SCAFFOLDING BUCKLES AT THE ‘LA ROCHELLE’ AFTER BEING HIT BY TRUCK

la-rochelle

A truck backed into the scaffolding at the La Rochelle apartment building at 57 West 75th Street, causing it to buckle and drawing a response from the FDNY. Firefighters taped off the area as they worked on the issue.

In 2015, the building received a violation for not having plans on site in relation to the scaffolding, and in 2014, a stop work order was issued, according to Department of Buildings records.

Thanks to Joseph Bolanos for the photo.

NEWS | 11 comments | permalink
    1. Sean says:

      And the beat goes on.

    2. dannyboy says:

      Truer than Ever!

      “In 2015, the building received a violation for not having plans on site in relation to the scaffolding, and in 2014, a stop work order was issued, according to Department of Buildings records.”

      Sean, we now live in a neighborhood that is no longer a community.

      Let ’em infight. There was good community work done here for decades.

      Not now.

      • Sherman says:

        Maybe if more people would pay their fair share of rent and everyone else wasn’t working so hard subsidizing these people we would have more of a community.

        • dannyboy says:

          yes

          good luck with that attitude

        • B.B. says:

          Another off the cuff remark based upon not knowing a thing about the subject in question.

          57 West 75th Street/La Rochelle is a luxury rental apartment building. There might be a few RS tenants but everyone else is paying dear to live in the place.

          http://streeteasy.com/building/la-rochelle#tab_building_detail=4

          This building sadly is best remembered of late memory as being the place where that nanny murdered two children in her charge.

        • Cat says:

          “Maybe if more people would pay their fair share of rent and everyone else wasn’t working so hard subsidizing these people.”

          Why do you post this same comment, or a variation of it, on every thread on the WSR? You insist that everyone who can’t afford to live here should move to another borough or Jersey City and use the PATH train.

          How is subsidizing ‘these people,’ affecting you personally?

          • just_an_uwser says:

            OK Cat, here is how it affects many people personally.

            Let’s say I own a building. If I add up property taxes, water/sewer charges, mortgage costs, heat, electricity, painting/repair costs, superintendent costs, etc let’s say that is $10k a month. Let’s also say that the building has 10 apartments – 5 are rent controlled or stabilized at an average rent of $500 per month. Those 5 apartments generate $2500 of the $10000 a month required to run the building. That means that the other 5 apartments need to generate $7500 a month just to break even.

            In this example 50% of the apartments need to pay 75% of the building’s operating costs, so the owner of the building is going to have to charge them a lot more rent than the tenants that the landlord needs to subsidize.

            • Cat says:

              Thank you, I understand how it works, I just don’t understand why Sherman needs to bring it up on every thread and tell people if they can’t afford to live here then they should get out of NYC. Possibly Sherman owns buildings and his circumstances are different, but the majority of us who are living here can obviously ‘afford it,’ or we wouldn’t be here. Maybe everyone isn’t living on CPW or Riverside with a doorman and a household staff at their disposal, but I don’t believe that tossing seniors out of their homes is going to improve our lives.

            • dannyboy says:

              Cat,

              and you also should know this: “And by the way, since you two are so worried about my financial situation I will only say that I am a retired real estate attorney (not to mention property owner) and I represented landlords and real estate developers for decades. You guys rarely have any idea what you are talking about….but by all means, carry on.” – SouthernGentleman

              Do you REALLY believe that in this hypothetical that SouthernGentleman will lower Sherman’s rent if a rent regulated tenant vacates?

              Greedy Landlord BULLSHIT!

          • Cat says:

            Hmm, I was defending the rent regulated seniors, but maybe I didn’t word that very well. I don’t live on CPW or Riverside or have a doorman or a household staff. More than half of my salary goes to rent, and I choose to live here even though I’ll never have these things, but I can still ‘afford,’ to live here. I’m well aware that there are seniors who can’t afford to start over, even if it is Staten Island or Jersey City, and I don’t think they should lose their homes. I’ve never thought that anyone’s rent would be lowered if a rent regulated tenant vacates, in fact I believe that just the opposite will happen and more luxury apartments will replace them.

        • Jen says:

          Very expected of Sherman. I love his definition of a fair share when it comes to rent.