camden hotel2

The Camden Hotel, a former SRO and temporary residence for people with HIV at 206 West 95th street, will be torn down to make way for a new 10-story building, according to a permit application reviewed by The Real Deal. Neighbors have complained about the building for years, because of drug dealing and other issues there; the 24th precinct reportedly called it the second most dangerous building in the neighborhood at one point. In 2012, a resident there killed the building manager, according to police.

It was emptied of residents over the past few years — the HIV program was moved to another site — and sold for $15 million last year to developers United Management Corp. and Certes Partners. The Real Deal says the new building will have 18 residences and be about 26,000 square feet. No permits have been filed yet to demolish it.

NEWS, REAL ESTATE | 53 comments | permalink
    1. Cato says:

      Are we talking “affordable” (that is, low income) housing, or more luxury condos? (I wouldn’t even mention a possibility for “middle class” housing, since we know there’s no interest in fostering a middle class in Manhattan.)

      Is this a big win, or “be careful what you wish for”?

      An interesting development, indeed. (Pun unavoidable but still intended.) We’ll have to watch to see what’s going on.

      • Christina says:

        Well, I would hope that affordable housing can and would include the middle class. “Affordable” should mean just that… Affordable, for middle income as well as low income. It’s sad that it’s become a 2 class city and quite possibly the country as well…. Sick!

    2. 9d8b7988045e4953a882 says:

      It looks like it was a beautiful building at one time (built in 1908). That was before it was turned into a drug-infested shelter of course.

    3. Penelope Pi-Sunyer says:

      Can’t the building be kept, cleaned up? Renovated inside. It is very beautiful, with details that will not be replicated. and will there be any requirement to have affordable units?

      • robert says:

        “Anything” can be done the question is how many tens of millions more do you want to spend? Its vastly cheaper to take it down than retrofit it to current code.
        The building at 260 west 99th was redone just a couple of years ago, its 4 stories and cost aprox 36 million.

    4. Paul RL says:

      The developers supposedly were considering saving the building, and I was really hoping they’d at least keep the beautiful façade. No such luck. Also disappointing is that there won’t be any commercial space at street level, even though it’s zoned for that. But the worst part is the architect that they chose. Take a look at their website and portfolio: Bleecccchhh.

    5. grandmasterbeta says:

      Any idea how many people are in it currently?

      • Paul RL says:

        None. The building is empty.

        • D.R. says:

          Paul RL, are we sure of that?
          I know of a building uptown with 37 occupants that a landlord had designated as unoccupied so he could have carte blanche with construction permits.

          • Paul RL says:

            Only from what I’ve read. My understanding is that there was one resident in there at the time of the sale last year. I live right near the building and haven’t seen a light on in months.

            • dannyboy says:

              Don’t believe all that you read. Todd Alexander Balzano still lives in the building (see Comment 18, below).

              now D.R knows of 2 buildings that landlords designated as unoccupied so he could have carte blanche with construction permits.

    6. Kenneth says:

      Of note – this property is directly to the east of and adjacent to the former Hertz location that closed almost a year ago and has sat shuttered for that time without any sign of real estate activity. Perhaps not a coincidence.

    7. robert says:

      The article says “No permits have been filed yet to demolish it”, but a series of DOB permits issued on 07/29/15 state…
      11 Job Description
      Related BIS Job Numbers:
      Primary application Job Number:

      I would not be surprised if it comes down much sooner then any one thinks

    8. Nelson says:

      Im optimistic. This stretch of the UWS desperately needs some TLC.

    9. rose higgins says:

      Looked at the builders website. As my grandmother would say “FEH!”.

    10. Glen says:

      26,000 sqft/18 residences = almost 1,500 sqft each, I assure you, none of them will be middle income.

    11. dannyboy says:

      “…the 24th precinct reportedly called it the second most dangerous building in the neighborhood at one point.”

      and in 1st Place is…

      • West Sider says:

        Not sure! We’re trying to track it down. WSR

      • Cato says:

        Probably Fairway. More shins have been bruised, arms banged, feet run over, and backs shoved by over-zealous customers and dolly-pushing workers than anywhere else on the UWS. I’d say that qualifies it as the most dangerous building in the neighborhood.

        Waatcha back!!

    12. Claire says:

      I’ll take junkies over yuppies any day, shame they’re going to tear down that building. Everyone who complained will have to deal with the new building and construction that comes next, enjoy! Hope they don’t camp out under the scaffolding!

      • robert says:

        Hopefully your kidding or you must be “new” to NYC. I have lived in this area since being born in 65. I still remember when buildings like the Paris were full of junkies etc that thought it was fun to light mattress on fire and throw them out upper story window onto WEA on a regular basis.
        And don’t get me started on the folks that use to be around like Larry Hogue the “Wild Man Of 96th street” that tried to push and/or drag people into oncoming traffic at B’way & 96.
        Those of us that grew up in the late 70’s early 80’s would strongly disagree. Yuppies are by no means perfect but know of them ever held me up at gunpoint for my $2 in milk money on my way to PS 75.

      • MJ says:

        Don’t worry, Claire. The UWS still has more than it’s fair share of junkies. Walk around the rest of the city once in a while, you’ll see we’re infested while other neighborhoods are thriving. And the reason this happens is because of people who share your attitude. You have an unreasonable problem with yuppies, and a bizarre romanticism for junkies.

      • Paul RL says:

        Claire, I’m sure the family of the building manager that was stabbed to death at the Camden hotel would really appreciate your comment.

    13. Upper West Side Wally says:

      Yes, it will have affordable units. Separate entrance, however.

    14. ROBERT DALIA says:


    15. b47 says:

      Most likely building as of right without any city incentives, so no “affordable” housing. As a previous poster pointed out, it looks like an average of 1,500 sq ft per apartment. This should make the immediate neighborhood much nicer and safer.

    16. Lucerne says:

      Yes it should have affordable housing. I thought that was what DeBlasio stood for. Those of us who
      Raised children who went to ps75 and believed in a society that was multi ethnic now have young adults who can’t live in the neighborhood they grew up in.

      • robert says:

        Don’t keep drinking the Kool-Aid as we used to say. de Bazls is not concerned about NYC at all, look at where is has been on speaking tours push himself and progressive politics. Weeks spent touring Iowa and NH etc. How about fixing the many cracks/potholes that have shown up all along WEA less than 8 months after they on the cheap repaved it.
        He has made no secret in NYC political circles that he feels he is destine for higher office. Take a look at his related PAC’s and the NYC CFB filings. They are full of developers $$$$. He is just another political hack, like all the rest. Promise people that if elected he will use government to force you to have a seat at the table. Personaly I want to make sure that through hard work I don’t just have a seat at the table, I want to be sure I own the company that makes the table. Gov is not the cure some people think, everything they do “for” us is paid for by us. If we did it ourselves “it” would be done faster and for much less $$$.

        • Bruce Bernstein says:

          just for the record, DE B never spent “weeks touring Iowa and NH.” i think he has made one or two speeches in Iowa based on invites, don’t know of any in NH. but we shouldn’t let facts get in the way of a good story.

          • robert says:

            April 13-20 2015
            Here is just one of the articles noting one of his several trips out there. Some were covered better than others.
            As per NY1 he was also in Nebraska and Wisconsin



          • Bruce Bernstein says:

            both of these links document ONE TRIP to Iowa, which possibly took one or two days. this doesn’t constitute WEEKS.

            even if there was a second trip out of town, once again, this was a few speaking engagements and not “weeks.”

            words have a certain meaning. you can object to the Mayor making a speaking engagement in Iowa if you want… though that is nothing different than what Bloomberg did. but you have no right to just make up so-called “facts” designed to show that he is derelict in his duty.

            by they way, I believe De B has spent a far higher percentage of time in NYC as Mayor than Bloomberg did.

            • Sam says:

              Bruce wrote, “I believe De B has spent a far higher percentage of time in NYC as Mayor than Bloomberg did.”

              There is no basis for this right? We wouldn’t want facts to get in the way of a good story right Bill? I mean Bruce…

            • Bruce Bernstein says:

              Bloomberg was away a vast number of weekends: it was never revealed where he went. the times even had to have an editorial about it in 2011.


              Bloomberg “riding out a winter storm in Bermuda”:


            • Bruce Bernstein says:

              another article in the NY Times, from 2010, about hpw much time Bloomberg spent at his Bermuda estate:

              “At Greg’s Steakhouse, the power lunch spot on this sun-soaked island, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is such a regular that he has his own booth, with a view of the Parliament building. The waiters have memorized his order: coffee-rubbed New York strip steak.

              The cabdrivers in Bermuda know Mr. Bloomberg by sight and jockey for a chance to drive him around town. (The billionaire mayor, they say, tips well.)”

              “Mr. Bloomberg, who owns a waterfront estate here, has walled off his life in Bermuda from voters in New York, arguing it is none of their business. He steadfastly refuses to say when he is on the island, and to blindfold prying eyes, he has blocked aviation Web sites from making public the movements of his private planes.”

              “The Bermudan jaunts do pose political risks. New York City mayors have historically prided themselves on working seven days a week and racing to the scene of an emergency even on the weekends.

              Mr. Bloomberg does not. His aides know better than to schedule public events after Friday mornings, allowing the mayor to make his getaways to Bermuda on Friday afternoon and be back in New York by Sunday evening. (Of the 17 Fridays since Dec. 31, the mayor had no public events scheduled after 10 a.m. on 13 of them.)”


            • robert says:

              Next time I’ll post all the links to all of his trips. I was trying to make a point/comment not a dirtib. In ref to Bloomberg, at least he traveled on his own dime not the taxpayers dime. Must of the time he use his own plane/helicopter as well and didn’t charge the city a dime. The mayor always travels with an NYPD security detail as well as advance staff that go out before the event and the folks that he took with him. All paid for by you and I. Not to mention his jaunt overseas shortly after these trips. He didn’t heed the photo op with the Pope to talk about climate issues.

          • Bruce Bernstein says:

            look, you said the Mayor had “Weeks spent touring Iowa and NH etc.” that was your statement, exactlty. so far you have justified this with links citing ONE DAY in Iowa. Has he even been to NH even ONCE? Maybe he has but i don’t recall this — and certainly not for WEEKS.

            Your gonna complain about a ONE DAY trip to Italy, at the invitation of the Pope, to address a climate conference of local officials? Seriously? isn’t that what the Mayor of NYC is supposed to do.

            Bloomberg always traveled to Bermuda with a security detail. did he pay for them out of his own pocket?

            I am just so tired of people MAKING UP things about De Blasio, things which fit their political prejudices but are not true.

            if you choose to dislike the Mayor that is your prerogative. however you don’t have the right to create fictional accounts and pass them off as true.

            • Cyrus says:


              Back away from the keyboard….

            • robert says:

              April 13 to April 20
              That trip alone was a week (7days)
              The pervious month he was in Nebraska,
              he has also made “side trips” as politicos refer to them, while on “official biz”.
              Just because a trip is not on the mayors public schedule doesn’t mean he didn’t go for a longer period and more often then the NYT mentions. If he only went out once to make one speech why did SEIU 1199 give 250K to pay for his trips.
              Don’t even try and tell me he went to Rome for just one day, if that’s the case then I guess his security detail and staff members just hung out there without him.
              These are the facts, just because the NYT and de Balz and co don’t tell the world about them doesn’t mean they didn’t happen.
              Common Cause has done some good sleuthing on this but to quote Susan Lerner, their director “We’re very disappointed to see the mayor ramping up his unacceptable fund-raising activities”.
              I could go on with this but I’m not interested in getting into an endless back and forth. Just understand that we should all read a politicians comments and filings very carefully, the real information is almost always in the index, footnotes, addendum etc, not in the flashy power point presentations given to the media and public.
              Full Stop.

            • Jake says:

              Bravo, Bruce Bernstein! Thank you for that comment!

      • anon says:

        The UWS has only affordable housing. There is a very very low vacancy rate here which indicates people are affording to live/rent/buy here – maybe not the people you approve of, but people nonetheless. No one deserves to live in a particular neighborhood just because they grew up there or want to. If our rent crosses the “affordability” line we’ll move on to an area we can afford and swallow longer commutes. We don’t deserve to live on the UWS – we chose it, love it and prioritize it in our budget…for now.

        • dannyboy says:

          This is neocon/neoliberal economics.

          ‘If you can afford to pay, it’s all good. If you can’t, don’t complain.’

          But people do complain about being forced out of their homes. These are not profit generators but family homes.

          Get the difference?

          • Nathan says:

            No. If they’re “family homes” they should have bought. They didn’t, therefore they have no right to the property in perpetuity.

            But they’re not “family homes,” they’re rentals, and as such have no claim to their apartments once their leases are up.

            • dannyboy says:


              “No. If they’re “family homes” they should have bought. They didn’t, therefore they have no right to the property in perpetuity.”

              in this instance, and many others, these are rental buildings, not cooperatives or condominiums.

              “But they’re not “family homes,” they’re rentals, and as such have no claim to their apartments once their leases are up.”

              in the instance of rent regulated apartments, leases are renewed. This serves the purpose of establishing ‘family homes’.

          • Anon says:

            Rentals are not profit generators? So my landlord should be providing me with my apt without benefit to himself? Why would anyone work for nothing?

            Also your “quote” is not an example of any kind of economics but an example of a free-speech violation (telling someone they can’t complain). If I can’t afford a Bentley I’m perfectly free to complain about how much it costs. And Bentley is perfectly free to not offer me one at the very reduced price I could pay.

            • dannyboy says:


              You lost me at: “The UWS has only affordable housing.”

              you must know that residents are priced (MCIs etc) and pushed out of apartments (service declines etc), if you’ve been reading the West Side Rag.

              you must see that your neighbors are moving or gone.

              The UWS has ‘affordable housing’ for the wealthier or transient person who replace your neighbors.

    17. Todd Alexander Balzano says:

      In the article paragraph 1says there has been permits.
      pharagraph 2 contradicts with has not been permits .

    18. Todd Alexander Balzano says:

      I’m president of the tenants committee Association here at the Camden I one with unanimous votes three years running ends since my oath of office as president I have single handedly transformed the camden from the precincts worst building to a residence with a pristine perfect record with virtually zero rounds fired from non-departmental unregistered weapons.

      • Todd Alexander Balzano says:

        The building is not empty .I am a tenant here and my eviction proceedings where thrown out of court as frivolous. According to the city I am rent stabilized tenant in good standing the courts would not even hear the case. If they wanted a vacant building they should have purchased the vacant building. The owner should be in jail tactics used in Emptying the property . Wealthy and the poor have the same laws. But the wealthy kicking the sick and an uneducated weather down tricking them out of their only asset ” stabilized housing” for $100 and couple of loose cigarettes may not be illegal but it is immoral. I would want to be the next time line at the Pearly Gates I was them….. In God We Trust

    19. Todd Alexander Balzano says:

      I am still living there . I’m being harassed by the owners for years . There not happy I won the court case . They have the local police arrest me for trespassing in Duane trade using milk when ten officers and a captain in white shirt surrounded me and o was arrested for trespassing in Duane reade . This is ob%serd I pay as much tax as the landlord 50% my income so does .y patent brother and sisters and all 3500 of my union. Brothers and sisters. I don’t deserve to be harassed by these officers I have done nothing wrong . As if barging into my home with there guns drawn searching without a warrant three that’s right one two three occasion not enough now frivolous arrest is unacceptable with my tax dollars

    20. Todd Alexander Balzano says:

      I’m not going to take this treatment from the owners . The n.y.p.d. . Or anyone else who has a issue . There a set of laws there same for everyone . There getting away with harassing me I need help from surrounding neighbors they can have police harass me out they can do same to you. They also are. It delivering my mail. Everything return to sender . I complain. It still no mail . Only. Certified . I need support from neighbors . ( Tabonuuws @ gmail) I’m Alex the Camden tenant board president 206 w.95th street please feel free to contact me . I can use all the support I can get