Hi—well, I have seen the error of my ways and have started responding to ALL complaints, even anonymous ones. Since I am truly committed to improving the management of Peter Cooper as well as Stuy Town, I realized that legitimate complaints, regardless of from what source, are helpful to me doing my job effectively.
You and your readers can provide high-quality information, by virtue of having more eyes and ears on the property than we ever could have. I welcome your input. Unfortunately, not being the owner and not being privy to many ownership issues, I will respond to anything that fits my job description. I can’t comment on issues that are not in my area. Reasonable?
I look forward to working with you and your readers. By the way, you will see the uniformed foot patrols that you have commented on. They are, in fact, the best form of community safety.
Adam R. Rose
Rose Associates, Inc.
Adam R. Rose
200 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10016
Direct: (212) 210-6789
Fax: (212) 210-6799
All comments to posts have to await approval. Please be aware that, depending on when I'm logged onto the internet, it may take me hours, even longer, to moderate comments, so if they don't turn up in a speedy fashion, they are still in the queue. Comments that cross a line I'm not comfortable with will not get approved. NOTE: Comments reflect the opinions of the person writing them and should not be assumed to reflect the opinion of the blog.
Friday, February 11, 2011
By now all of you should have received and read your "PCV/ST Community Update" (February 7th edition) from Rose Associates Inc (RAI). According to the update, Rose is "committed to enhancing the quality of service for all residents," etc, etc. Sections of the update deal with "Quality of Life Issues," dog problems, security hirings, noise, apartment renovations, water value replacement, etc.
Rose should be commended for, at least, reaching out to residents in this manner, because certainly the stone wall of Tishman Speyer did not. Yet, despite Rose's reach out and the stated goals, color me doubtful that the problems here will be dealt with as expeditiously and professionally as the intention seems.
Regarding dogs, I will believe it when I see it, but so far I have seen the same old/same old, with residents letting their dogs off leash or on the grass (though, now in the winter there's admittedly little grass around). If Rose is serious about the dog problem, it has to get the security force walking the grounds and in places, like the M level areas of buildings, where dog owners do what they want because no one is watching. Security also has to be around at the times when dogs are typically walked--morning and evening. Even the Oval area in the early morning is lacking security, and that's when many of the dog violations occur. The test here will come with warmer weather. If there is no progress with the dog problem, then Rose has to look into shaking up the security force and the person(s) who runs(run) it. So far, this security force has been pathetic regarding enforcement of dog rules.
The latest Town & Village spoke to Security Chief Bill McClellan about some of the quality of life problems in ST/PCV, and his responses were stupefying on occasion, if not revealing a gross irresponsibility on the part of security.
T&V on dog summonses: "Of course, as was the case before, the tough part will be catching people in the act. Since being deputized to give $250 dog poop summonses, McClellan said only a few have actually been written since people tend to be on better behavior when security's around." This sounds like almost zero summonses were issued, and, of course, security is rarely around--which is the reason dog owners get away with this behavior.
Curiously, while the attached "Resident Notice" flyer mentions that dog leashes cannot be longer then six feet, there is no prohibition against retractable leashes. A prohibition against such leashes would have been the easiest way out of this problem and the quickest to check, so this lack of insight is troubling. Also of concern is that there is no mention of non-resident dog owners using the grounds in whatever way they please and parading dog breeds through the complex that are not allowed here, including pit bulls.
Dan Garodnick's assistance in getting security the authority to issue summonses for leash violations is mentioned, but--hey--considering how fast Garodnick got those dumpsters out of Stuy Town's loops, we may have to wait for this authority for years.
Regarding noise--well, it's unclear just what Rose will do differently than what's been done before. This sounds fine: "Excessive incidents and related inappropriate conduct will be addressed by the Management through an aggressive notification and response process." But there is no explanation of this process.
And, again, here's T&V speaking with Security Chief McClellan: "... McClellan said this week there have been six recent hires. The officers are now using newer security vans, and a new system to help keep track of quality of life complaints. Previously, if there was a shift change, security wouldn't necessarily be aware that it was visiting the same apartment more than once a night to respond to issues like noise."
Huh??? You mean that security was so disorganized that they had no system that would tell them about a repeat noise offenders at night? And this bit about "newer security vans"... Guys, how many times do residents have to tell you, it's BOOTS ON THE GROUND that are needed, not new security vans or a couple of guys watching monitors in the Management office.
Left out of the quality of life concerns are bicycles. There is a no bicycle-riding rule in Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village that gets violated very second it seems, and many complaints. Yet this update has not one word on the subject. Possibly too difficult to enforce? Or would it be too obvious that there is no enforcement?
Anyway, let's see how this plays out. I'd love to be proven wrong about my pessimism.