Comment Policy

All comments to posts have to await approval. Approval does not happen immediately. NOTE: Comments reflect the opinions of the person writing them and should not be assumed to reflect the opinion of the blog.

Management has two priorities: 1) Making sure money is made, hence upgrading and filling up apartments is their goal. "Amenities" are important in selling the place, though few residents use them. 2) If someone needs medical attention, Public Safety will be there, if alerted.

Quality of life issues are not that important, however. Things like the carpet rule or outsider dogs. These "rules" tend to be ignored, on purpose it seems. So you will see a lot that isn't taken care of properly, and complaints will be met with a creative excuse and a smile.

"Peace and quiet" must be a cruel joke, though this property is sold that way. There can be no peace and quiet as ALL apartments must be upgraded, which includes the installation of an AC unit below the window. Aside from the continual construction about the neighborhood, there is a new and noisy subway extension being built along East 14 st and the shut down of the L line. "Choosing" to live in NYC, now the newest mantra, is a fabrication when the talk is of ST and PCV, which was traditionally quiet, with no construction noise.

Though money was always important, it is now more important than ever. Money rules many things, as you will find.

At this point, 30 years into living here and seeing many things, I can state that Management and their reps are BS-ing us. I can't say that loudly enough: We are being BS-ed. I don't see any genuine change, though the "selling" of this place is intense. Few of the "rules" will be enforced, as Management doesn't want to lose customers or potential customers. Where personal integrity is a hallmark of an excellent management style, this integrity is not seen in enforcing some of the rules.

About those "club cars" we see going this way and that way, and outside of Stuy Town or Peter Cooper Village:

Meanwhile: Freedom of Information:

Saturday, January 24, 2009

Green Dan Looking for Houses in Manhattan

I like Dan Garodnick, so this is not really a knock on Councilman Dan, but I have to say I found Dan's latest newsletter rather amusing. It's his "green" newsletter and touts the advantages of going green and explains how New Yorkers can go green. The problem is that most of us in Manhattan are limited by how far green we can go. We certainly can't install solar power on our houses--because we don't have houses. Yes, most Manhattanites live in apartment buildings, as I'm sure Dan realizes. So what's that diagram of a nice suburban house and a full page commentary on turning your house green doing in Dan's newsletter to Manhattanites? And why is Dan wasting a valuable resource on this, like paper, which mandated that some poor tree be cut down in some forest, probably in Brazil, probably by some cheap, malnourished labor force?

Going green is the latest fad. Going green may or may not work to protect the environment, but surely there are a lot of upstart businesses looking to make gold when the government pushes green and offers monetary advantages to do so. These business may go bust in ten years, but what the hell. Just like the boom of the dot com companies in the 1990s, these green companies see good and fast money to be made, so they are jumping on board. The quicker they can get on, the more gold they receive.

For landlords, like Tishman Speyer, going green may just be another way to lower costs for themselves and screw tenants in the process through MCIs and a reduction of efficient services. Going green will probably wind up costing the consumer more and the results won't be as good as getting by the old-fashioned way. Those CFL bulbs, for instance, do not shine as bright as regular bulbs--and they are a terrible environmental pollutant because of the mercury they contain. But they save energy and now are the offical light source of Stuy Town and Peter Cooper kitchens and bathrooms. (Hmm, I wonder if Tishman Speyer is using them in their new leasing office or in the Oval Essentials???)

Dan's green newsletter is toned in nice green colors. (Is using color environmentally safe? Surely it must be more expensive than printing something in black and white. Oh, I forgot, we the taxpayer is paying for this newsletter.)

You undoubtedly have gotten Dan's newsletter in your mailbox today or will be getting it next week. There are five nice photos of Dan, outside and inside the newsletter. Thankfully he's a fairly handsome guy, so no problems there. And, yes, there's that diagram of that suburban house, a house that I've yet to see in Manhattan.

The environmentally conscious Dan recommends that you recycle his newspaper. (The paper doesn't seem to be printed on recycled paper itself.) I think by recycling, he means we should throw it into the appropriate recycle bins in our buildings, rather than pass it around. I'm sorry, Dan, but I personally can't be bothered. Down the chute it goes, in the hopes that Tishman Speyer will be slapped with a fine for non-compliance of recycling laws. You see, we have some problems here in Stuy Town/Peter Cooper, and payback is always a pleasurable bitch.


Anonymous said...

Goradnick is an opportunist and is as useless as his stupid newsletters.

AnnieMae said...

I am hoarding real light bulbs because I can stand those low energy fluorescent horrors. I dread the day when they are the only ones available. We may as well go back to gas light! I also think that Goradnick is a waste of space. He certainly hasn't done anything to convince me that he worth voting for.

Anonymous said...

The recycling areas in Stuyvesant Town have turned into general garbage dumps! I don't recycle anything any more because I can't stand going into those filthy areas. Dan Goradnick should come see what a shambles the recycling program is in Stuyvesant Town - and see how much sense his newsletter makes here!

Anonymous said...

I think that some lazy person on Dan's staff just confiscated some green propaganda and sent it out without really adapting it to Dan's constituency. If I were Dan, I would fire that staff person. If I were Dan, I would read what my staff is proposing to send to my constituents.