[EVG file photo]
Back in early August, the landlord (Lee Odell, c/o 149 Associates, LLC) sent tenants of 149 First Ave. a "notice of non-renewal and vacate request."
To refresh your memory, according to the letter:
"We have been advised by our engineer that the building has serious deterioration issues and has to be rebuilt and most probably demolished.
As a matter of safety, we have to vacate all the apartments in the building.
Please do not take longer than 90 days to leave. Thank you."
The only violation on file with the Department of Buildings was a failure to file an annual boiler inspection report from 2012.
Meanwhile, the residents of the building between East Ninth Street and East 10th Street banded together and worked with various housing advocates to fight the evictions.
On Friday, the city issued the following "Notice of Violation and Hearing."
[Click on image to enlarge]
Visiting conditions observed include "Failure to Maintain Building in a Code Compliant Manner."
And the city's remedy for the landlord: "Make safe immediately — repair and maintain."
Previously on EV Grieve:
Landlord tells residents of 149 First Ave. that they need to vacate ahead of demolition
1st Avenue residents meeting tonight to discuss mass eviction notice
20 comments:
I would hire my own structural engineer to do an evaluation of the building.
I'm confused did the city back up the landlord's assessment or did it point out needed repairs only with evacuation?
And gee, not a word about demolishing it. Whoda thunk it?!?
how great that the tenants got together and if they can stick it out through the horrible city and court bureaucracy (and perhaps get some good press and elected officials to help them) get to stay in their apartments, and maybe even sue the landlord for harassment.
i know a good housing attorney.
This proves the landlord 's letter was full of BS, otherwise the DOB would have issued a Vacate order. Now thanks to his scare-tactic letter the landlord will be forced to do the repairs that they should have done before. Looks like its safe for tenants to stay while the repairs are underway. Good job tenants!
Now the nonunion day workers can come in and destroy the building "by mistake" if you know what I mean. Will the tenants come home to find the stairs removed? the gas system conpromised? The game is not won by any means. Do you think a landlord willing to conduct these tactis has any restraint? they want their million dollars too.
Damit! Have to agree with nygrump, and that's making me grumpy.
Looks like that letter didn't work after all. Good for the tenants for fighting back.
Afraid I agree with nygrump, and I feel bad for all the tenants in that building. I'd bet the landlord will make their lives a living hell to the fullest extent, as in: Don't count on heat or hot water this winter.
I'd love to see people who buy buildings like this be required to put 15% of the gross purchase price into escrow with NYC just for situations like this. Maybe that would deter some of the owners.
Its so interesting how there are so many people with no knowledge of how a building structure works. really quick to judge against a landlord because of course this world is meant for all landlords to be scrum and tenants to be victims. Lets say this building does collapse. Then what? Oh let me guess. The same special victims want to sue because not enough was done. We all know the Department of building is full of idiots thatcan care less about really looking at the interior issue and only looks at 1 thing and runs out the door. Give it time and trust me. Instead of the tenants complaining and trying to be victims. They should be trying to figure out where to go and sstabilized tenants should be able to come back. But if they keep stalling and tge reports come in. Lets all remember. The DOB just comes in with no warning and everyone is on the street. that's what happens for for not doing your research and quick to want to be the victim. Most of these buildings have joist issues and slumlords keep covering it till a building collapse. You have a landlord trying to correct the issue and you all rather the building collapse and god forbid kill some tenants to prove everyone wrong. You all are rediculous. I havent seen anything on this story indicating anyone being forced out. I just saw a 90 day curiously notice to have major repairs and construction done and I believe tenants are able to come back.
Annon 6:23
Congrats on being the only person that is not a landlord to defend this landlord. Let's look at the probability of this building actually being in such a state that it could collapse after the 90 day (random time) request to vacate. The building is sandwiched in between to late 19th or turn of the century buildings so it has not been free standing or partially standing for at least 100 years. The building did not have a structural problem according to the DOB and the landlord has not shown any evidence to tenants of his findings they are just suppose to take his or her word for it. The EV as is in the midst of a real-estate gold rush and a lot of longterm building owners are cashing in which is their prerogative however we still have laws to protect renters from eviction without good reason and this landlord appears to put this building on the market as EMPTY which is a big plus for the next buyer. People posting here on EV Grieve are speaking from experience and if you are paying attention in the slightest you will recognize this landlord's attempt to empty this building is nothing more than a lie motivated by greed with no regards to tenant laws.
6:23, working for a rental agency or inheriting your families real estate company is not a valid backing in structural engineering either. Why are you even reading this blog? Go shop for loafers or something.
Anon 7:23, I believe you may have been hasty in your assessment of anon 6:23. Sounds like the man to me!
6:23, and get spell check after buying your ridiculous loafers.
In reply too anon 6:23 pm. Jared Kushner......is that you????
Have to agree that 6:23 sounds like the owner! Unable to correctly spell or punctuate, and the thought process displayed is illogical - yep, almost surely the owner!
PS: I'd love to know what a "90 day curiously notice" is, but realize that's probably a "rediculous" request!
"In 90 Days I'll be curiously noticed to see cracks in the wall suddenly susan appear" is what he meant to say
.
If the landlord hadn't been such a doosh and actually offered decent buy outs or relocation to something similar in the city,they could have fully emptied the building and either raze it or do the Ben Shoul favorite of adding floors... but nope they got stupid greedy
ShutUpHooker said:
If the landlord hadn't been such a doosh
The rest of your comment is on-point, but douche is French for "shower" and is probably what you meant.
Yes sweetheart, I know how its spelled... but I spell it that way to get over any auto censor bots present in many blogs, I don't even bother checking anymore and use the urban dictionary way of spelling ;)
I realize I'm about seven years too late to this party, but did the building come down? Also, are we talking about the back building or the front building? I lived in the back building between 1996 and 2010 (apt. 4R) and ... trust me, this building was on the verge of collapsing the whole time. The floors depressed by about an inch and a half from the exterior walls to the struts and the building was constantly shaking and creaking when it was at all windy. Given how much worse climate change is making the weather, I'd be really worried, even if Lee O'Dell is actually a total bum.
Post a Comment