Developers Bend Rules and Screw Buyers
We’re supposed to be focusing on other things this week, but wanted to make sure everyone saw Sunday’s article about the C of O quagmire that the buyers of new condos on Spencer Street between Willoughby and Dekalb in Bed Stuy are now in. While this is a disaster for the purchasers who are the…
We’re supposed to be focusing on other things this week, but wanted to make sure everyone saw Sunday’s article about the C of O quagmire that the buyers of new condos on Spencer Street between Willoughby and Dekalb in Bed Stuy are now in. While this is a disaster for the purchasers who are the unwitting victims, we’re glad to see that developers are getting called to task for pulling a bait-and-switch tactic that we drew attention to back in July.
In our post on the South 3rd Street development in Williamsburg, we described how developers will apply to build extra square footage on the premise that it will be used to serve a community purpose (like housing for a religious or educational institution) and then when the project is built the community group will mysteriously not need the space anymore and the developer will sell it on the open market. This has been particularly prevalent in Williamsburg and its environs but obviously it has been happening elsewhere as well.
In this particular case, the villains are a group of developers including Mendel Brach, Moshe Oknin and Moshe Roth and their accomplice is architect Henry Radusky (who has won everyone’s respect and admiration with his pillaging of the South Slope). So now the buyers, who were able to close and get mortgages when the buildings received temporary C of O’s, are stuck in the strange position of being unable to sell their units because the DOB won’t grant permanent C of O’s. Personally, we think the developers should be forced to reimburse everyone for the purchase price plus other incurred expenses and hardship. Then they should be tried criminally. What scum bags.
Do people know of other specific incidents of developers pulling this crap? Let’s out them if we can. Maybe the papers will pick it up.
Caught in the Twilight Zone [NY Times]
South 3rd Street Development [Brownstoner]
More Trouble at Radusky Site [Brownstoner]
Work Officially Stopped on 15th Street [Brownstoner]
Can anyone answer the question of the 10:53 poster? About how to review plans on file with the city, and not just the brief forms on the DoB website? I think I have a Bricolage type nightmare in the works next to my house and I’d like to know how easy it is to get the info so I can nail the developer if he’s exceeding the FAR before it’s too late. I’ve already had to endure an illegal exterior asbestos removal without proper abatement and now have my property showered with lead paint chips from the underlying siding every time the wind blows. So, iceberg and joshK, I think I can safely assume that the owner isn’t really interested in playing by any of the rules and I shouldn’t count on decency and integrity.
Anybody out there looked up plans before? How much of a pain is it?
NO MAN IS AN ICEBURG!
For the very small % of people who own land, and for the even smaller % of people who can afford to develope that land, I salute you iceburg. Glad to see you putting that PhD to use.
Are you the guy i see on late night TV with the??????marks all over your suit
Is there any responsibility with the brokers? Seems a lot of this shoddy construction, bad faith dealing is promoted by a handful of borker firms (Developers Group etc.) Seems like anything sold by these and other folks should have “buyer beware” written all over it.
I hope that Bricolage spends the next few years defending lawsuits. I never thought I would see hear people condoning lying and dishonesty. If that’s the case the poor should steal their food, and people unlucky in love should just kidnap the first appealing person they see on the street.
JoshK,
Apparently there is a pattern of deception with these developers, though. There was never an intent to build the community-purpose housing. It’s plain dishonest and now the buyers are the ones who are screwed. What you are calling “aggressive” is actually unethical at best and illegal at worst, isn’t it?
Henry Radusky is an errand boy to any developer who wants to bulk up their buildings.
What about the homeless shelter/ luxe condos doublecross he pulled in Bed sty a few years back?
Then theres 266 22nd street, a Locicerro/Radusky developed property that is in violation of its C of O. having received permission from DoB to build a 9 story dorm building based on an exclusive lease signed by the Rabbi of The Yeshiva Gedolah Bais Yisroel. The building was built and the Yeshiva never occupied the building. Instead the developer flipped the lease to Methodist Hospital.
Then theres 408 15th St. Spring 2005 Locicero and Radusky try again, same building design same community facility use bonus, same signed lease from the Yeshiva Gedolah Bais Yiseroel. DoB grants permits and approves all plans.
However this time local residents investigate and find that the faculty housing loop hole was closed more than a year prior to the plans being submitted. It was a small group of people who, royally pissed off, by bringing 266 22nd St. to DoB attention, got the permits and plans revoked at the 408 15th St. property before they could put in their foundation. ACCORDING TO THE VILLAGE VOICE, TOM ROBBINS ARTICLE THE YESHIVA DENIES EVER SIGNING ANY LEASES!
NYC has a self certification rule that allows architects to perform all the necessary tests and inspections to insure that the building is being built to code. Submitting false information is fraud. I was dismayed by the Attorney General’s Office lack of urgency, deferring to the DoB to settle the Bed Sty condo’s problem, especially with Radusky’s history.
DoB is overwhelmed by the amount of new construction in the borro. Susan Hinkson is the new Commissioner of the Department of Buildings. Remember the prior commissioner was fired by Guilliani for refusing to issue C of O’s to developers in Williamsburg after he found poorly constructed buildings being built, so she actually has a pretty big set of balls to take on any developer after that.
It is my opinion that now that Radusky is on the DoB’s radar, every project he has done in the last few years will be under investigation. Note to owners of Bricolage Buildings….get a lawyer now.
To clinton hillbilly: I’m also curious about whether there are developers of high quality buildings out there. The house painter I hired said he’s done work in multi-million dollar new condos in Manhattan where the quality & workmanship are inferior to even modest prewar places.
“If you can stomach reading Iceberg’s blog you will see that at least he is consistent in his approach.”
Ooohhh? A manifesto-blog? Count me in!
Sorry Anonymous,
Invoking Godwin’s Law doesn’t refute economic law. Economic regulations can only lead to other undesired market behavior: shortages, glut, higher prices, etc.
Brownsloper,
I’m not trying to suggest that their actions aren’t criminal; ridiculous laws make criminals out of everyone. That isn’t to say the law is justified. Hint: You have a meme called legal positivism which is conflating the issues here.
Eric,
Where did you glean the impression that I harbor sentimentsal feelings for honesty and integrity? I don’t trust developers precisely because they have economic interest to cheat me. However, the perception that government regulations will keep them straight is just that, and naive too.
The only way for them to gain my business under a free market system is by producing high-quality or ultra-efficient housing product. It is also then in their best economic interests to be forward and honest with their customers, with the hope of attaining a well-known regard for their integrity and honesty. This cannot happen under a mixed-economy, where the only incentive they have is to stay one-step ahead of the regulators, which is hardly encouraging to me the consumer.
BTW, this has nothing to do with Ayn Rand and her Objectivist philosophy; this is purely known as praxeology and catallactics.