Greenpoint
Lorven Pharmacy
Culture on the Cheap
New York Shitty Day Ender: Reader Comment du Jour
Calyer Cooze notes (in regards to this post):
And here’s the latest Craigslist ad! Nausea, indeed. http://newyork.craigslist.org/brk/abo/3003528111.html (As seen above, for posterity)
On that note, I had a very interesting bit of information brought to my attention. That being:
239 Banker Street does not have an a Certificate of Occupancy for a hotel. Thus the question becomes why are they being taxed as such? Anyone who cares to take up this interesting discrepancy can (and should) do so by clicking here.
New York Shitty Day Ender: If At First You Do Not Succeed…
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
WilliamsburgGREENPOINT 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.
Reader Comment du Jour: An Agent Speaks About 239 Banker Street
CitySlicker24 writes in regards to this post:
I am a real estate salesperson and I just started working for a broker that’s representing the property owner, leasing out the building’s top three floors as residential units. I had not heard anything about this building being illegal until a couple of my prospective clients cancelled on me, citing your website.
A couple of things I wanted to raise with you: Oasisnyc.com shows that this is zoned as an office building, not as a manufacturing facility, as your article claims. Also, you fail to mention that the building was issued a certificate of occupancy in 1930, permitting up to 225 occupants on the upper three floors, though you do allude to the fact that NYC Department of Finance has this building classified as a hotel.
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.
Obvioulsy your efforts to keep everybody informed are laudable, and now that this story has been brought to my attention, I have the legal duty, which I will uphold, to advise my prospective tenant clients that the building is zoned as a commercial space, that the legal status of the building has yet to be determined, since the DOB has not yet resolved the active complaints, and that an application for coverage under the loft law is pending. And I will try to get the company’s listing agent to bring these issues up with the owner and the city in order to find out whether I should even be dealing with this property at all.
While I disagree with some of Cityslicker’s analysis, for example:
- the building in question is permissible as a hotel per the Department of Buildings because it is located in an Industrial Business Zone and
- of course there’s the fact this building is not legally allowable as residential property in the first place but is being represented as such
I’ll be very interested to see where this leads.
To be continued…?
News You Can Use: The El Retorno Report
Filed under: 11206, 11211, East Williamsburg, East Williamsburg Brooklyn, Williamsburg, Williamsburg Brooklyn
As many of you are aware yours truly frequently attends meetings conducted by our local Community Board. The reasons for this are manifold, but I will list the two most important ones below:
- Said meetings are an excellent way to learn about what is going on in north Brooklyn.
- The public speaking segment at the end is often illuminating and downright entertaining.
This month’s meeting was no exception. After a rather lengthy evening a citizen named “John” spoke about an eating and drinking establishment in (what I would presume to be) his neighborhood: El Retorno. His speech started as follows:
If you are looking for a liquor license to turn down, this is the one.
and then he proceeded to tender some rather unsavory details about this business to back up his assertion. This included— but was by no means limited to—- the following:
- While described as an “eating and drinking establishment” El Retorno was in reality a place for men to get drunk.
- The waitresses at said establishment solicit the clientele to buy drinks for them.
- The aforementioned ladies also “taxi dance” (Read: they will dance with men for money).
“John” concluded his speech (one of the finest yours truly has ever beheld at a Community Board meeting, I will add) with a bang by pointing out this establishment has been cited by the Department of Health for harboring roaches, rats and flying insects. These he described as being “the perfect trifecta”. Suffice it to say yours truly and a few buddies were very impressed. So much so we broke into raucous applause which netted us confused and mildly annoyed looks by a number of people present.
In the following weeks we could not stop thinking about this alleged den of iniquity. Was this chap “John” merely exaggerating or was El Retorno as vile and repulsive as described? This was the question we kept asking each other. Finally, we decided to find out for ourselves and to this end invited ~23 of our best friends to embark upon a fact-finding mission. Six stepped up to the plate. We established guidelines/rules for this endeavor. These were as follows:
- We would visit this establishment under the pretext of one of us having a birthday.
- Our panel would be constituted of women only. The Mister was rather disheartened to learn this but I had his best interests at heart; you do not send in a Boy Scout for a task better suited for the Marines.
- This mission would come to pass March 26, 2011 at 8:00 p.m.
And come to pass it did. Follows is a report of our findings. WARNING/CAVEAT: the following content is not for the squeamish.
Yours truly was the first to arrive. Noting this establishment seemed to be patronized exclusively by men, I called one of my fellow conspirators, Christine:
Where are you? I am NOT going into this place by myself.
She replied that she and a friend, Alison, were catching a car service and should be on site soon. I took a walk around the block and sure enough when I got back they were waiting for me. We entered and took a table.
The first thing we noticed was a solitary crutch propped against a wall next to the front door. We later concluded this was kept on hand in the event of an emergency. A very nice waitress came over and gave us menus. Remembering the “trifecta” as mentioned by our (unwitting) tipster regarding the food, we decided to stick to beverages.
We made a toast to our endeavor.
Preliminary observations/thoughts:
- The lady waitstaff of this establishment were drinking along with the clients.
- There was an older gentleman sitting in the back wearing sunglasses. Mind you, this was well after dark. We deduced this chap was the owner and/or “management” of this establishment.
- We noted this eating and drinking establishment has nary a single Yelp review or page on Facebook. We vowed to change this egregious oversight.
- We really liked the “cravats” made from paper napkins on the beer we were being served.
8:39 P.M.: Upon noticing buckets of beer are offered for $20.00 a pop we ordered one.
We noted that said bucket had a rather nifty bottle opener attached to the handle.
We were quite impressed by this bit of ingenuity. However, this gizmo proved to be problematic/less than user-friendly— as you will soon see.
8:42 P.M.
- A woman arrived with two small children. They hung around and talked to the man wearing sunglasses. After about fifteen minutes, they left.
- Upon noticing we were having some difficulty using the bottle opener attached to our bucket (READ: We were spraying beer on ourselves trying to use it), our waitress (who was really friendly) offered us a more conventional one. We declined. We were dead set on learning how to use this device properly. We would not be defeated!
- Yours truly perused the jukebox. Freebird was not offered.
As is usually the case when consuming beer, yours truly found herself in need of a privy and in so doing made the first of a series interesting discoveries.
- The signs gracing the lavatories are in English, Spanish and Polish.
- Our Greenpoint gal, Sherry, notes the Polish being employed is grammatically incorrect: kobieta means “woman”. The correct plural tense is “kobiety”.
1. There is some interesting graffiti to be found in the ladies’ lavatory.
2. Someone has a bone to pick with a chap named Gerry. Among other things.
Yours truly attempts to use the bottle opener attached to our beer bucket. Hilarity ensues.
My notes were fortuitously unharmed.
(SIDE NOTE: Yours truly initially had trepidations about going home reeking of beer— but then remembered that as a Greenpoint resident this “perfume” would be in no way be construed as unusual. Our kindly waitress provided napkins and I proceeded to clean up my mess.)
9:00 P.M.: We noted that men were starting to show up in significant numbers.
9:25 P.M.: We have another beer opening mishap— but endeavor to persevere!
9:36 P.M.: Another bucket of beer is ordered and another member of our fact-finding mission, Juliet, arrives.
10:00 P.M.: We notice that the men sitting at a table behind us are smiling at us. We return the favor.
10:04 P.M.: The lights are dimmed and our intrepid Christine attempts to locate a wireless network.
Amusingly enough we learned that “Vagina” was locked. This discovery elicited peals of laughter from our panel.
10:05 P.M.: We noted the music is becoming, really, seriously, INCREDIBLY loud.
10:10 P.M.: A fellow patron comes over. The dialogue which follows gets somewhat convoluted, so I will give a general outline.
- He offers to buy us a bucket of Coronas. I offer to buy him a Coors if he’ll buy me one. He says he does not like Coors. I tell him I do not like Corona. However, if it is free I will drink it. This confuses him so I clarify that I am from Greenpoint and this is how we roll. This confuses him even more.
- He asks if we are married. Christine replies that some of us are. He is nonplussed and continues to press the matter.
- We give him a beer.
- He gets a call from his wife. This bothers him. He then confides in us that he has a girlfriend as well. He continues to ask if we’re married. We ask him why, if he has a wife and a girlfriend, this is so important to him. We do not get an answer.
- He concludes that we are married and changes his line of questioning to (and I quote): If you are married why are you here? We ask him why, if he is married, is he here? Once again, we do not get an answer.
- He asks how we know about this place. We tell him a guy named John told us about it.
10:15 P.M.: His cousin comes over. He explains that our new friend is from New Jersey. Our new friend asks our party:
Who is the leader?
Everyone pointed to yours truly. He tells me he’d like to me to go outside with him so he can show me something. This did not strike me as an offer I cared to take up and I told him so. He persisted so I went to “Plan B”.
We do not have a “leader” per se. We are anarcho-syndicalists. We take turns as an acting executive officer on our outings. This evening I am the “leader” but next time this sinecure be assumed by another person in our party.
He said he had never heard a story like that. I assured him this is exactly why I told it. (ASIDE: It has been yours truly’s observation that nothing will stop a man from pitching a tent like a woman talking about politics.) We then noticed that a sound system was being fired up in the backroom. We asked our new friend if they were preparing to do karaoke. He answered to the affirmative and proceeded to solicit recommendations from us: Lady Gaga or Britney Spears— or as he put the latter: “Whoops, I did it again”.
We agreed unanimously upon Britney. He was visibly disappointed and said he likes Lady Gaga better. We assured him our panel’s suggestions were merely advisory and therefore non-binding. In other words: if he wants to sing Lady Gaga, he is perfectly entitled to do so.
10:20 P.M.: He begins to ask one member of our panel to dance with him. Repeatedly. She was clearly uncomfortable and we took this is as an indication it was time to go. We endeavored to clear our tab. I go to the bathroom. I opened the woman’s lavatory to discover a man urinating. I elected to patronize the men’s bathroom instead.
ASIDE: Earlier in the evening a member of our party voiced concerns about the cleanliness of the toilet seat in the women’s bathroom. I am pleased to note there was no such issue manifest in the men’s lavatory! I came to this conclusion because all the urine I saw was located on the floor.
As I am using said privy I noticed evidence of someone trying to kick the door open from the inside. I am certain the story behind this is a good one. A story, I imagine, I am much happier not knowing.
10:29 P.M.: We gathered up our materials and commence to leave. Our waitress for the evening thanked us for coming and told us she hopes we will come back. We thanked her for a memorable evening and Christine tips one of the hostesses $5.00 and apologized for us “stepping on her game”. She was genuinely grateful and welcomed us to come back anytime.
Sherry was selected from our party by our new friend as his “best girl”. Lucky her. We leave and on the way to the subway we exchanged notes/drew conclusions:
- A motion was brought forward by Christine that this was the best $20.00 she has ever spent. This was enthusiastically ratified by our panel.
- I brought forward a motion to congratulate Sherry as being deemed the “Best Girl”. This too was enthusiastically ratified.
- Most importantly, we decided that “John’s” testimony regarding this establishment was, by all appearances, startlingly accurate.
At the corner of Metropolitan Avenue and Graham Avenue our panel disbanded. Juliet and I headed to the G train at Metropolitan Avenue. As we were walking something really strange happened: a building started talking to us.
It was at this point yours truly realized that three beers on an empty stomach— or the “trifecta”— was working its magic. I had been RETORNO-ED. We made double-time to the nearest subway station and in an act of nothing short of divine providence, the G train arrived as Juliet and I hit the platform.
Upon exiting the G train in Greenpoint I spied a text message in my inbox. It was from the Mister.
Okay?
I thought to myself. No, I am not okay. Yours truly had one of the most fun evenings she has had in YEARS!
Thank you, El Retorno!
Miss Heather
Post Script, March 27, 2011: Our sleuth Sherry made a fascinating discovery about our new favorite eating and drinking establishment. It DOES have a page on Yelp after all…
albeit as a hotel. Fascinating. On a lark I pulled up 191 Graham Avenue’s latest Certificate of Occupancy. Follows is what I found:
I perused the ECB violations for this address and quickly learned the aforementioned “ordinary” cellar is anything but.
From The New York Shitty Inbox: Trouble At The House Of Vans?
Filed under: 11211, 11222, Greenpoint, Greenpoint Brooklyn, Greenpoint Magic, Williamsburg, Williamsburg Brooklyn
This week, dear readers, I have the honor of passing along a rather dubious Greenpoint first. Plenty of noise and quality of life complaints find their way to my inbox, to be certain— but regarding an establishment that is not technically open to the public yet? Well, this has indeed come to pass and the honoree of the hour is House of Vans. Anonymous writes:
As you probably remember, Vans (the skateboarding shoe company) took over that old Odwalla warehouse on Franklin next to Pop’s Popular Clothing at 25 Franklin. They had their grand opening Saturday night, and it was a mess. People parked illegally, people doubleparked, people parking their cars in the middle of the street, tons of honking as cabs & car services attempted to drop people off.
It was also very loud. I appreciate that there is no residential on any side of them, but the space clearly has no kind of insulation or soundproofing. We could hear the bass in our living room with the windows closed.
The biggest issue was kids who were congregating on the street corners near us afterward. But there’s nothing they can really do about that and I don’t expect them to, but a “Please respect our neighbors as you make your way home” wouldn’t kill them.
What I’d like to see from Vans for future large events of this nature:
–Have a security guard out front directing traffic and dealing with cabs and pickups/dropoffs. Everyone seemed to arrive in a cab or car service. It’s not that far away from public transportation and it was a nice night. And these were skaters?!
–Check the volume down the block in the residential area; if it’s too loud, drop it to 11 please
I have no objections to this being a skatepark. In fact, I think it’s a great reuse of a building. I don’t even have objections for it being used for the occasional live event. I would, however, like to know how many of these large loud parties they plan on holding each year. The Vans spokesperson described it as “a hub for doing grassroots skate events”* but it didn’t look that grassroots to me on Saturday night.
Funnily enough I cannot find anything about 25 Franklin St. on DOB BIS. Says it is not a valid address. Pshark.com doesn’t have it either. Curious about permits. You understand.
I for one am curious as to what the FDNY would have to say about this. Obviously if this warehouse is going to be repurposed as a public venue it will have to be complaint with fire code. If anyone reading this has an expertise in this respect I would love to hear from you be it via comments or email at: missheather (at) thatgreenpointblog (dot) com. In addition, I would think a Place of Assembly permit may be in or order— or at the very least an amended Certificate of Occupancy. Finally (and in closing)— taking into consideration what my tipster observed last Saturday in regards to traffic, double parking, etc. and the fact Kent Avenue has less traffic capacity— I have to wonder how these events are going to impact the surrounding residential community in terms of vehicular congestion. In my opinion the outlook isn’t very good.
Miss Heather
UPDATE, 10/21/10 3:36 p.m.: I have received an email from a very nice chap from Vans. You can look forward to a follow-up post (about this missive) in the near future!
*E.g.; (according this site)
- 25,000 square feet; 15,000 indoors and 10,000 sq. ft outdoor enclosed patio and skate plaza
- raised indoor flowing concrete bowl with numerous contours, shapes, banks & transitions
- outdoor skate plaza with steps and railings
- permanent, removable professional stage, lighting and sound system
- performer “green room”
- installed custom art by Mike Giant
- will serve as Vans’ East Coast marketing headquarters with two full time employees at launch
- home to Vans’ East Coast touring RV
Greenpoint Degentrification Watch: Anyone Have $2.6 Million?
If so 48 Box Street, one of yours trulys favorite pieces of real estate insanity, can be yours! What in my opinion makes this listing so special is the advertising copy. It runs as follows:
Magnificent new building in the up coming neighborhood of Green Point, Williamsburg and Lic. Distance to Newtown Creek where thousands of residents are planned, tax abatements for 16 years, 1 car garage, storage space, 8′ concrete, top of the line appliances, height ceilings, Co as now pending on last 2 test.
I checked the Department of Buildings online database and sure enough, this building has no Certificate of Occupancy. I suppose this should come as no surprise. It’s not like the folks who constructed this building gave much thought or concern about such trivialities (including Stop Work Orders) before. As for using Newtown Creek and eight feet of concrete as a selling tool, it remains to be seen how effective this marketing strategy will be. My closing thoughts: if you are going to take this rather unorthodox approach to neighborhood “amenities” why not toss in “steps away from the Pulaski Bridge, McGuinness Boulevard and the Newtown Creek Nature Walk (featuring the Shit Tits— as seen on television!) as well?
Miss Heather
From The New York Shitty Inbox, Part I: A Question About 467 Troutman
J writes:
Miss Heather:
I’m apologize in advance if I am wasting your time, but you seem like you might be able to shed some light on a certain amount of confusion I have around 467 Troutman.
I’m looking to move into a 3 BR loft in the area and have been shown several decent options. We were recently shown a space in 467 Troutman – I went in with very low expectations resulting from some internet research and a landlord/manager that I (think) I respect telling me the following:
Eeks! 467 troutman st has no certificate of occupancy, same landlord as 260 Moore street + 315 siegel .I don’t recommend living in that particular landlords buildings-besides the dept of building violations the buildings has bedbug issues and shanty build out of the building…Anyway, the space I saw was the nicest I’ve seen so far – kitchen/bathroom seemed relatively new and clean, the hallways clean, the buildout seemed better than most I’ve seen, etc…. the overall vibe seemed good – and the the tenant who currently occupies the space told us she’d been there 4 years and had nothing negative to say about the landlord.
Do you know of any good reason to not live there? My feeling is that the building had issues in the past but things are better now… Am I missing something? It seems like Max Starck and 467 Troutman come up often enough on your website in a negative light… so I thought I’d ask you for your opinion.
Thanks so much for any info you might be able to provide, and thanks for doing what you do. It’s an invaluable resource.
Aside from having walked by 467 Troutman (and knowing that Max Starck) is its owner I know very little about this building. For this reason I am putting your inquiry to my readers, J. This having been written I am familiar with a number of Mr. Starck’s other buildings. For the purposes of this post I am going to narrow my focus to two: the Sweater Factory Lofts and the Greenpoint Hotel. Both are located in Greenpoint.
As you have probably learned by perusing my site, the Sweater Factory Lofts were vacated by the Department of Buildings last year for harboring conditions dangerous to human life. Among the violations cited were uncapped electrical wires and sprinklers being sealed over with sheet rock. A rather appalling fire safety hazard if you ask me. It should also be noted that the space in question (239 Banker Street) was zoned to be a hotel but Mr. Starck and his partner were marketing it as residential property. This may seem trivial but the fact of the matter is there are different safety requirements for transient and residential properties. See where I am going with this?
Now let’s consider the Greenpoint Hotel for a moment. Until fairly recently it was owned by Mr. Starck. The new owner (whom I have met and it should be noted acquired this property at a public auction— it was seized) is spending a lot of money to get this facility back to code. Among the violations being corrected are a sagging wall, an inoperative bathroom and, drum roll please, repairing a number of inoperative sprinkler heads.
These are but two examples be they are enough to establish a pattern of neglect and general disregard for tenant safety. I have little doubt if you were to search his other properties (like 315 Seigel Street, for example) you will find similar such stuff. While I applaud your due diligence for talking to a tenant of 467 Troutman Street I have to go with the landlord/manager on this one: keep away from anything this chap owns.
This having been written does anyone— preferably tenants of Mr. Starck’s properties— have any advice for J? If so please leave them in the comments or email them to me at: missheather (at) thatgreenpointblog (dot) com. All tips/anecdotes will be kept anonymous if you so desire.
Thanks!
Miss Heather
From The New York Shitty Inbox, Part II: Chez Toshi
Anonymous writes:
Hi Heather,
I hope it’s okay that I come to you when I have random questions about the neighborhood! On my way home today I noticed that the building at 808 Driggs Ave., which earlier this year was advertised as a rental (I know, because I looked at the apartments. Decent, but way overpriced), now seems to house another branch of Hotel Toshi. It says “hotel toshi” on one of the buzzers, and there was a very makeshift-looking flier taped to the outside of the door with the Toshi “logo” on it. How exactly does this guy run all of these “hotels” out of rental buildings? I’m mostly curious because I live near this building, and when I googled Toshi it seems like everyone on the Internet is equally mystified by his real estate dealings.
Just curious if you had any thoughts on the guy 🙂
Well, for starters 808 Driggs Avenue has (ostensibly) been canvassed by the Department of Buildings. At least that is what this post over at Curbed would lead one to believe. Apparently they found nothing amiss.
Despite the fact that the buzzer, as you piquantly noted anonymous, clearly states a hotel is on the premises.
A litany of complaints that this building is being employed as a hotel. Follows is my personal favorite.
I want to personally commend the aforementioned complainant’s civility. Had someone entered my apartment I’d probably take our household Louisville slugger and discharge my own “Special Enforcement”.* The call to 311 (or 911 for that matter) would follow. But I digress.
808 Driggs Avenue’s Certificate of Occupancy makes it pretty clear that while it is technically a “mixed use” building it is, in fact, residential.
This begs many questions. Among them:
- How do the folks who are outlaying $2,500+ a month in rent at this “hotal” feel about this?
- Who would want to rent a room at a “hotel” whose “Welcome” sign is an inkjet print on a piece of office paper affixed with tape? To stucco?
- How can the Department of Buildings overlook his web site— which features one “vacation rental” which seems to be located in a rent-stabilized building?
The “Swiss Chalet on South 4 Street” is (in my humble opinion) a real pisser. As is this** which can be found on Toshi’s Flickr page.
Check it out!
Miss Heather
*Not that I advise this. I am for all intents and purposes a law abiding individual. I abhor violence. I do not, however, take kindly to people trying to gain entrance to my apartment for nefarious reasons. I write this as someone who once had a dude walk into our foyer at midnight – 1:00 in the morning one weekend while the Mister and I were watching movies in our living room. We forgot to lock the front door to our apartment. The chap in question was not a resident of our building. My shouting at the top of my lungs:
HELLO! HOW CAN I HELP YOU?
was a sufficient deterrent. He scrammed and we have been damned vigilant about locking down our apartment ever since. Had this chap persisted, well…
**For some serious Toshi partying down click here. CAVEAT: NSFW.
Zip112 Back In Business?
Remember my friend whose sister had her reservation canceled by Zip Hostel earlier this week? Well, her tale had taken (yet) another twist.
T writes, April 1:
…Really have no idea what to make of it all at this point – will go check out the place and if it looks OK she will probably stay there with our air-mattress as a back-up. Obviously staying in disputably legal hostels is not ideal but hopefully it will work out OK!
Here’s the email from Zip112 with links to 2 buildings department complaint forms which I thought you might be interested to see.
Dear (excised)..
The problem has been resolved, therefore your reservation is still fine. Here are the city building department link for zip112 5F.
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/OverviewForComplaintServlet?requestid=2&vlcompdetlkey=0001262590
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/OverviewForComplaintServlet?requestid=2&vlcompdetlkey=0001281794If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Thank you.
Young. ZIP112 Zipny, Inc
Hostel+Travel+Arts
Address: 112 N 6th st 5F Brooklyn NY11211
Email: info@zip112.com
Phone: 347-403-0577
http://www.zip112.com
So let me get this straight: this building has no Certificate of Occupancy and this hostel is located on a floor that legally does not exist? Welcome to the smash jaw and arbitrary world of code enforcement in north Brooklyn.
Miss Heather
From The New York Shitty Inbox: Canceled
Filed under: 11211, 11222, Greenpoint, Greenpoint Brooklyn, Greenpoint Magic, Williamsburg, Williamsburg Brooklyn
Since I wrote this post there has been a great deal of commentary and speculation about Zip112, better known as Zip Hostel. E.g.; is it legal? Well, I have word from someone whose sister was going to stay there this upcoming weekend that it has been shut down. In fact, it would appear almost the entire building has been vacated. T writes:
…I actually got hold of the owner of Zip112 on Monday evening and he assured me everything was OK with them (that they were legal etc.). Now my sister has had an email saying the whole building is getting shut down and canceling all reservations.
So whether they are legal or not, they are closed!
Thanks for the advice – my sister has had to forsake Brooklyn and get a bed in a hostel in the East Village instead. Oh well!
On a lark, Monday afternoon I searched for “vacation rentals” in Greenpoint on Craigslist. What I found was sobering.
Presenting the Dobbin Street Lofts.
As you can see, they’re doing brisk business. Who knew April Fool’s Day was a U.S. holiday? I thought that stopped after George W. Bush left office. But I digress.
Here is a photo of said “loft”. And here is what I found on the Department of Buildings web site.
No Certificate of Occupancy
“COMMERCIAL OFFICES”
Same song, different verse. This is not to suggest there isn’t humor to be found here. There is.
239 Banker Street (AKA: The Sweater Factory Lofts), a “hotel” illegally pressed into service as living space, is clearly visible in the background of their photo showcasing the roof deck of their illegal hostel. Nice.
Miss Heather
P.S.: For more reading/commentary about the debacle at 112 North 6 Street I strongly recommend you read Brooklyn 11211’s follow-up post.
NYS Flickr Pool
You must be logged in to post a comment.