Brooklyn Heights Blog

Comment from nabeguy
Time: May 29, 2008, 10:10 am

Does this really surprise anyone? If you saw the way the top floors were brought down, it was fairly obvious that the workers had no regard for the rest of the building, as they dumped most of the brickwork onto the fire escapes and bay windows, basically destroying them. I seriously doubt that this was intended to be a partial demo/restoration job but rather a full pull-down from the get-go.

Comment from ABC
Time: May 29, 2008, 10:38 am

Yeah, I think this was the obvious outcome. Let’s just hope this all gets charged to the owners — and I hope it’s triple-time for that work done over a holiday weekend.

While I do feel the owners are 100% at fault here, I wonder what payout was offered and rejected by the tenants. I assume they get nothing now.

Comment from nabeguy
Time: May 29, 2008, 1:59 pm

A payout to the tenants? Hah! They’ll be lucky enough to be allowed to retrieve their belongings!

Comment from notbornhere
Time: May 29, 2008, 2:02 pm

I heard they were offered 100,000 each to relocate but they turned it down. Now they will be lucky to get their pants and shoes back.

Comment from bdm
Time: May 29, 2008, 3:30 pm

As in the most recent BHA newsletter, the owners of this building (and the others noted) should be held accountable by the landmarks commission for allowing things to get to this state. I don’t understand what the point of the landmarks commission is if they NEVER seem to act on this type of demolition by neglect! They must be too busy making me/my husband/my architect jump through ridiculous hoops to get my carefully planned (at great expense) renovation approved at every turn but cant take any action to stop this kind of completely predictable travesty. Infuriating!

Comment from nabeguy
Time: May 29, 2008, 4:35 pm

If you think the LPC preservation mandates are strict, imagine what might happen if they were given the kind of eminent domain powers that some seem to feel they should have. Yes, it’s disgusting that some landlords work the system in a way that results in this very sad demoilition but do you really feel comfortable with the idea of a city agency telling you not only how to renovate your property but how to maintain it as well at the risk of having it taken away? Let the LPC remain the toothless tiger that it is.

Comment from bdm
Time: May 29, 2008, 9:06 pm

Nabeguy, I understand your point but having to deal with all the requirements and extensive delays (and subsequent expenses) caused by having to get LPC approval on a renovation in BH, I find in supremely irritating that it seems only “law-abiding” residents have to deal with the hassle of LPC but if you are a disinterested, dishonest, owner/landlord you can just repeatedly ignore these laws and then in the end reap a potential financial profit when you are able to develop a former historic property with few contraints.

Comment from nabeguy
Time: May 30, 2008, 11:14 am

bdm, I feel your pain, having dealt with the LPC myself and waiting 2 months for an approval on a project that should have been a no-brainer (replacing a collapsing chan-link fence with a wrought iron one). But the LPC neither enacts or enforces any laws; as far as I know, there are no statutes that force a private property owner to maintain said property. All the LPC can and does do is make sure that renovations are done in a historic context in keeping with the neighborhood. I’ll admit that they’re somewhat Taliban-ish in their interpretations, but without them, you might find yourself sitting next to a McMansion.

Comment from Ken Sturmer
Time: June 2, 2008, 1:01 pm

Don’t blame it on ren-control! Put the blame where it belongs, on the rich greedy landlords. The idea that all these people are only renting as second homes is an insult to all! Most people living in these buildings are simply retired or working class poor people trying to make ends meet. I would never live in New York or any city where landlords were allowed to dictate the price of housing.

Comment from elvis
Time: June 2, 2008, 2:46 pm

“I would never live in New York or any city where landlords were allowed to dictate the price of housing.”

Damn capitalism!

Comment from Ken Sturmer
Time: June 6, 2009, 10:52 am

Yes, DAMN Capitalism! It is a worse system than Communism!

Comment from nabeguy
Time: June 6, 2009, 6:40 pm

Ken, it took you a full year to come back with that?

Comment from benita berman
Time: June 6, 2009, 9:02 pm

What a shame this building is coming down! First the St. George pool mural and now 100 Clark. I lived across the street at 95 and my bedroom window looked out on this house. It seem enormous. I remember chasing someone when he ran into 100 Clark. The door closed behind him and locked and I pushed hard to open it again and my arm went through the glass in the top half of the door. I still have the scar to remember this building by.

Comment from nabeguy
Time: June 6, 2009, 9:19 pm

Benita, check the date line on this story. This happened over a year ago, and the building is still there, although two floors shorter thanks to the DOB. In its current state, it’s an unfortunate scar for all the neighborhood to remember it by.

Comment from benita berman
Time: June 6, 2009, 11:27 pm

Thanks for clarifying, Nabeguy. When I was there about 6 weeks ago, I did see the building with scaffolding. I didn’t realize this was an old story. Do you know if it will be repaired or eventually torn down?

Comment from nabeguy
Time: June 7, 2009, 8:05 am

Benita, it seems that the landlords did what they could to shore up the building and then did exactly the same thing that led to this situation…they walked away from it. Has anyone seen any progress on this building?