentality sets in and that is harmful both to humans and to architecture.
evict all rent control leaches. what is this , socialism? why cant i pay $400 for a 2 bedroom in park slope? my low paying job at blockbuster? i have no motivation to earn more money because i only need to make $550 a month to cover my living expenses. thats why i sit on my stoop all day smoking. i live the easy life. my lower wages also contribute less taxes to the city coffers. let all the go-getting yuppies pay for everything. they are the only responsible people in this world. hell, they can pay for my illegitemate baby tool. suckers! i can just keep screwing up and have no consequences because antiquated liberal laws protect my lazy a*s!
10:29, in other words, we need more regulation to deal with the mess that rent regulation creates. Your argument is so predictable – “trying to create even more regulation, is not going to solve the problem.”