Illegal Hotel in Park Slope
What can be done about illegal brownstone conversions into hotels/inns in the neighborhood? There is one innkeeper in the name with three properties that are not registered as SRO’s with the DOB. It attracts quite a lot of transients to our normally quiet neighborhood and blocks our street every morning for airport taxis. It’s a…
What can be done about illegal brownstone conversions into hotels/inns in the neighborhood? There is one innkeeper in the name with three properties that are not registered as SRO’s with the DOB. It attracts quite a lot of transients to our normally quiet neighborhood and blocks our street every morning for airport taxis. It’s a shame these homes aren’t available for rent/sale to residents and it is hurting our quality of life. Does the city crack down on these illegal conversions or is there an agency to report this to?
makes sense now. Coop. nuf said.
Amber321,
Glad to hear your concerns were addressed.
Your interpretation of everyone else but you is humorous.
Wow, an amazing amount of commentators are actually applauding this scofflaw. It shines a light on how far each of you would go to save a few dollars, skirt the law and ignore the community at large. Cheers to your moral ambiguity!
As previously stated, if these hotels were legal, everyone I’ve spoken to would welcome the new business it brings to the neighborhood. We WANT this kind of business coming to local mom and pop shops. We have tried numerously reaching out to the owner. He continuously ignores the letters, voicemails and flyers.
Regardless, every other commentator who gave tangible advice has actually helped the situation! Inspectors came by today and guests are no longer allowed until the owners pay fines and change their Certificates of Occupancy. So, thanks Brownstoners for helping keep NYC safe and free of scofflaws.
Amber321, the new short term rental ban that goes into effect in May only applies to buildings with five or more units, so the two bldgs with 3 apts each won’t be in violation of it (though, again, they may not be collecting/paying sales and hotel/occupancy taxes as required)…
stuyvesantheights,
amen. why are there so many laws passed recently that benefit industries and business that are heavily controlled by union labor? hummm.
The assumption here seems to be that the owner is a slumlord profiteer, owning three buildings and all (gasp), and that the “transients” are unruly, raucous, ne’er-do-wells.
However, it’s possible that the owner may have bought the properties as an investment, intending to lease apartments to long term renters, but since the collapse of the market 2 years back, it simply isn’t profitable enough to pay their pre-2008 mortgage.
This is the case with many vacation rental owners in the city. For many, the pre-2008 rent levels just barely paid a proportionate share of the mortgage, basically subsidizing the ownership of the building until either rents, property values, or inflation rise to a point where it becomes profitable. However, since rents plummeted in 2008 (and have yet to return), it would cost more to own than the income they bring in.
The law that passed in May was heavily written and lobbied for by the hotel industry and shouldn’t be seen as a populist “quality of life” protection, but as a policy bought by an industry trying to manipulate market in it’s favor.
So the simple question is: would you rather have three foreclosed properties on you block?
Personally, I would prefer the European tourist families who mostly comprise the vacation rental population. They tend to be considerate, conscientious, educated and reasonable. They also tend to have exchange rates working in their favor, and therefore spend money in the neighborhood. Even the younger “backpacker” types tend to be people who are traveling with friends and are more interested in seeing the statue of liberty than causing trouble. Oh yeah, and the backpackers tend to eat out more and spend MORE money at local businesses than the families.
Stained furniture? Wow.
Thank you JohnnyPump, rh, DIBS, *Rob*, snowman, Aristocrat, etc. Also put me in the ‘quit yer whining’ category.
So righteous, Amber321(etc), and moral too! You leap from taxis to taxes– and sound too much like a disingenuous soapbox rant.
A greedy ghost who collects “nightly” from his B&B–nightly but is never there? Really?? If this is a firetrap (“burned luggage”–OMG, there was a fire in attached brownstone Pk Slope? Really??) call the NYFD as well. It’s “a shame these homes aren’t available for rent/sale to residents”– actually, they were. He bought them first. Have you tried to buy or rent one of these homes from him?? Um, you forgot to mention that part–
So, lodge your complaint(s), form your block assoc’n, get to know your local officials and, even, this owner. If this IS a slum lord, you/r neighborhood assoc’n, (once formed), can ‘scare’ him into compliance. Or, you can be a BIG thorn in his side, then, maybe you’ll even be effective.
It’s so easy to say ‘scooped up’; but not so easy to do. But then, hey, maybe you can do a better job?
I’m a little confused. Aside from “taxis piling up in the street” what *real* annoyance are you experiencing? Again, what real, tangible annoyance, aside from the taxis are you getting?
The comments about “bedbugs, leaky roof, pocket lining” seem to indicate some level of bitterness, and in my opinion don’t help resolve the “taxi” problem. Now, if this is all about being right, and telling people what they should be doing then it’s a different story.
Frankly, it’s not a perfect world, and why on earth would someone care whether an owner pays its property taxes or not? It’s their business after all no? It doesn’t bother anyone does it?