A three-bedroom affair, soon to be a fourth when the living room is converted to a make-shift sleeping area.
http://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/roo/2843055769.html
Three full time college students in our 20's looking for a fourth roommate . We live in a 3 bedroom fully renovated secure building in beautiful Stuy Town. Ideally located on 16th and 1st close to the L train, bus and Union Sq. Great restaurants, nightlife and shopping. The room offered is being used as our living room currently and while no walls can be put up its a large space and comes with a huge closet and we will work with you to make it as private as possible.
Looking for someone between the ages of 20-27.
Can't wait to hear from you.
At first I thought this was a three-bedroom without partitions, but from the photo, it seems this once was a two-bedroom. (?)
So on the couch you go!
56 comments:
And NYFD is really ok with this?
Depends on whether the apartment is a genuine three-bedroom one, I'd guess. The person does note that walls can't be put up.
Another question is whether a landlord can deny housing to someone because he/she is a student? And yet another question is how a condo conversion will change the dorm scenario, considering that only a portion of apartments will be bought by tenants, with the rest remaining in the hands of one corporate entity who will clearly want to rent out at the highest prices, irregardless where the money comes from? And what if NYU, or another school, decides to buy up the apartments they are already renting? (On this latter issue, the TA/Brookfield has indicated they would structure the deal to make something like that an impossibility, but at this point, as with everything else about the condo conversion plan, it's just talk.)
You can't deny who to rent to but we can, and should make renting these out with stricter rules, move in fees, noise limitations, carpets... we'd be the owners and clearly we'd have a say in this.
Right?????????????
"My first New York apartment" X 7,000 X 4 college kids = HELL
You would own your apartment, but Brookfield (under the TA/Brookfield plan) would have a majority say in what goes on here.
They can't deny housing because someone is a student, however, they can stop slicing and dicing the apartments which creates student friendly living conditions.
Adam Rose should check this out and take action. Aren't no more than three unrelated people allowed in one apartment? Found this on the RGB site: http://www.housingnyc.com/html/resources/hmc/sub3/art4.html#27-2078
Buy my apartment to live with this type of neighbor indefinitely? Yeah. Right.
Buy into this fucking place? What a joke!
9:30 is correct The sleezy desperation of yet another landlord to rent flats at 3,000 and up brings anyone into the property. No move in fee, no broker fee, COME one , come all.
I won't buy here either. Such a disgrace. and fwiw, doesn't nyu have any responsibility to demand their students act apropriately ?
It's no wonder the plumbing and infrastructure is failing in this place. It's not build to house this many students.
The conversion be it condo or coop will NEVER fly. You can take that to the bank.
Stuy Town is still 60% rent stabilized.
Why would anyone in his right mind double or triple his monthly costs just to "own" a part of this dump?
Rent stabilized tenants overwhelmingly will not buy. I sure won't.
I am a a resident of Stuy Town since 1992.
So sad how this place has deteriorated. Maintenance has declined but most importantly this place has ceased being family-friendly and now has a never-ending turnover of market rate residents who have no long term commitment to making this their home.
Just my two cents worth, that's all.
With three-four boyfriends/girlfriends and three-four different social circles coming and going. If it sounds like a dorm, smells like a dorm and vomits like a dorm, it's a dorm!
I,m a Asian-American professional currently living on my brothers coach, interested, how's the night-life. BTW. I dribble a lot, signed JL
I see the Cole the Carpet Inspector missed this dorm.
It's no wonder there is so much garbage in the recycling rooms, especially as so many of these people don't know that they shouldn't put "dirty" garbage down there. Sometimes you can't get to the bottles or paper recycling bins because they are stacked high with bags of oozing, stinking garbage. The toll on the infrastructure and "services" is absolutely ridiculous. They have reduced staff to maintain the buildings while piling in more and more tenants in the 21-going-on-11 demographic.
You know, it's true, the more i think about it. This place is really a serious dump now. N.y.u and Baruch and now other colleges have taken over. Our building has nothing but students in it. there is just us and maybe one other non student. I can't believe this happned here and that's just how it is. theres nothing anyone can do about it. today we were passing the rental office, and there were about 10 or so people waiting inside. i don't think thee was one who was over 20.
Maybe you can't refuse to rent to a student, but you can refuse to rent to someone whose rent is being guaranteed by someone else. At least, that's my impression from reading rental ads. Some say guarantors are OK, which leads me to believe that some buildings prohibit the practice.
"Stuy Town is still 60% rent stabilized."
The complex is 100% rent stabilized.
I think you mean to say that 60% of the tenants are paying less than "market"--but don't let me put words in your mouth.
I can't imagine buying this place. Let them sell to the 40%+ that are already paying through the nose. Oh...wait...at least half of them won't buy either because they're "just passing through this town."
OK. So they can sell to the 20% that are lookin' for a schtuppin' and the rest of us can just keep renting--with most of us costing them plenty each month that we stay. Unfortunately for the people who buy in, they're going to have to pay the freight for a lot of the rest of us. Shame...
Why can't they deny a lease to someone who is a student? When I moved in 30 years ago there were all kinds of criteria such as a clean credit record, references from prior landlord, proof of income and an inspection of the apartment I was then living in. If a landlord can't set some kind of standards for tenants, without breaking discrimination laws, then we might as well forget about this place ever becoming civilized again. Buy here? No effing way!
Actually, IME, this carpet passes Rose's carpet inspection. They do not care how close to the wall it is or how much floor it covers!
AWESOME
I don't think you can discriminate. If it's a condo or coop, maybe you can require xyz in finances and documents and exclude guarantors.
But isn't it true that in typical rentals, you cannot exclude?
"Maybe you can't refuse to rent to a student, but you can refuse to rent to someone whose rent is being guaranteed by someone else. At least, that's my impression from reading rental ads. Some say guarantors are OK, which leads me to believe that some buildings prohibit the practice."
Herein lies the problem. I doubt the college kids who placed this ad are making the alleged hundreds of thousands of dollars required to rent here.
"Actually, IME, this carpet passes Rose's carpet inspection. They do not care how close to the wall it is or how much floor it covers!"
NOT 80% coverage!
When there was a waiting list (which was abolished in 2001 when vacancy decontrol came in and they could jack up the price of each apartment that was vacated to market rate)they had criteria that had to be met by incoming tenants as their turn came up on the list. That's why the place was coveted to live in and respected by people who lived here. Now it's a transient dorm/hostel/hotel shithole. There are some regular market rate people (ok RS if Roberts really wasn't an unenforceable joke of a "victory") who are very nice and behave like adults. But then, they ARE adults. People in their early thirties/forties who actually know how to live in a multi-unit dwelling and respect their neighbors and expect their neighbors to respect them. Then there are the yunnies (20-somethings in their first apartment away from mommy and daddy in Hootersville) and the students. This demographic does not make for a pleasant environment because they are too self-centered and oblivious of everybody else.
Regarding the carpeting shown in the Craig’s List advertisement for the dorm apartment, that apartment is not, I repeat, not, in compliance of the 80% Rose Associates carpeting requirement. See link below. Getting Rose Associates to enforce this regulation, like the other regulations and rules listed in the link , well, that is another story. I also would like to respond to the posters who keep saying that Public Safety does nothing. Those claims are false. I have had many interactions (I know, way too many) with Public Safety officers regarding noise from such dorm apartments, Public Safety, as a department of Rose Associates, is not the issue. The officers are professional and courteous. In general, William McClellan, the Chief of Security, does a good job especially on the big issues. If you talk to any of the Public Safety officers off the record, they will verify that is is out of control here in regard to the public drunkenness and noise. Public Safety is not the cause of this but the current tenant marketing strategy of CW Capital is (allowing guarantors). It’s not just “students” but the just graduated from college demo that will “dorm up” to be able to pay the rent and be close to the hottest neighborhoods in New York, the East Village, The Lower East Side and the Bowery. Officers responding to noise complaints can be overwhelmed by the limited number of officers are on any given shift. The Public Safety officers I have encountered have no sympathy for these children of privilege whose narcissism level is off the charts. As anyone who has an apartment that faces the Oval knows, the screaming that one hears from Thursday to Saturday night is compatible to the zombies that Will Smith had to endure in his Washington Square apartment in the movie “I am Legend”. I agree, the fight for QOL is here is time-consuming and exhausting. I have been and I’m still there. Take a look at the FB page (StuyTown Noises) set up by a tenant here that is devoted to this issue. The STR provided that link on one of his previous treads. I have provided the link on my post as well.
http://www.pcvst.com/resident-info/living-basics/good-neighbor-policies.aspx
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_358760671689#!/StuyTownNoises
They are of course not earning 45x the rent. But Daddy is.......
According to several tenants, Rose Associates is converting a 1 bedroom to a permanent 2 bedroom for apt. OM-A at 441 E, 20th in Peter Cooper. Renovation crews have been there for the past 3 weeks. The same sources say that Rose will market the apt towards "college age" tenants.
The previous resident was a long time stabilized tenant, ms. edelman, but now the apt will have a rent of over $3K according to what we are hearing.
This problem with NYU might not be that hard to get rid of if we convert, or if our "landlord" CW would take a stand. If CE really wants to sell then they should cooperate so to speak. Unless they want to sell to NYU, who allegedly does not have the money to buy.
No one is under obligation to rent to anyone, except for racial discrimination or disability.
Now, how could NYU Students have stabilized leases, considering that they want it to be a dorm with students having to move out in a few years to make way for the oncoming hordes?
If they are NOT stabilized than they all can be asked to move once their leases are up.
My question, which no one has answered yet, is what kind of deal does our rental people have with NYU? Is it in anyway legally binding? Due universities have legal rights that regular people do not have?
I am going to do some research before I throw my hands up in the air and say we are a total dump and lost cause. I do not believe we are. Not yet...
There are no 3 bedroom apartments on 1st Ave, so these full time students are living in a converted 2 bedroom apt.
Not sure if turning their "living room" into a fourth bedroom is legal, as that would block other rooms from "free and unobstructed access to each required exit."
February 13, 2012 9:35 PM:
Your comments are accurate and well said. I have had, and am continuing to have the same experiences with security. I do agree that they are professional and try to help. I believe the onus will be on Brookfield to articulate exactly how they are going to make STPCV a livable community again. Exactly how are they going to address the dorm situations on this property? Exactly how are they going to address the noise and filth produced by the flawed dog policy here. For those of us who are considering purchasing out apartments, is it not our right to here from Brookfield exactly what they intend to do regarding these issues?
If STR is indeed correct and Brookfield will have say as to what goes here, then things could possibly change for the better. I can remember how people used to say that Met ran this place like a "police state." If one recalls, this was the time period when STPCV was an eminently livable place. It is obvious that we cannot have a lax management policy here.
I need to go now and pray I'm able to get some sleep tonight.
No matter how much harassment in the form of shitty students Adam Rose wants to pile in, I am not giving up my spacious, rent stabilized one-bedroom apartment. My neighbor has a rent stabilized three-bedroom apartment. I'm talking long-term rent stabilized. We are the people Rose and CW hate! Aint moving out and aint buying. You will have to pay us to move. No amount of harassment is gonna shift us!
As Rose is doing with most of the one BR in pcv and st. They also get the new tenants to pay for the 'wall'.
I guess Management has every right to do what they want to rent out apartments here. I'm betting that MA in 441 is already rented. Just waiting for the paint to dry.
In general, William McClellan, the Chief of Security, does a good job especially on the big issues. If you talk to any of the Public Safety officers off the record, they will verify that is is out of control here in regard to the public drunkenness and noise.
I guess that Chief McClellan along with Rose and their mercenary managers don't consider out of control public drunkeness to be a big issue. The bottom line is that for McClellan, Rose and the rest of the mercenaries who do not reside here, this place is nothing more than a paycheck and management fees.
"No matter how much harassment in the form of shitty students Adam Rose wants to pile in, I am not giving up my spacious, rent stabilized one-bedroom apartment. My neighbor has a rent stabilized three-bedroom apartment. I'm talking long-term rent stabilized. We are the people Rose and CW hate! Aint moving out and aint buying. You will have to pay us to move. No amount of harassment is gonna shift us!"
I agree and I hope that no one leaves this place because of the reduction in the QOL (long time RS residents that is). One can't be sure if this harassment is by design, but for sure you know that Tishman Spyer were all the more happy if long standing residents lives here were made to feel inconvenienced and uncomfortable in any way at all. I too will never leave due to their harassment.
One can't be sure if this harassment is by design, but for sure you know that Tishman Spyer were all the more happy if long standing residents lives here were made to feel inconvenienced and uncomfortable in any way at all. I too will never leave due to their harassment.
February 14, 2012 11:20 PM
OK, and I getthat. Sad though since we have one life, and it's being lived in an awful dwelling, borderline abusive between loud music/ parties and filthy neighbors. I really not sure it's worth it. We're not going to 'win' this thing back anyway.
>> OK, and I getthat. Sad though since we have one life, and it's being lived in an awful dwelling, borderline abusive between loud music/ parties and filthy neighbors. I really not sure it's worth it. We're not going to 'win' this thing back anyway.>>>
You are absolutely right. Don't know what the solution is though. Some people just don't care how much they ruin other peoples' lives just so long as they make a lot of money.
Depends on whether the apartment is a genuine three-bedroom one, I'd guess. The person does note that walls can't be put up.
Putting up walls that block air and/or light to a room (as defined under the building code) requires a permit. If you know the address you can access the buildings department Building Information System on the buildings department website. You enter the block and lot number (ST is Manhattan block 972 lot 1; PCV is block 978 lot 1)then click on browse the block to find the address. Click on the BIN number associated with the address and lokk for your permits etc. by clicking the appropriate hyperlink.
BIS is a nice tool for checking on what management is doing in terms of construction, apartment renovations, plumbing and electric work.
As soon as they were able to construct partitions( how they got around fire code is beyond me) to create extra bedrooms this place was doomed. I hate to say this but, unless someone dies in a fire in one of these partitioned apartments, nothing is going to be done about it. I suggest everyone write something about this on the TA's website. Maybe they will realize-although I am sure they already know-that chopping up these apartments and loading them with students is one of the key reasons QOL has diminished greatly. Whether you plan to rent of buy, this is still a big issue. speak up!
Speaking of partitions, there's an interesting thread at the TA Facebook that I want to explore a bit on this blog in a future posting.
Who will be liable if (or when) there is fire with loss of life and property in one of these dorm "apartments?"
I'm going to wait and buy one of the many foreclosures that will happen.
I wish the TA would allow us to view their Facebook without having to sign up for Facebook. They used to. Why do they have to be so "exclusive?" I don't want to sign up for Facebook because I've heard it is not too secure as far as privacy goes and I have no interest in interacting on it. It would be nice to be able to see what's going on with the TA though, especially as I pay my annual dues!
"I wish the TA would allow us to view their Facebook without having to sign up for Facebook. They used to. Why do they have to be so "exclusive?" I don't want to sign up for Facebook because I've heard it is not too secure as far as privacy goes and I have no interest in interacting on it. It would be nice to be able to see what's going on with the TA though, especially as I pay my annual dues!"
HUH? That's exactly why they don't just let anyone see it. Because then you could see all the members as well. If you want to connect with the TA without using FB, that's easy--go to their Web site or email them or call them. But the FB page is for FB users.
HUH? That's exactly why they don't just let anyone see it. Because then you could see all the members as well. If you want to connect with the TA without using FB, that's easy--go to their Web site or email them or call them. But the FB page is for FB users.
So, how come you can go to some Facebook sites, such as T&V and Lux's Facebook (when he had one) without having to sign up for Facebook?
The TA Facebook page is not a definitive source of everything. There are posters there using pseudonyms so that ultimately, there is no accountability.
I wonder if they are rapidly filling the place up with students in order to make it less desirable for tenants to buy? That way they can sell it off to the sleaziest bastard landlord who comes down the pike.
Wwhy would the seller care who he sells to? All CW Capital cares about is geting the highest bid for the property.
"Wwhy would the seller care who he sells to? All CW Capital cares about is geting the highest bid for the property."
And that will be neither Brookfield nor Guterman. They will be outbid by some sleazeball with deeper pockets.
It's a 2-bedroom apartment made into a 3BR. Have NONE of you people met your new neighbors yet or asked to see what they're living in? How friendly and community-minded of you! It IS against the law to rent out a room without windows as either a BEDROOM or as a LIVING ROOM. Hence, if it's rented as a bedroom it's a lease violation AND a DoB violation AND a DoH violation. Probably a few more, too, tho I've obvs made the legal point.
Meantime, do yourselves a favor, get to know the NEW KIDS! You're not speaking from ANY realm of experience or exposure by staying shut up in your ivory tower nor are you perpetuating the whole COMMUNITY mindset by remaining ever cloistered. Plus, you might even find that you kinda like a few of them.
Some of the kids are very nice (some are not). It's the blood sucking management who are cramming them in and making life miserable and dangerous for all of us who we hate!
I would love to get to know them (TO THE ABOVE POSTER), problem is, they leave every few months and a new one takes the place of the old one!
Can't wait for CAMP STUYTOWN summer 2012!
Whether they are nice or not is not the point. They are loud, messy and partying 5 nights a week. We did this too, in our dorm, in our dorm, with 100% students. in our dorm. with 100% students. on campus. inour dorm, on campus.
"CAMP STUYTOWN"
That's what their new ad in T&V says! Refer a friend and you each get a keg!
There are also lots of families that have walled off living rooms and have minor children sleeping in those windowless rooms (good parenting, huh?). They need to income and asset check everyone in that place - too many should not have stabilized rents that also permit the purchase of vacation homes.
Post a Comment