We’ve previously wrote about a full vacate order at 11, 13 and 15 Old Fulton Street townhouses. In addition, on 8/3, the NYC Department of Buildings served a full vacate notice on 9 Old Fulton Street, due to “major structural defects to exterior walls.” This makes the four buildings (9, 11, 13, 15 Old Fulton Street) at risk for demolition. A source close to the situation told us that 11-15 Old Fulton are going through the process of what is called “demolition by neglect”, which means that the City is trying to compel the owner of these buildings to maintain the property so that they do not deteriorate to the point where they will have to be demolished. Allowing buildings like this to deteriorate to that point is a tactic sometimes used by landlowners who deem it cost-ineffective to renovate the existing structure, and who would prefer to raze the building and start over.
Regarding 9 Old Fulton, the owners submitted an application for a “hand demolition of one story structure”. They are probably going through the approvals process in preparation to construct a new building on that site.
In the meantime, while waiting for the approvals process, the owner of 9 Old Fulton gave verbal permission to the restaurant next door (A&B Fulton Corp.) to use the lot as an outdoor garden with restaurant seating (pic here). This activity too, however, has been stopped by the DOB.
{NYC.gov BIS for 9 Old Fulton Street}
{NYC.gov BIS for 11 Old Fulton Street}
{NYC.gov BIS for 13 Old Fulton Street}
{NYC.gov BIS for 15 Old Fulton Street}
The garden used by the restaurant was indeed lovely, but if you saw the rear of these buildings you would know why there is a FVO – this is obviously a matter of public safety. The DOB does not issue this order lightly or without first sending engineers and building officials to evaluate the building. They must have felt it was structurally unsound, which means that all adjacent uses and pedestrian traffic are also in danger – not just the garden restaurant. The owners of this building and their negligence are guilty of not only depriving the restaurant of income, and not trying to salvage historical buildings, but are putting a lot of people in danger. This building is worth more to the owners as a fallen down pile of rubble, not factoring in lawsuits from people/property owners – but then again, that's what insurance policies are for.
The garden used by the restaurant was indeed lovely, but if you saw the rear of these buildings you would know why there is a FVO – this is obviously a matter of public safety. The DOB does not issue this order lightly or without first sending engineers and building officials to evaluate the building. They must have felt it was structurally unsound, which means that all adjacent uses and pedestrian traffic are also in danger – not just the garden restaurant. The owners of this building and their negligence are guilty of not only depriving the restaurant of income, and not trying to salvage historical buildings, but are putting a lot of people in danger. This building is worth more to the owners as a fallen down pile of rubble, not factoring in lawsuits from people/property owners – but then again, that's what insurance policies are for.
Interesting- it's a matter of time before all of these townhouses are torn down. As a Fulton Ferry resident, I don't mind that they may be rebuilt, but worried about the potential injuries to the pedestrians waiting in line for Grimaldi's. The buildings are full of cracks anyway, so why can't the city order the demolish sooner rather than waiting for years until they fall apart?
Interesting- it's a matter of time before all of these townhouses are torn down. As a Fulton Ferry resident, I don't mind that they may be rebuilt, but worried about the potential injuries to the pedestrians waiting in line for Grimaldi's. The buildings are full of cracks anyway, so why can't the city order the demolish sooner rather than waiting for years until they fall apart?
More recently, after closing down for a day or two last week, the operator of this restaurant took down the FVO notice and moved back into the space last Friday. The DOB was called out, inspected the premises on Sunday, and issued a Class 1 citation under NYC Administrative Code § 28-201.1(see below) for willful violation of a FVO. This is deemed an “immediately hazardous violation,” and can carry civil penalties of $1,000.00 – $25,000.00, plus ongoing fines of $1,000.00 per diem of disobedience, as well as possible criminal penalties of up to $25,000.00 in fines and a jail term of up to 15 days.
Serious business, this. Which is good, because the guy who owns this restaurant sort of acts like he can do whatever he wants. It's obvious that he does not appreciate the real danger that he is putting his customers in by operating his restaurant in that space.
I walked by today and the tables & chairs had plastic over them, but the space was opened up, so anybody could just walk in off the street. And the FVO notice is still (or again) torn down.
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/OverviewForCo…
More recently, after closing down for a day or two last week, the operator of this restaurant took down the FVO notice and moved back into the space last Friday. The DOB was called out, inspected the premises on Sunday, and issued a Class 1 citation under NYC Administrative Code § 28-201.1(see below) for willful violation of a FVO. This is deemed an “immediately hazardous violation,” and can carry civil penalties of $1,000.00 – $25,000.00, plus ongoing fines of $1,000.00 per diem of disobedience, as well as possible criminal penalties of up to $25,000.00 in fines and a jail term of up to 15 days.
Serious business, this. Which is good, because the guy who owns this restaurant sort of acts like he can do whatever he wants. It's obvious that he does not appreciate the real danger that he is putting his customers in by operating his restaurant in that space.
I walked by today and the tables & chairs had plastic over them, but the space was opened up, so anybody could just walk in off the street. And the FVO notice is still (or again) torn down.
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/OverviewForCo…
For years those few buildings under the shadow of the Brooklyn Bridge have been used in movies to show a picture of “old New York.” I don't know what value they are to experts as landmarks, but it has saddened me to watch the “demolition by neglect” that has been going on for decades. I wonder how high the buildings will be that replace them.
For years those few buildings under the shadow of the Brooklyn Bridge have been used in movies to show a picture of “old New York.” I don't know what value they are to experts as landmarks, but it has saddened me to watch the “demolition by neglect” that has been going on for decades. I wonder how high the buildings will be that replace them.
What is the point of a full vacate notice if the building is about to collapse – no one has lived there for decades – the hazard is to people and buildings nearby – outside of the building. What is being done to shore up this structure to ensure it does not collapse? Forget about new construction – first step is to protect the public and property.
What is the point of a full vacate notice if the building is about to collapse – no one has lived there for decades – the hazard is to people and buildings nearby – outside of the building. What is being done to shore up this structure to ensure it does not collapse? Forget about new construction – first step is to protect the public and property.
there are not 4 buildings – there are 3:
7 old fulton – 7 old fulton st restaurant w/apts above
9 old fulton – empty lot – being used as a garden area by 7 old fulton resto – slated for development of mixed use building
11, 13, 15 old fulton – these are the buildings in question.
there are not 4 buildings – there are 3:
7 old fulton – 7 old fulton st restaurant w/apts above
9 old fulton – empty lot – being used as a garden area by 7 old fulton resto – slated for development of mixed use building
11, 13, 15 old fulton – these are the buildings in question.
I walked by 9 Old Fulton earlier this evening–all the tables in the garden were full. Shouldn't the people dining there be warned that where they're eating might be dangerous? Also, since it's technically a different address, wouldn't the restaurant need a separate liquor license to serve alcohol in the garden?
I walked by 9 Old Fulton earlier this evening–all the tables in the garden were full. Shouldn't the people dining there be warned that where they're eating might be dangerous? Also, since it's technically a different address, wouldn't the restaurant need a separate liquor license to serve alcohol in the garden?
Pingback: Dumbo NYC, Brooklyn » Archive » Grimaldi’s Pizza Served Eviction Notice (DumboNYC.com)
Pingback: Dumbo NYC, Brooklyn » Archive » Grimaldi’s Pizza Served Eviction Notice (DumboNYC.com)
I walked by 9 Old Fulton earlier this evening–all the tables in the garden were full. Shouldn't the people dining there be warned that where they're eating might be dangerous? Also, since it's technically a different address, wouldn't the restaurant need a separate liquor license to serve alcohol in the garden?
I walked by 9 Old Fulton earlier this evening–all the tables in the garden were full. Shouldn't the people dining there be warned that where they're eating might be dangerous? Also, since it's technically a different address, wouldn't the restaurant need a separate liquor license to serve alcohol in the garden?
Pingback: Dumbo NYC, Brooklyn » Archive » Img: Scaffolding Going up on Old Fulton Street (DumboNYC.com)
Pingback: Dumbo NYC, Brooklyn » Archive » Img: Scaffolding Going up on Old Fulton Street (DumboNYC.com)