By Gus Saltonstall
The giant advertisement on West End Avenue that West Side Rag first wrote about on January 29 remains up as of Thursday afternoon, but the Department of Buildings did officially issue four violations related to the sign on Wednesday.
Following the Rag’s reporting, the DOB visited the sign between West 95th and 96th streets last week, and determined it was illegal in multiple ways.
Here are the official violations that have been issued to the building’s owner, 720 WEA Ventures LLC, according to the DOB.
- B201, AC-28-105.1: For a sign erected without a permit.
- B2A2, ZR 22-321: For a sign that exceeds maximum square footage for a residential district.
- B2A2, ZR 22-342: For a sign that exceeds maximum height for a residential district.
A violation was also issued to the shed and scaffolding contractor of the building — DHS FRACO LLC — for an unlawful sign on a protective structure.
Councilmember Gale Brewer has also drawn attention to the advertisement and has both written a letter to the city and been in direct contact with DOB Commissioner Jimmy Otto, who was the Staten Island borough president when she served as Manhattan borough president, to urge that the “Up End The West End” advertisement be addressed.
While the violations have been issued, it does not mean that the advertisement will come down tomorrow.
The next step is an Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (OATH) hearing, which is generally scheduled 60 days out from the date of violation. The penalties will only be imposed once this hearing takes place and the respondent is found to be in violation, or if they do not show up to the hearing.
The exact associated penalties are not determined until the trial, but here are what the specific violations generally cost if confirmed.
- Work without a permit: $1,250 (with an additional DOB civil penalty required for correcting the work without a penalty)
- Sign too large for residential district: $2,500
- Sign too high for residential district: $2,500
- Unlawful sign on a protective structure: $2,500
The violation issued to the shed and scaffolding contractor is not mitigable, while the other three are.
Additionally, the DOB will continue to monitor the advertisement, and if they find that the sign has not been removed after 45 days, they will issue another round of violations that carry much higher penalties.
The development team at 720 West End Avenue has not returned West Side Rag’s request for comment.
Subscribe to WSR’s free email newsletter here.
I live next door. What’s the big deal? It’s better than the scaffolding behind it and will presumably speed up occupancy.
I also live around the corner and I hate the damn thing, as does every neighbor I’ve spoken to about it. Give me the scaffolding any day.
Agree. If only someone could get the DOB onto illegally converted homeless and illegal immigrant shelters, which are rampant on the UWS.
Agreed, this looks better than the shrouding covering our neighborhood.
Because once one goes up like that with no fines, then there will be more to follow. The UWS looks much different than Times Square, and most of us would like to keep it that way. There are other ways to make the scaffold look nicer without a giant Times Square style advertisement.
AGREE! The sign is disgraceful. Also the conversion of this building into luxury apartments is despicable. The fines are ridiculously modest. .
That’s a lot of very strong words for a pretty average construction site for NYC.
It’s advertising the building and it’s temporary. It’s not a generic billboard. And no, no “other ways” are going to happen. Why would they? Who would pay for them?
Where is your opposition to the advertisements that have been gracing street lamp posts for the last 5 years?
That horse is out of the barn, lad.
Big difference. They are small flags, not giant in-your-face billboards. And they generally (though not always) promote non-profit cultural events like the current Sonia Delaunay exhibition at the Bard Graduate Center.
Yes, as always. But bigger is definitely not better.
Been residing on the UWS for over 56 years. The fuss over this makes me realize that our priorities are all mixed up. As a much older resident, my concerns are crime; safety for my neighbors; and lower commerical rent so that grocery stores are more available. And not a big advertisement, especially of a beautiful woman.
I do not want to live in a neighborhood of giant billboard advertising. All the concerns you mention and this are not mutually exclusive. Actually they are all of one part—n one respecting the rules and regulations that keep our city liveable.
Good points. Hopefully the building will be occupied soon and there will be residents who are paying taxes and shopping at local businesses so they can stay in business rather than departing and leaving more empty store fronts. And by shopping at these businesses they create working class jobs. And the building also creates jobs for doormen, porters, etc.
Let’s focus our energy on making sure Trump doesn’t get elected.
Are you talking abiut the same Trump responsible for the development of all those buildings in the west 60s? Creating a new neighborhood filled with the taxpayers and shoppers, creating working class jobs, stores, doormen, porters etc as you put it?
Fine them every single day
Why take it down? Look at all the press it’s getting! Worthy the fine
Watching the kids in the school across the street stare at it is disappointing.
why?
West End between 95th and 96th has now become bottlenecked with this construction, With 79th Street highway access limited,96th is being used as a highway access point more than ever. Northbound West End traffic cannot get by with the left turn lane backing up becasue the construction is not only using a lane but juts out into another lane. There is never any traffic cop assistance or other attempts to mitigate this. Bottlenecks that create this kind of traffic lead to more emissions, more noise, more stress and aggressive driving that causes more accidents, It is incredible that the city is incapable of awareness of what is going on and coordination between it’s departments on things that impact entire communities.
I notice many trucks going west on 96th to the HH Parkway? Why? Commerical vehicles are excluded but no enforcement.
Commercial vehicles are not excluded. Non-passenger vehicles are. There’s a difference between the two.
And we’ve been living like this going on eight years now. Construction of 212 West 95th created bottleneck as you described beginning in 2016. Then the construction of both 250 west 96th and 216 west 96th turning a four lane street into the 2 -3 lane mess that it is. I’m all for new development, especially a building like 216 that is actually bringing in affordable housing. The lack of planning and coordination on the part of the city, though, is what is most frustrating. Why haven’t they forced the removal of the dining sheds on west 95th to help with traffic flow? Made a temporary no parking zone on one side of the street allowing for a clear path of traffic at all times? Simple fixes in my mind.
The DOT is waaay too busy planning new bike lanes to worry about traffic flow!
There are huge safety issues for pedestrians as a result of all of this on 96th and Broadway and on West End and 96th, which for those who don’t live here, 96th is a major crosstown street with lots of traffic normally. Now, there are issues with all kinds of delivery and other trucks simply staying in place, blocking the walkways for pedestrians to the point that they are at risk because they are having to walk into areas where vehicles are turning. It’s a nightmare and really can’t be avoided if you live/shop/walk in this area.
I have to wonder where do all the folks with money to buy into these huge (and ugly) buildings come from? Meanwhile, it’s not like we have greater services to deal with increase in population. Yea, more luxury buildings, fewer shops and services and increased traffic and more risks for pedestrians.
If you have a solution, why not mention it instead of just complaining?
What’s with the Whataboutism? From the fact that there are other and worse situations on the UWS it does not follow that laws that govern this type of signage should not be enforced.
I guess we’ll just keep our fingers crossed that there’s no accident and nothing falls on anyone while DOB dithers. Issue a Stop Work Order and go in there with your own people and remove the sign and then bill the landlord for the work.
It’s actually a great professional high end looking ad. As someone who has lived in the neighborhood for over 13 years, I’m OK with it.
Glad we are cracking down on the real crime that is affecting New Yorkers.
Why only fines? Why can’t the DOB demand that the sign be removed entirely?
The fines are minimal – in advertising alone it cost $7 million for a 30-sec ad during this year’s SuperbBowl. And for a mere $9,000 they are getting an ad for 24 hours/day for 60 days, What’s the incentive for the developer to take down this disgusting, oversized signage? In my opinion, the fine amount should be determined as part of the hearing and cumulative by day. And the community should, as well, have a voice during such hearing.
They are making way more money in free advertising being in newspapers and blogs every day.
I hope they keep it up!