Fuming 200 Hicks Street Residents Take Hotel Conversion Grievances To NY Daily News

Mr Crusty’s comments are churlish and uninformed. I lived at 21 Monroe Place from 1963 to 1966, From 1969 to 2003 my wife and I lived at 200 Hicks (which is a coop not a condo),
During the years from 1963 to the 1980’s acquisition by the Witnesses, the Bossert was NOT a transient hotel in fact. It was a residential hotel, which had already was deteriorating. Only a very few transients stayed there. The residential tenants put up with the decline because their very low rent was protected by various laws.
The grandiose statements from the purchaser/developer that he is only planning to restore the great days of a transient hotel, which he implies were just prior to the gradual Witnesses acquisition in the 1980,s are very misleading and false.
Additionally, I cannot imagine a fully operative 200 plus room transient hotel operating on Montague at Hicks. Key Food’s sidewalk loading dock is a factor as is the fact that Montague is one block long westbound from the Bossert. The spillover into north and south residential areas would be catastrophic, as would increased air pollution.
The resultant ecological disaster of the proposed hotel would cause severe problems for many Heights residents and their children. The bell is not ringing only for 200 Hicks, it is ringing for many other Heights folk,
Mr Bear

The attitude that if you don’t like noise, move to the suburbs flies in the face of settled law, which provides for the right to quiet enjoyment. The police are the enforcers of this right. And they have had to do so at the developers club. Would you argue with the police and judges that they are wrong?

The time to come to agreement with the proposed club/restaurant regarding how loud they can be on an open deck with no sound-containing walls and how late they can play amplified music is before before they begin construction, not after it is a fait accompli. And thus, before taxpayer money has to be wasted correcting a problem using law enforcement and the judiciary.

Actually you can and should prevent a business them from doing something simply b/c of fear of something that hasn’t happened yet. It is done all the time. Many licenses, like liquor licenses and casino licenses are a privilege, not a right. And when a business requests one, their past history is a major factor as to whether they are approved or not.

I agree that the hotel could help create a more vibrant local economy. Maybe the developer’s plan for a rooftop party club will be just fine. But it should be examined in full before consent is granted to proceed.

Didn’t the Brooklyn Dodgers famously celebrate their world series win at the rooftop bar of the Bossert?

Crusty should be ashamed of himself.

Well, if it isn’t a problem for ME, then clearly it can’t be a real problem, so those 200 Hicks folks should all just shut up!

Let’s face it Montague is a dreadful strip of shops. We’ve had some nice adds in the last half year, but it’s in need of life. Brooklyn Heights still has no good restaurants (I don’t count anything on Atlantic Ave – Colonie, etc., that’s technically BH, but it’s really Cobble Hill one black over) and Jack the Horse Tavern is nice, but wouldn’t it be nicer if they changed the menu ever (seasonally would be the ideal).

A hotel with a clientelle willing to spend money is a great change to the existing users of the building who are not known as the biggest of consumers, it’s been a waste to the neighborhood.

I don’t understand all the partying and comotion people are enivisioning that will ensue. It’s a restaurant and a bar. The bar is NOT EVEN at GROUND LEVEL. Isn’t that better than the horrible drinking establishments on Montague?

Also a 250 person hotel is not going to produce a swarm of people like that stupid stadium will that we have to deal with not too far from here. Have these people ever been to Manhattan where hotels are integrated into neighborhoods all over? This will bring more cabs to the neighborhood. Are people going to land at JFK and rent a car to come to the Bossert??

This is about old guard vs. new guard in the neighborhood. We need vibrance and investment dollars, we also need rules to conform our neighorhood to keep it a unique place to live. This is not a Walmart – it’s a boutique hotel in a space THAT WAS A HOTEL.

@Richard Lynd says: “The grandiose statements from the purchaser/developer that he is only planning to restore the great days of a transient hotel, which he implies were just prior to the gradual Witnesses acquisition in the 1980,s are very misleading and false.”

@Mr. Lynd continues, “In what way are they misleading and false? I cannot imagine a fully operative 200 plus room transient hotel operating on Montague at Hicks.”

Well that is what is at Montague and Hicks. A hotel. One that has been there for a 100 years. One that you decided to move in across the street from. One that was there long before you moved across the street. If the hotel is not going to be operated as a hotel what would you like the building to be used as?

More nonsense for Mr. Lynd: “The spillover into north and south residential areas would be catastrophic, as would increased air pollution. The resultant ecological disaster of the proposed hotel would cause severe problems for many Heights residents and their children”

CATASTROPHIC he says. ECOLOGICAL DISASTER he pontificates. Please give me a break. Increased air pollution? Ecological disaster? This kind of fear mongering is utter nonsense. It is as if there are no 300 room hotels in the city. Again. YOU decided to move into a building on the commercial street in Brooklyn Heights across from a hotel. Its like all those people that move next to an airport and then complain about the noise. Guess what, perhaps you should have found a more quiet residential street to live on rather than trying to prevent a hotel from operating as a hotel.

Oh, and lets not forget The Children… oh.. The Children will be irreparably harmed if a hotel operates on Montague Street. The horrors.

@Rick: “The article doesn’t describe Heights residents as worried that the Bossert “might actually be operated as a hotel.”, as you put it.”

No? well how do you interpret Mr. Lynd’s comments quoted above?

That sounds pretty much like he doesn’t want a hotel operating on Montague and Hicks Street doesn’t’ it? It does to me. Perhaps a nice museum would be ok.

@Wiley E “Crusty should be ashamed of himself.”

This from the guy that DEMANDED to know how the BBP was spending taxpayers money. DEMANDING to know how many Prius’s and lawnmowers were bought suggesting somewhat nefariously that there was something foul a foot. Of course our good friend Wiley E didn’t realize that the BBP posts their annual expenditures on their website for all to see. No Prius’s. No scandal. No foul play. Did he apologize? Of course not. Shame is not a word you should be tossing around Wiley E.

Legally the fact that the Bossert began life as a hotel (transient or residential) is irrelevant. The JWs changed the occupancy and as a consequence the buyer needs a variance because in 2012 a transient hotel isnot permitted in a residential zoning district. When the Bossert was built in the early 20th century, these zoning rules did not exist. Now they do.

For all of those who would welcome a nice hotel, your desire cannot not trump the right of adjacent residents to quiet enjoyment of their homes or apartments.(The misfortune of those living near the Empire Hotel is that it it in a commercial zone).

A hotel in the Bossert is fine – a rooftop restaurant and bar is fine – loud music on the roof into the wee hours of the night is not acceptable and not in keeping with a residential neighborhood.

I can’t imagine anyone in BH is seriously advocating for a rooftop scene ala the Wythe, the Standard or the Empire. This is not an old guard-new guard thing. It might be a resident-non resident thing in which case I think the residents should have a little more sway.

@Mr. Crusty
So if I see an intelligent well-reasoned post I’ll assume it is really you, but if it is bat-s**t crazy I’ll assume it is your evil imitator!

No Rick you can just look at the graphic next to my name. If brown, it is the real deal. Purple, not so much.

@Rick then we are really not in disagreement. Reasonable controls on the decibels that will be allowed at various times is entirely reasonable. But, as Mr. Lynd demonstrates, there are others that are talking about increased traffic, air pollution, and of course the old standby, the safety of The Children.

Let’s just be honest, they just want to prevent the owner from operating the Bossert as a hotel because of some perceived inconvenience. Sorry, that entitled attitude just irritates the heck out of me. This is the big city and we all have to put up with things that perhaps are not ideal. That is the price to be paid for living in a place with a whole lot of other people. Adapt.

I agree on all points Crusty, thanks.

mr crusty, haven’t about 90% of things you listed happened? so, I wouldn’t worry too much about people complaining on this blog.

on the hotel issue, this developer has a terrible reputation. now is the time to get it all on paper — especially getting the penalties down since this developer has in the past just broken all laws and either paid the fine or not. “quiet enjoyment” is a right in fact. we always have cabs here — adding more isn’t great. it only adds more cars to the neighborhood. they need to figure out with key food how they’re going to unload people while KF unloads food, etc. now is the time to get this all worked out because soon the neighbors will have next to zero say.

also, locals might prepare themselves for the “open to the public” rooftop to be “closed for a private party” when they show up. That’s a common practice at this developers (and others) boutique hotel bars and restaurants. doormen have the power to limit the crowd to the cool crowd ie, nobody over 30.

of course, maybe it will be like the carlyle and the bar will be like bemelmans. that would be great — and they’re always welcoming there. but is this an area that supports drinks that are north of $20? I doubt it.

being smart about this stuff isn’t dumb.

It would be really nice to have a good rooftop bar, with incredible views, on Montague Street. It would also be nice to have a destination restaurant — somewhere close by that serves better food than the mediocre cafeteria food at the Heights Cafe. I hope that the naysayers will keep that in mind when they contemplate how fierce they want to be in their opposition.