Neglectful Brownstone Owner Under Fire
Back in 2007, a reader posted a “What’s the Deal?” question about the boarded up brownstone in Park Slope. Today, the Brooklyn Paper tackles the topic. Neighbors have been complaining about the eyesore and potential safety hazard at 174 Garfield Place for many years, but now Council Members Lander and Levin are getting into the…
Back in 2007, a reader posted a “What’s the Deal?” question about the boarded up brownstone in Park Slope. Today, the Brooklyn Paper tackles the topic. Neighbors have been complaining about the eyesore and potential safety hazard at 174 Garfield Place for many years, but now Council Members Lander and Levin are getting into the act, calling on the Bank of New York to force the owner, a real estate investor named Peter Saltina, to fix up or get out. “It is within the bank’s power to urge [Saltina] to fix it up, or put it in the hands of a responsible owner,” Lander told The Brooklyn Paper. “We want to turn this building into an asset to our community rather than a hazard.” Saltina responded with the kind of attitude that has endeared him to the community all along: “Let them complain…I’ve been here since 1969 and dealing with these people has made my skin thick.” According the article, Saltina claims to have a verbal agreement to sell the house, though he’s played that card before to no end. In the meantime, someone could get hurt or killed: Apparently big chunks of cement recently fell into the front yard next door. Hopefully the Councilmen can run this jerk out of town.
Neighbors Want to Save Decrepit Building From Owner [Brooklyn Paper]
Creepy Unoccupied House on Garfield? [Brownstoner]
Photo circa 2006 from Property Shark
“Brooklyn real estate and mental illness have always been closely linked.”
I will mention that to my landlady, minard! 😉
Bank cannot commence foreclosure action without there being a default – monetary or otherwise – under the loan documents. The existance of legal action, a lis or even eminent domain proceedings usually (really depends on the docs) isn’t enough to compel a bank to act for fear of lender liability issues.
Brooklyn real estate and mental illness have always been closely linked.
Agreed, cmu! And I basically hate eminent domain.
Funny you mention the Kelo decision, suburbandude. The last thing i read was that the development fell through. It was so unnecessary in the first place.
It runs in the family. look at this times article from 1912. catwoman, yikes! here’s the title
**Dead miser guarded by insane daughter: live apart from all the world for 30 years on parks slope in brooklyn**
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9C06E0DB173CE633A25752C0A9649C946396D6CF
here’s my take. what’s market value for this place?
you have the parcel.
(1) demolition costs – take down the entire structure
(2) build again. where’s a flipper when you need one?
he’s owned since the summer of ’69
divorce around 1990.
existing mortgage of 230k.
lis pendens filed and judgement entered multiple times — don’t know why bony doesn’t foreclose.
next door is 13.3 ft wide; outside dimensions.
there is a long list of violations, obviously, but it seems that the politicians could lean on bony to foreclose.
Now, THERE’S a valid use for eminent domain.
I thought the Kelo decision in New London was a disgrace because occupied single-family homes were condemned in favor of a big developer.
In this case tough, luck on the owner. There should be a law that if a property is blighted and vacant for a period of X number of years, the city should be able to condemn it and pay the owner the FAIR MARKET VALUE of the property. The city then sells it to a developer who is contractually obligated to renovate it in a certain period of time
The owner loses nothing because he gets FAIR MARKET VALUE. And the long-suffering neighbors no longer have to suffer.
While someone may have the “right” to do whatever they want with a property, the don’t have a right to endanger others. This is not an abandoned house at the end of a long road in the woods. It’s in the middle of a residential block with people walking by, and neighbors on both sides who have legit concerns about fire, structural integrity, rodents, trash and possible break-ins and squatters. Hopefully the bank can put pressure on the owner. Somebody needs to.