New York Shitty Video & Photos Du Jour: On The Waterfront

Today since the weather is amenable, I decided to see what’s happening in far north ‘Point. After revisiting my favorite urban artifact (as seen above, she can be found on Commercial Street not terribly far from the kitty condoplex) I swung over to the Manhattan Avenue Kayak Launch.

First, I encountered this. I do not know when this happened. But it did.

I was stunned at how many boats were moored, illegally I’ll add, on the Queens side of the creek. I have it on excellent intelligence that yes, some of these boats are being pressed into service as residences. Residences on Newtown Creek. Please take a moment to mull this one over, gentle readers.

I do know when this happened: June 9th, 2013. As you can see it has yet to be repaired. No one seems to know if, much less when, this will come to pass. That seems to be the “Greenpoint Way” nowadays.

I was rather distressed to see this: a tree in a clear state of distress. Onward I walked.

No exploration of the utter absurdity that is the Greenpoint waterfront is complete without a visit to the North Brooklyn Boat Club.

Lest any of you are wondering what this is, it is the “Ed Shed”. The “NBBC” (via Open Space Alliance North Brooklyn— remember the latter handles money for the previous) secured a $25,000 grant for this educational facility. Yes, you just read me correctly. This structure will feature a “Sewer In A Suitcase”, material/date about water quality and various art projects for the edification of school groups.

I found this rather large vessel moored to the west curious— but not as curious as…

this one which is affixed to the premises of the Department of Transportation directly under the Pulaski Bridge. Is this legal? No, it probably is not. While we’re on the subject of questionable legality, 51 Ash Street (the premises of the North Brooklyn Boat Club and the new location of the Greenpoint Boathouse) appears to have an al fresco kitchen…

… replete with a barbecue pit…

and “kitchen sink”.

Note that this fixture does appear to be fully functional— and begs a number of questions:

  1. Where is the water coming from? (Educated guess: 49 Ash Street).
  2. Were the proper permits filed to do this? (Educated guess: No.)
  3. How is it that an “educational facility” located on private property (which is under lock and key) can receive a $25,000 grant (and assistance from our local parks conservancy group) and public park whose fence was seriously damaged ten months ago is seemingly not worthy of attention— much less the funding— required to conduct repairs and routine maintenance?

Anyone?

From The New York Shitty Inbox, Part IV: A Word From The 94 Precinct

Although this has gotten a nice clip of attention elsewhere I feel compelled to pass it along here anyway:

Police are asking for the public’s assistance in locating two (2) male whites wanted in connection with twelve (12) burglaries that occurred in the 94 Precinct.

The suspects forcibly enter commercial establishments by gaining entry through the street level entrances, remove unknown amounts of USC from cash registers, and flee in a minivan.

Incident #1 – Between approximately 0400 hours and 1000 hours on Tuesday, June 18, 2013 at 158 Norman Ave. (Connie’s).

Incident #2 – Between approximately 0300 hours and 0630 hours on Friday, June 28, 2013 at 160 Franklin St. (Mrs. Kim’s).

Incident #3 – Between approximately 1700 hours on Tuesday, July 2, 2013 and approximately 0340 hours on Wednesday, July 3, 2013 at 224 Franklin St. (TBD Bar).

Incident #4 – Between approximately 0057 hours and 0300 hours on Wednesday, July 3, 2013 at 457 Graham Ave. (Grandma Rose’s).

Incident #5 – Between approximately 0437 hours and 0500 hours on Sunday, July 21, 2013 at 134 Kingsland Ave. (One Stop Beer Shop).

Incident #6 – Between approximately 2300 hours on Sunday, July 21, 2013 and approximately 0630 hours on Monday, July 22, 2013 at 94 Franklin St. (Cookie Road).

Incident #7 – Between approximately 0153 hours and 156 hours on Monday, July 22, 2013 at 257 Driggs Ave. (Freddy Food Market).

Incident #8 – At approximately 0533 hours on Monday, July 22, 2013 at 579 Meeker Ave. (Boulevard Tavern).

Incident #9 – At approximately 0309 hours on Friday, July 26, 2013 at 125 Wythe Ave. (Fat Goose).

Incident #10 – Between approximately 2300 hours on Thursday, July 25, 2013 and 0600 hours on Friday, July 26, 2013 at 103 N. 3 St. (Modca).

Incident #11 – At approximately 0150 hours on 133 Roebling St. (Osilo Coffee Shop).

Incident #12 – Between approximately 2000 hours on Thursday, July 25, 2013 and approximately 0930 hours on Friday, July 26, 2013 at 183 Norman Ave. (Ameenas Florist).

See attached video (captured during Incident #8).

Anyone with information is asked to call Crime Stoppers at (800) 577-TIPS (8477). The public can also submit their tips by logging onto Crime Stoppers’ website at www.nypdcrimestoppers.com or by texting their tips to CRIMES (274637), then enter TIP577.

All calls are strictly confidential.

From The New York Shitty Inbox: A Word From Stephen Pierson

piersonNYS

I know what a lot of you are thinking, fellow Garden Spotters:

Who the hell is this guy?

Well, registered Democrats of the 33rd City Council District listen-up. He’s running against “our” incumbent: Steve Levin. And here’s what he has to say to us. Actually, Mr. Pierson wants to hear from us— which is even better. I do not recall Mr. Levin doing this. But I am getting ahead of myself…

Dear North Brooklynites,

pierson2My name is Stephen Pierson and I am running (as a Democrat) for City Council in our district (the 33rd) against the incumbent, Steve Levin. The election is September 10. I am a 15-year Brooklyn resident, a CB2 member, a (very lucky) husband, the father of a two-year-old daughter (with another on the way), and the Director of a nonprofit that runs an after-school tutoring program for at-risk youth and produces several arts/literary publications.

For too long I’ve watched with dismay as our local politicians cut backroom deals that benefit themselves at the expense of our community. Steve Levin is the very embodiment of this unethical culture and represents the continuation of Vito Lopez’s dynasty. His symbiotic relationship with Vito—which dates back to his time as Vito’s Chief of Staff—has had been detrimental to our community. Among other things, Levin has taken money away from North Brooklyn, sending over six million of our tax dollars out of the 33rd District to Vito’s corrupt nonprofit.

North Brooklyn deserves better. Getting functional toilet seats installed in McCarren Park shouldn’t have to be the job of crusading bloggers.

Over the course of this campaign, I’ve spoken to hundreds of Greenpoint residents, attended dozens of meetings, and spent many mornings at G train subway stops and at the India Street Ferry terminal. Drawing on these (and my 15 years in Brooklyn), here are but a few proposals towards a better North Brooklyn:

(1) (OVER)DEVELOPMENT:

  • Ensure that developers build sufficient infrastructure for the rest of the community that they impact. The Bayard St. condo developments should serve as a warning: I’ve spoken to numerous Bayard St-area residents—people who have lived there for decades without problem—who suddenly, since the condo constructions, find their basements flooding with every big rain storm, costing them thousands of dollars in damages. Current residents shouldn’t have to pay for developers’ (and politicians’) shortsightedness regarding infrastructure. I will also work with the City Council to explore transportation impact fees to be paid by developers.
  • Ensure that the right numbers and types of affordable units are built at Greenpoint Landing and 77 Commercial St. The memorandums-of-understanding (MOUs) that promise roughly 25% affordable units at both need to be legally binding (for once), and need to have significant financial penalties built in that compel these developers to follow through on their promises. Furthermore, building 50% of its affordable units at 80-to-120% AMI, as Greenpoint Landing proposes, is neither acceptable nor truly “affordable.” We need to fight for more 40-to-80% AMI units.
  • Additionally, these MOUs should provide that a substantial percentage of these affordable units will be guaranteed for local residents.
  • And note that this assumes that Greenpoint Landing and 77 Commercial St. will proceed as planned. I do believe that there is still room–and much reason–to fight for downzoning on the waterfront to prevent this rampant over-development.

(2) TRANSPORTATION

  • Better G-train service. Period. As a member of the Riders Alliance, I have long helped advocate for this. The MTA needs to fully and immediately implement all the recommended changes contained in their just-completed Full Line Review.
  • More frequent ferry service during peak hours. Service every 20 minutes during rush hours isn’t good enough. And it certainly won’t be good enough as the waterfront becomes significantly more populated over the next several years.
  • Strongly support Assemblyman Lentol’s proposed dedicated bike lane on the Pulaski Bridge, and study the construction of a dedicated bike/pedestrian bridge that runs parallel to the Pulaski. The recently-completed DOT study that suggests replacing a lane of car traffic on the Pulaski with a dedicated bike lane is a large step in the right direction. However, I do worry that it doesn’t sufficiently account for near-future surges in traffic that will accompany North Brooklyn waterfront development. With Long Island City looking to become the next big tech/startup hub, we may need a dedicated bike commuting route that doesn’t impact the Pulaski. I would advocate for a feasibility study, jointly funded by Brooklyn and Queens developers (as the building of such a bridge would also serve their interests).
  • Bring Bike Share to Greenpoint ASAP. While this needs to be implemented responsibly, in conjunction with the street-facing needs of local businesses, I strongly believe that Greenpoint significantly benefits from Bike Share—both by providing Greenpoint residents with more transportation options, and by making it easier for non-Greenpoint residents to visit Greenpoint and positively impact local businesses.
  • Enforce existing truck routing laws to decrease truck traffic in North Brooklyn. Currently, the BQE is the only legal “through truck route” that passes through North Brooklyn. All other truck-legal streets (like McGuinness Blvd., Greenpoint Ave, and Kent Ave) only allow for trucks that make local deliveries. Far too many through-trucks cut through North Brooklyn to either avoid BQE traffic or circumvent the LIE/BQE junction. This is illegal, and it results in more traffic, accidents, and noise/air pollution in North Brooklyn. It needs to be stopped immediately by setting up enforcement stations and putting up signage.
  • More traffic enforcement at dangerous intersections like Lorimer St. and Bayard (where the four-way stop is often disobeyed), and especially all of McGuinness Blvd. (which is, statistically, one of the three most dangerous streets in Brooklyn). Consider installing traffic cameras at these locations.

(3) OPEN SPACES / QUALITY OF LIFE

  • Build a dog park in north Greenpoint! This is way overdue. The only dog run in Greenpoint is in McGolrick Park. It is not a viable option for anyone who lives north of Greenpoint Ave. Thus, dog owners are using Transmitter Park as an ad hoc dog run. This is not a viable solution for anyone. We need to build a new dog park now, even if it’s only a temporary run on undeveloped land off of Commercial Ave.
  • Direct revenue back into North Brooklyn’s parks. North Brooklyn residents are already shortchanged regarding open spaces. If Brooklyn Flea/Smorgasburg are a fait accompli, the least that can be done for residents is to have this revenue reinvested into improving other neighborhood spaces, instead of being absorbed into NY State’s general park fund. At the initial CB1 liquor license hearing for Smorgasburg, pressure was placed on certain members of the SLA Committee to pass it. What is revealing is the likelihood Mr. Levin, my opponent, was trying to extract meaningful concessions from the proprietors of Smorgasburg/Brooklyn Flea.
  • Enact significant changes to the process of filming on Greenpoint’s streets. Greenpoint residents are continuously inconvenienced by a massive amount of filming in their commuinity. At minimum, three proposals bear strong consideration: (1) Reduce the number of permits issued; (2) eliminate alternate side parking rules on surrounding streets during a shoot; (3) ensure that some of the revenue generated by these shoots is directly reinvested back into the community.
  • Construct a better Community Board 1 (CB1) that’s more representative of the current community, and more responsive to the community’s needs. I’ve heard far too many stories of residents being told by CB1 that their complaints don’t matter. A more responsive CB1 can be achieved by instituting term limits, making the appointment process more transparent, and directly involving community organizations in the appointment and interview process (and there should actually be an interview process!).

These ideas are, of course, only a small starting point. More than anything else, I want to hear from you! I envision a City Council office that works directly with residents, actively soliciting and discussing ideas, and making its decisions in a completely transparent manner. You can contact me at: stephen@piersonforcouncil.com or 347-471-0388.

So there have you.

Closing on a related note, here’s a press release as issued by Mr. Pierson’s Campaign Manager, Diana Gonzalez. It is calling for a series of debates through-out the amazingly diverse district that is the 33rd.

emailNYS

I for one think this is a sterling idea. Anyone have questions/concerns to voice to Mr. Pierson? Contact him! Otherwise, in terms of venues and/or moderators anyone have ideas? Let’s make a debate in Greenpoint (and Williamsburg) happen!

New York Shitty Photos Du Jour: Garden Spot Pastoral

Taken September 22, 2012.

Coming To McGuinness Boulevard: R7 Zoning?

August 14, 2012 ·
Filed under: 11222, Greenpoint, Greenpoint Brooklyn, Greenpoint Magic 

 

This item was brought to my attention by an anonymous tipster. While methinks we can all agree that 910 Manhattan Avenue (the former location of Club Exit) would be a splendid place to have a health club, this is not what concerns your truly. Rather, it is the first item. Which brings me to the second page of this notice.

To give you all an idea of exactly how large the parcel in question is I have taken the liberty of grabbing a map via Google.

Now let’s review what the city has to say about R-7 zoning (which is what is being proposed):

7 districts are medium-density apartment house districts mapped in much of the Bronx as well as the Upper West Side in Manhattan and Brighton Beach in Brooklyn. The height factor regulations for R7 districts encourage lower apartment buildings on smaller zoning lots and, on larger lots, taller buildings with less lot coverage. As an alternative, developers may choose the optional Quality Housing regulations to build lower buildings with greater lot coverage.

Regulations for residential development in R7-1 and R7-2 districts are essentially the same except that R7-2 districts, which are mapped primarily in upper Manhattan, have lower parking requirements.

Our Land Use Chair (a very nice lady who happens to also be named Heather) has given me a general rundown of what’s up. She writes:

Hi Heather – The proposal is to rezone half the block that is currently M1-1 to R7A/C2-4. FAR = 4.6. The west side of McGuiness Blvd to the north is R6A and to the south is R7A. The applicant only owns the site in the middle of the block

(Le Cue/Blockbuster building). Proposed is an 8 story mixed-use building, approx. 155,000 sf of floor area in total, 141 dwelling units above 23,000 sf of ground floor commercial space. 40 dwelling units will qualify as low income units pursuant to the Inclusionary Housing Program. Of course, that means the developer gets additional floor area for every square foot of affordable housing he builds. Also, 68 residential parking spaces, 23 commercial parking spaces and 9,000 sf of tenant recreation space.

to give you a sense of the size, it is the same zoning as the building under construction on Bedford/N. 12th, along McCarren park, only the McGuiness site is half the block in depth, not the full block.

So there you go. Whether or not the previous is your cup of tea, gentle readers, you can view the presentation for this and most importantly of all ask questions soon!

Community Board 1 Land Use/Ulurp/Landmarks Joint Committee Meeting
September 5th, 2012 starting at 6:30 p.m.
203 Diamond Street
Brooklyn, New York 11222 

UPDATE, 1:37 p.m.: I have been sent the questionnaire for this R7 request. Without further ado, here it is.

New York Shitty Day Ender: If At First You Do Not Succeed…

April 30, 2012 ·
Filed under: 11222, Greenpoint, Greenpoint Brooklyn, Greenpoint Magic 

Our City Councilman writes to yours truly on April 11, 2012 (regarding this post):

…The Loft Law was designed to protect residential tenants who, knowingly or unknowingly, moved into manufacturing or commercial spaces and it may grant rights for tenants to save and stabilize their housing and avoid the excessive costs associated with being vacated. With regard to 239 Banker Street, I cannot say whether they will be covered by the Loft Law. However, when the building was vacated in 2009, many tenants suddenly lost their living spaces as well as thousands of dollars in rent and security deposits. I do not want to see a repeat of that event. I will work to ensure that all building code issues at 239 Banker are addressed, but I hope to avoid seeing another vacate order if possible…

Cityslicker24 writes on April 8, 2012:

…Furthermore, an application for legalization under the NYC loft law is pending, and indeed the building has undergone modernization, including new windows, floors, and fire sprinklers installed throughout each unit. I was in the units two days ago and saw that there have been significant projects intended to make the building appropriate for dwelling use…

hav writes on March 29, 2012:

non-surprisingly someone decided to complain to the DOB which ordered the building to vacate yesterday. As of today there are some interesting developments but nothing solidified yet. It is however looking like the building has a strong possibility of getting covered by the NYC Loft Law which will protect tenants from being vacated…

Given that 239 Banker has— at long last— overcome their recent brush with vandalism, the above-listed comments; and Mr. Levin’s apparent confusion as to whether or not this rather notorious edifice qualifies for Loft Law protection, I decided to do a little research. First, I perused the Loft Law proper. Then I proceeded to parse through each and every post I have authored about 239 Banker Street. You see, unlike our City Councilman, I actually lived here when this shit show started.

My conclusion is as follows: I can assure cityslicker24, hav and Mr. Levin that 239 Banker Street is in no way, no HOW entitled to Loft Law protection. And the best reason of all can be found on the New York City Loft Board’s own web site:

In June of 2010, the State Legislature expanded the Loft Law to include tenants who lives in a commercial or manufacturing building where three or more families have lived independently from one another for 12 consecutive months from 1/1/08 through 12/21/09, in a building that lacks a residential certificate of occupancy.

So let’s review a (somewhat) concise timeline of 239 Banker Street with the previous data in mind, shall we?

1. For starters, the permit approving the conversion of 239 Banker Street into a “hotel” (as seen at left) was not granted until July 30, 2008. This expired on July 30, 2009 and was not renewed until December 11, 2009.

2. Advertisements shilling apartments at 239 Banker Street were noticed on Craigslist May 28, 2009 (as seen below). In fact, there was a website created for the sole purpose of marketing “The Sweater Factory Lofts”. Alas, this is long gone, but you can view screencaps by clicking here.

3. Individuals were spied moving into 239 Banker Street May 31, 2009 and June 2, 2009. Following me so far? Great!

4. A Stop Work Order was issued shortly thereafter. This was (naturally) disregarded. So complaints were filed July 31, 2009.

5. The Department of Buildings actually saw fit to cite 239 Banker Street for violating a Stop Work Order (at right, which you can view in larger format by clicking here). This came to pass September 8, 2009.

6. And last— but hardly least— the Department of Buildings issued a Vacate Order citing “conditions imminently perilous to life” on September 29, 2009. Among their dismal discoveries were disabled/concealed sprinkler heads and uncapped electrical wires.*

Follows is ABC’s footage of this death trap. Seeing is truly believing folks!

Post-script: as of December 28, 2010 this Vacate Order was still in place.

Let’s review:

  • The Loft Law requires that three or more families reside in a commercial or manufacturing building for twelve consecutive months between January 2008 and December 2009.
  • 239 Banker Street did not have tenants— much less three families living independently of each other— until at least May 31, 2009.
  • 239 Banker Street was vacated by the Department of Buildings September 24, 2009.
  • This makes five months total— not even close to what the law requires.

So why file such a spurious application in the first place? Well, as one commenter noted recently:

they can apply for loft law status, but they will have an almost impossible task of getting coverage. The problem is that once they apply and receive a docket number they are actually protected from any action from DOB, which actually sucks because there is a 2-3 year back up to hear the case with the loft board. So while they will almost certainly lose the hearing they will keep moving people into the space who will get evicted in 2 or 3 years at best…

Unless of course in the meantime someone changes the law**:

Assemblymember Vito Lopez told more than 200 tenants gathered at a meeting last night on his 2010 law protecting their right to live in former industrial spaces that he is their best ally — and suggested that Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez is the one they should throw out of office this year.

“[Councilmember Diana] Reyna and Velazquez wanted the area carved out of the law,” said Lopez, who also heads the Brooklyn Democratic Party, referring to the industrial zone bridging Williamsburg and Bushwick that lies within his district. “They really don’t like you. This was Velazquez’s way of saying you don’t matter.”

Velazquez faces a primary challenge this June from term-limited Councilmember Erik Dilan, a close ally of Lopez who sat at his side onstage at the event. Flanking Lopez on the other side was Williamsburg GREENPOINT Councilmember Stephen Levin, who formerly served as Lopez’ chief of staff…

*Which, it is interesting to note, netted them a paltry $25,000 fine. Not they they have bothered to pay it or the litany of other penalties they have accrued. They haven’t.

**You do not honestly believe Mr. Lopez and Mr. Levin are pushing for an expansion of the Loft Law out of the kindness of their own hearts, gentle readers? No sir. Rather, this is simply an expedient means to use voters so as to rezone by decree and reward landlords/political backers who have no regard for zoning laws— or their tenant’s safety. Landlords like Meserole Factory, LLC.

From The New York Shitty Inbox: And Now A Word From Our City Councilman

April 11, 2012 ·
Filed under: 11222, Greenpoint, Greenpoint Brooklyn, Greenpoint Magic 

It would appear, at long last, my coverage of 239 Banker Street (which is clearly being followed by real estate notables such as Brownstoner and Curbed, real estate agents and ostensible tenants of said space) has gotten the attention of our City Councilman! Steve Levin writes:

Heather,

I have noticed your posts and am glad you continue to bring light to the issue of lofts in Greenpoint and Williamsburg. The Loft Law was designed to protect residential tenants who, knowingly or unknowingly, moved into manufacturing or commercial spaces and it may grant rights for tenants to save and stabilize their housing and avoid the excessive costs associated with being vacated.  With regard to 239 Banker Street, I cannot say whether they will be covered by the Loft Law.  However, when the building was vacated in 2009, many tenants suddenly lost their living spaces as well as thousands of dollars in rent and security deposits.  I do not want to see a repeat of that event.  I will work to ensure that all building code issues at 239 Banker are addressed, but I hope to avoid seeing another vacate order if possible.  All I can do is try to spread the word about the Loft Law so that tenants in such spaces can apply for coverage that they may be legally entitled to.  Of course, the Loft Board will make final determinations about each application individually.

Sincerely yours,
Stephen Levin
Councilmember

To wit I replied (sans visual aides):

Hey,

First off I appreciate the email— and I agree that the loft law (which is much-needed) may or may not applicable in this case. What really upsets me is we are for all intents and purposes seeing the exact same situation (as 2009) play itself out again, e.g.; a commercial building—without the applicable permits I’ll add— is being converted into residential space, this space is being willfully and deliberately marketed/presented as residential space;

people are moving in under the illusion it is legally inhabitable space, etc.

This would suggest that lessons were not learned (bye it by the owner of this property, our enforcement agencies, etc.) the first time around and/or whatever consequences borne by the owner of this space were not a sufficient deterrent from engaging in this (illegal) behavior again. Or to put it differently: the “system” we have in place is not working. I have a very big problem with this. What is the point of having laws on the books, agencies deemed with the enforcement of said laws and due process if they can be bypassed, quite flagrantly I’ll note, in such a manner?

Do I want to see people thrown out on the street again? No, not really. But I am also getting very tired of this building’s owners total disregard for the law— and the fact they have been basically enabled by the upholders of said laws to do so. No matter how you cut it, this is appalling. They tried via the Department of Buildings to have this space reclassified as residential. It was refused.

They could (theoretically) go through our Community Board and get a zoning variance— but have seen fit not to do so. Why should they? There are for all intents and purposes no consequences for their actions, thus they do whatever they want.

I would also be remiss if I didn’t add in closing that real estate agents are seemingly eager participants in this fraud. Each and every one of them (in my opinion) should be reported to the Department of State and have their licenses revoked.

Thanks again!

H

With all due respect, what seems to be lost by our City Councilman is he can, in fact, stop another “repeat” of this event. By simply asking the Department of Buildings to do its job. Months ago.

Photo Credits: All taken today, April 11, 2012, by yours truly.

Quicklink: A Robbery On Nassau Avenue?

I heard rumblings about this yesterday via number of sources. It would appear that the jewelry store located at 63 Nassau Avenue was robbed yesterday at 1:30 p.m. The proprietor was shot in the stomach— but the good news is he will be okay! You can read more about this incident by clicking here.

UPDATE, 8:41 a.m.: Here are more deets from the NYPD!

The New York City Police Department is seeking the public’s assistance in locating and identifying the following suspects who are wanted in connection with a commercial robbery and shooting that occurred within the confines of the 94th Precinct.  The details are as follows:

On Monday July 25th, 2011 at approximately 1248 hours, two (2) males entered a jewelry store located at 93 Nassau Avenue. Suspect #1 removed a black revolver from his waistband and vaulted over the counter chasing the store owner, M/W/54, into the rear of the store. Suspect #2 then vaulted over the counter and started removing jewelry from the displays, dumping it into a bag. During the course of the robbery, the store owner was shot. The victim was working alone and was removed to Bellevue hospital with a single gunshot wound to the left side of his chest. He is listed in stable condition. Both suspects were last seen exiting the store, crossing the street heading eastbound on Nassau Avenue.

Suspect #1 is described as: Male, 35-45 years old, 5’9″-6’0″, medium build, dark skinned, mustache. He was last seen wearing a light colored ball-cap, eye glasses, sweat pants, and in possession of a black firearm.

Suspect #2 is described as: Male, 35-45 years old, 5’9″-6’0″, medium build, dark skinned. He was last seen wearing light colored ball-cap, light blue polo shirt, dark pants, eye glasses, and gloves…

Anyone with information in regards to this incident is asked to call Crime Stoppers at 1-800-577-TIPS (8477). The public can also submit their tips by logging onto the Crime Stoppers website at WWW.NYPDCRIMESTOPPERS.COM or by texting their tips to 274637 (CRIMES) then enter TIP577.

All calls are strictly confidential.

UPDATE, 2:40 p.m.: I just got wind that the gentleman who was shot had just come back form vacation in Poland. Yeesh!

Miss Heather

P.S.: Special thanks go out to Queens Crap for bringing this link to my attention!

Greenpoint Photo Du Jour: Shmoo!

May 8, 2010 ·
Filed under: 11222, Greenpoint, Greenpoint Brooklyn, Greenpoint Magic 

From Commercial Street.

Miss Heather

Breaking In Williamsburg: BUSTED!

March 26, 2010 ·
Filed under: 11211, Williamsburg, Williamsburg Brooklyn 

I have just received word that 112 North 6 Street (AKA: Zip112) has been vacated by the Department of Buildings for being an illegal hostel. Apparently there were up to sixteen people living in each “apartment”, no sprinkler systems were in place and there was no means of “second egress”, e.g.: fire escapes. My buddy over at Brooklyn 11211 has some interesting things to say about this development. You can read ’em by clicking here.

Miss Heather

UPDATE, March 28, 7:59 p.m.: It would appear there was not one, but two hostels operating at this location. Zip112 has been allowed to continue operation. Aaron Short has the full run-down here.

UPDATE, 5:16 p.m.: Here’s an update/statement of Assemblyman Joe Lentol’s office.

Northside Williamsburg Building Evacuated for Being Illegal (and dangerous) Hostel and a Fire Hazard

Assemblyman Joe Lentol has just learned that a building in his district, at 112 North 6th street is currently being evacuated by the FDNY and the buildings department for being an illegal hostel.  Also on site are the Office of Emergency Management and the Red Cross.  According to information given to Assemblyman Joe Lentol’s office the building is zoned commercial but had been divided into 12 apartments with up to 16 people living in each apartment for a potential capacity of 192 people.  Lentol’s office was also told that there were no fire escapes or sprinkler system and no secondary exit should an emergency arise.

“My heart goes out to the people affected by this and I am very relieved to hear that emergency services and the red cross are available to them.  My office is as well,” the assemblyman added.  “We are going to do everything we can to help the people affected and to ensure these things don’t happen in the future.  I intend to work with the city and my colleagues in state government to find ways to improve the system to try to prevent this to the best of our abilities.”

“This type of situation, where people are being kicked out on the street, should not be allowed to occur in the first place.  Its simply unacceptable.  I never want to see people on the street in my district.  I am very glad that the Department of Buildings is stepping in to ensure that everyone is safe going forward but I think we need to be asking ourselves how did it get to this point?”

“This is certainly not the first time people have been put out on the street because they find out that the landlord doesn’t have the proper zoning or safety requirements for what he is renting out.  The other day a constituent told me that his real estate agent told him he could also live in the building he was buying to operate a business. He found out she was wrong.  If he hadn’t checked for himself, he could have ended up on the street for violating the zoning and also lost a lot of money.”

“It points to a larger problem where too often the owners or the renters of buildings are trying to do things, or are being told by real estate agents that they can do things,  on a wink and a nod and the people living there get the short end of the stick. In some cases the risk is monetary, in some of these cases of serious fire hazards they are risking much more”

“For some time now, my office has been trying to look at ways that we can try to remove the guesswork from the system so that when you move into a building you know what you can and cannot do with it, you know whether the owner has a certificate of occupancy, you know the legal situation of where you are living, so that we can avoid this,” said Lentol. “This situation the perfect example of why we need to do that.  It put peoples lives in real danger. That cannot happen again.”

“I always believe in prevention first, but now that we are in this situation, I will be sure to work the Mayors office to help everyone involved. And then we focus on learning from our mistakes.”

UPDATE, 10:22 p.m.: It would appear the New York Post is on the story. I’m happy one of my commenters could be of assistance. Who needs to do research when they sit on their ass, surf the Interwebs and get it for free?

  • NYS Flickr Pool

    The One CrewSnowy SeagullsWalking the Dog in the Snow
  • Ads