Today, lovely day at the fountain. Noon. One dog was there, then another joined in the fun:
No Public Safety to be seen in the Doll House Booth or anywhere else.
Half an hour goes by. The dogs are still there. A Public Safety car circles the Oval, but, of course, doesn't see anything.
Soon afterward, another dog joins the two already at the fountain. That's three dogs.
An hour goes by. One more dog at the fountain, making a total of four dogs in an area off limits to dogs.
Not once did a Public Safety officer step into the fountain area to check around. For dogs. Or hookah parties. Or whatever.
Let's revert to the policy that if you can't enforce the rules, or don't feel compelled to regularly check if they are being enforced, get rid of the rules. It's much better that way. Less aggravation, less trouble, more freedoms for dogs and dog-owners everywhere.
UPDATE: ca. 4:15-4:45pm. Five (different) dogs at the fountain plaza! Guys, forget about enforcing this rule and just remove the standing no dog sign. Seriously. The non-compliance of this rule just advances the concept that rules aren't followed here in general and dismays those that do follow the rules.
83 comments:
A Public Safety car circles the Oval, but, of course, doesn't see anything."
Look, I don't think you are being fair to these guys. It is very difficult to drive and update your Facebook page on your smartphone without hitting anybody. Something has to give!
Ha. I know! The 'security' personnel are way too busy on their cellphones. Please, don't interrupt them!
Did anyone see/hear the accident on 1st Avenue @ 18th Street? SUV hits pedestrian - not pretty. anyone know how the pedestrian managed? She looked to be coming from StuyTown.
This is a big problem. No surprise that the security guys don't want to be bothered. Guaranteed...if this place sells to the tenants, that will change. The bylaws will state that any security guard remiss in enforcing clearly stated bylaws will be subject to being dismissed.
Why not phone Security to tell them about the dogs? Of course it's unlikely they'll do anything, but I like the idea of reminding them incessantly of what they're supposed to be doing. Can't hurt. Just add Security to your cell phone contacts, which is a good idea anyway.
I don't have a cell phone. Refuse to get it. But that's another story.
But, yes, if Security were informed, they'd have to do something, and if this were a major violation, I would certainly inform them.
I personally don't mind dogs at the fountain plaza (they are most everywhere else), but what does gnaw at one is seeing this minor rule being broken again and again with that no-dog sign up in the front. This is why fencing has to be put up all over the place. There are people who just will not follow the signage in this complex.
I also don't want Public Safety to be an intrusive presence in the Oval, hovering around the fountain to make sure the dog rule is obeyed, but someone should check on foot (perhaps once an hour at least and during the busy weekend when the fountain plaza is crowded) to make sure everything is on the up and up.
Besides "cuz the rules say so," why is it a big problem to have people walk their dogs around the fountain?
Does anyone think sunbathing should also be banned from "fountain plaza" along with dogs? What an eyesore it is when the beach towels are out and the semi-clad guys and dolls are strutting their stuff whilst regular folks are trying to enjoy the cool tranquility of the fountain.
STR, don't you get it yet that Rose Associates is simply incapable of enforcing the rules it makes? The rules are the best example of form without substance that there is. The reason: Rose Associates is a totally ineffective company and was no doubt the lowest bidder when CW was looking for a property manager. MetLife ran the property well, but it wasn't overrun with dogs and students, transients and filled with overstuffed apartments with all the pressure walls. Rose Associates is just too ineffectual to enforce its rules because they can't deal with a residential property this size. Probably no other company could either. From the dog shit all over the property to the uncarpeted floors, noisy tenants, filthy recycling areas and filthy, broken down washing machines, the whole property is just unmanageable. It would probably be better if it were broken up and parceled out to several companies. If Rose only had to manage one or two buildings they would probably be up to the job. But the whole project? They can't handle it. We see proof positive of that every day of our lives.
>>Does anyone think sunbathing should also be banned from "fountain plaza" along with dogs? What an eyesore it is when the beach towels are out and the semi-clad guys and dolls are strutting their stuff whilst regular folks are trying to enjoy the cool tranquility of the fountain.<<
It's not an important issue for me, but, yes. Today, you couldn't cross the fountain without nudging some sunbather. I assume the crowds will disappear and move over to the lawn when it opens up next week.
>>Rose Associates is a totally ineffective company and was no doubt the lowest bidder when CW was looking for a property manage.<<
I wouldn't think so. Rose was here pre-Tishman Speyer and that's why the company is here again. After TS, Rose could step in, already familiar with the property and fully aware of the problems in maintaining it.
"After TS, Rose could step in, already familiar with the property and fully aware of the problems in maintaining it."
Just because they are fully aware of the problems in maintaining it doesn't mean that they are capable of maintaining it. When they ran the property pre-TS, it was in good shape because MetLife had been running it for decades. TS reduced it to a shambolic state and walked away from the mess. Rose took on the the post-TS property and, in my opinion FWIW, hasn't been able to cope with the task. The rules are, as I said, form without substance. Rose makes rules, but doesn't enforce them which means that the rules are meaningless. I really don't believe that Rose Associates is capable of successfully running this property. Maybe no company is. The place is a disaster and the cosmetic touches (landscaping, etc.) are just like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Why would anyone want to pay market rent to live here when the place is overrun with students/transients/b&b guests who make life miserable for regular renters? Those are the people who totally ignore all of the rules whether it pertains to carpets, noise, filth, whatever. Rose Associates simply does not have what it takes to enforce the rules and that is a fact.
"Does anyone think sunbathing should also be banned from "fountain plaza" along with dogs? What an eyesore it is when the beach towels are out and the semi-clad guys and dolls are strutting their stuff whilst regular folks are trying to enjoy the cool tranquility of the fountain."
There is a time and a place for everything (well...most things, anyway).
The time and place for sunbathing is around a pool or at the beach. It's not on the lawn outside my door. There's just something vulgar about it. It detracts from the community.
I love the beach. I love the sun. And I love to hang out in a chair and just chill but I don't do it in the grass across from my building. It is just so low class and so airbnb.
Rose may be aware of the problems of maintaining the property but they can't do the job! Duh.
I lived in Stuy town as a child in the early to mid-Fifties.(277 Ave C). I loved it.
At the time there was a strict policy: NO PETS ALLOWED! I suppose birds and fish were okay, but you had to leave Stuy Town for a dog sighting on Ave C or 14th ST.
Stuytown Baby
"Does anyone think sunbathing should also be banned from "fountain plaza" along with dogs? What an eyesore it is when the beach towels are out and the semi-clad guys and dolls are strutting their stuff whilst regular folks are trying to enjoy the cool tranquility of the fountain."
Sunbathing should be banned from the entire property period. If anything, like the old days, allow it in one area one day a week. This is a home not a flop house (even though it has turned into one).
This is yet another example of why we WANT a conversion.
"Does anyone think sunbathing should also be banned from "fountain plaza"..."
Personally, I think it's classless and cheapens the aesthetic of the grounds. Sunbathing ANYWHERE on the property wasn't allowed under MET. You weren't allowed to wear a bathing suit or lie down on a bench, but rather than being so petty I'd be more in favor of having sunbathers restricted to a less visibly prominent area than the Oval. Playground 3 might work.
>>The place is a disaster<<
I just don't see it that way. Overall, I enjoy living here and am grateful I do.
>>Rose may be aware of the problems of maintaining the property but they can't do the job!<<
I don't think that's a fair or accurate accusation. Remember, Tishman Speyer's policies instituted certain changes here that created problems which in certain cases, like the dog situation, are continual. As for students being here, well, that's a fact of NYC life these days. Walk out of Stuy Town and what do you see a lot of? Students. The student population in the city has dramatically increased, as has the need for student housing. I would venture to say that even if the TA and Brookfield get this property in the end, they will still have to rent to students, if just to make the complex financially solvent.
I have absolutely NO problem with people enjoying the grass and the sun. Sunbathing is just fine with me--it seems so petty to try to ban that. No bathing suits? Met Life sounded like a Nanny State! I am so glad it's 2012!
3:11--
Shambolic? Disaster? Miserable?
Really? I love it here. LOVE. There is much room for improvement, but I LOVE it here. I think you need to move so someone who appreciates it here can move in.
Move so someone can move in ? what????? they have thousands of vacancies.
take your pick. omg, really no need to make more empty space here.
Besides "cuz the rules say so," why is it a big problem to have people walk their dogs around the fountain?
This might come as a big surprise to you, but not everyone likes dogs and some people are even afraid of them so is it OK with you if there is ONE area on this property where dogs are NOT allowed?!
And, I might add, as someone who does like dogs - or at least used to - there are those of us who resent the abuse that many of the dogs' owners now selfishly heap on this property by allowing their animals to poo and pee on every flower, bush and blade of grass, despite signs asking them not to.
...Rose Associates is simply incapable of enforcing the rules it makes
Disagree. I know for a fact and have been on the receiving end - in a positive way - of Rose enforcing rules when they want to.
The reason that Rose doesn't enforce the rules is really quite simple: MONEY.
It takes time and manpower - which equals money - to enforce rules and it would make the complexes look less profitable to the current bond holders and potential buyers if they spent too much of their operating budget on rules enforcement.
I also think that CW Capital and Rose use non-rules enforcement as a passive-agressive way to try to aggravate and push out long-time, lower rent paying tenants.
I was doing my usual get out of town on the weekend thing and was loading the car on Saturday at around 7 AM. As I started out to the elevator on the main floor of my building my son said look out Dad, so I stopped and looked down and right there on the tiles between the 2 elevators was a big dog turd. Some dog owner allowed their dog to take a crap in the building and then just left it. Totally unbelievable if I hadn't seen it with my own 2 eyes.
Note to Adam Rose: I will be contacting your office to find out if you have seen who the culprit was since you have a camera right there. I will also be wanting to know when you will kick this person out.
Dogs in the fountain, was this a form of protest or quite possibly a Mayor Bloomberg cooling center. If one feels strongly about this issue complain to security, it's your right!
Regarding sunbathing, I believe this should be regulated much like the size & breed of dogs are? Management should also invoke it rights regarding aggressive breeds, each potential sunbather can be provided with a tag to certify that they are management approved.
sunbathing is tacky, but then that seems to be the theme of late. I can cite two disturbing examples from last year, both equally tasteless albeit for different reasons: First, a young girl sunning herself outside my building on the grass (not on the Oval), lying on her stomach in nothing more than very tiny bikini bottoms and no top. Second, (these two are regulars, same spot near my building) a couple of flabby underdressed and overtanned older women (one in a bra top no less) on display for the better part of the day as fully dressed tenants come & go. Ugh...!
>>they have thousands of vacancies.<<
Proof?
>>I also think that CW Capital and Rose use non-rules enforcement as a passive-agressive way to try to aggravate and push out long-time, lower rent paying tenants.<<
I'd think the market-rate paying tenants would be the first ones to leave then. The old rent-stabilized tenants have a very good reason to stay here: their lower rent!
>>This might come as a big surprise to you, but not everyone likes dogs and some people are even afraid of them so is it OK with you if there is ONE area on this property where dogs are NOT allowed?!<<
Some people are also allergic to dogs or find the smell of dogs a bit nauseating.
I used to jog around the Oval (and may take it up again), but these days I'd be wary of all the dogs and extended leashes in my way. (And speeding cyclists.)
Go to the office and ask for an apartment. They will show you tons of availability. They advertise all over the city to fill the vacancies.
How do you not know this?
"They advertise all over the city to fill the vacancies."
This is true. They advertise on subways and on websites. As far as aggravating older tenants goes, I think they do indeed want us to move and they are hoping that the lack of enforcement of rules, the noisy students and the general decline in cleanliness and safety will nudge us out. Unfortunately, some of us just love our homes (as well as the lower rent) and won't be moving out, so tough nuggies for Rose and CW there! It will take more than a few scruffy obnoxious students and other similar annoyances to bother those of us who've lived long and full lives. Full lives as in rough with the smooth. We have learned to take things in our stride, so it probably will be the younger, less weathered and less patient market renters (who are paying through their eyes, nose and ears to live here) who will get aggavated and move first.
This link was posted today in the STPCV TA FB page. The “Curbed” link also was linked to a comment via the “Bowery Boogie” blog. Churn, baby churn. That’s what it all about. Suck em in, then spit em out. Why enforce ANY regulations?
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2012/05/21/stuytown_playing_lets_make_a_churn_with_rental_deals.php
http://www.boweryboogie.com/2012/05/responding-to-stuy-town-spots-on-spotify/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BoweryBoogieALowerEastSideChronicle+%28Bowery+Boogie%29
I find the sight of all these barely covered bodies sprawled out all over the place quite offensive. Some people look a lot better with their clothes ON (and I'm not saying I'm not one of them!) and this isn't a beach or pool. Some of the sights I've seen sprawled on the grass, in deck chairs and around the Oval have been totally nauseating! It's as tacky and low class as hanging your crappy underwear out the window to dry.
>>I also think that CW Capital and Rose use non-rules enforcement as a passive-agressive way to try to aggravate and push out long-time, lower rent paying tenants.<<
I'd think the market-rate paying tenants would be the first ones to leave then. The old rent-stabilized tenants have a very good reason to stay here: their lower rent!
Everyone has there limits, even tenants paying lower rents, as you have seen in posts here lately by old timers who have decided it's just too aggravating to live here now.
http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2012/05/21/stuytown_playing_lets_make_a_churn_with_rental_deals.php
New York's rental market has maybe never been hotter—vacancies rates in Manhattan are just above 1% and monthly rents are hitting historic highs. So why is StuyTown offering rental inducements that promise no broker fees and a month's free rent to get people into apartments there? One commenter at Bowery Boogie informs that these rental inducements are actually meant to entice people into a situation they will quickly not be able to afford, and allow the property manager to churn residents, with the huge inter-tenant rental increases that allows.
Bowery Boogie's commenter breaks down how one month's free rent that is divided up over a year can sting when it's time to renew one's lease:
For example, a one bedroom typically rents for $3,500 per month. Divide $3,500 by twelve and it comes out to roughly $291.66. Subtract $291.66 from $3,500, and the discounted monthly rent drops to $3,208.84.
When it’s time to renew the lease in a year, the rent jumps back to $3,500. The rent increase is based on this number. A typical increase is between 7% and 10%, making the new rent as high as $3,850, a $641.16 increase.
The commenter goes on to explain that if that's too steep an increase and the renter moves out, StuyTown can then raise the rent an additional 20%. Is this a case of caveat emptor for deal-hungry renters unwilling to do back-of-the-envelope math before signing a lease, or is it dirty pool by StuyTown agents setting up renters to fail so they can maximize their units' rents?
Many people with low rents are moving as many of us have seen friends move out. They just don't want to live amongst the vomit, the disco and the dorm scene even if it is cheap. Life's too short.
@anon May 21, 2012 4:16 PM
It's been the tactic here since the beginning of market rate to churn the leases so that the actual rent far outpaces the market. Then, tenants are simply offered a rent stabilized lease at "preferential rents" (which are below the maximum allowable), but the landlord can pace the apartment with the market upon vacancy. The whole thing is a scam that the entire RE industry participates in, so they essentially can offer rent stabilized units in name only. This is one of the prime examples of how stabilization is threatened.
It does seem we have hit rock bottom with complaints. Female near naked flesh, tacky lawn chairs, conspiracy minded landlords not enforcing questionable rules to infuriate long time tenants to give up their apartments. This appears to be the lull between semesters and parties. Lest you forget we were all once young!
Plus, that dog in the photo is so cute!
Stuy Town Fountain Dogs, was this not Tom Waits 3rd Album?
Hey Tommyboy, a lot of the male flesh we see too much of the moment the sun comes out is pretty repulsive! We're not seeing any Clooneys or Pitts around here and believe me I've looked! Keep it covered when you're not at the beach, please!
Regarding the Oval, I posted this comment below on the STPCV FB page on a tread on sunbathing at the Oval. That being said, the current crew which takes over the south side of the Oval fountain for sun bathing while waiting for the Oval proper to be opened, I’m sorry, this bunch is truly a self-absorption/narcissism combo since anyone who wishes to enjoy the entire fountain, children, elderly, walkers, etc., the territory staked out has become a “forbidden zone” for those people. This is also the same crew that also took over playground ten as well for sunbathing back in the day (2 years ago?), a playground specifically set aside (regulations posted at the front of the playground) for mostly children’s sporting activities, while the Oval was waiting to be opened, as per the schedule, and still closed to sunbathing.
“I would like to add that if CW Capital/Rose treated the Oval as the Central Park Conservancy treats the Sheep Meadow, same rules and regulations, I would have no problems with opening up the Oval to sunbathers, picnickers, etc.”
‘In the 1960s and 70s, thousands of people came to Sheep Meadow for large-scale concerts. Even the first landing on the moon was televised to a crowd at the Meadow on July 20, 1969. But these events, and the lack of management and maintenance, led to the lawn becoming severely eroded –a virtual dustbowl. In 1980, it was restored and has been maintained by The Central Park Conservancy since then. The meadow became the Park’s first Quiet Zone – which means it’s the perfect place to relax and unwind.’
>>I’m sorry, this bunch is truly a self-absorption/narcissism combo since anyone who wishes to enjoy the entire fountain, children, elderly, walkers, etc., the territory staked out has become a “forbidden zone” for those people.<<
I have to concur.
>>I’m sorry, this bunch is truly a self-absorption/narcissism combo since anyone who wishes to enjoy the entire fountain, children, elderly, walkers, etc., the territory staked out has become a “forbidden zone” for those people.<<
HUH? What are you talking about? It's so NOT a forbidden zone. I have never found it to be unusable and almost always delightful. There are occasional sunbathers, occasional dogs, but I don't mind them in moderation and it is always so nice (except when the children have had a bit too much sugar, lol). I have NO idea what you are talking about. You are making noise about literally nothing.
Just walk over them and their damn towels and stuff. Say, Oops, didn't see you.
I'll have my kids go and play an aggressive game of kickball near them. That should scare them away. OMG! Like that ball bounced off my ass!
If its not a beach like atmosphere, why can I buy a barbecue, charcoal, water toys & deck cheers at the local hardware store? I believe that there is a law that no one (male or female) is required to wear a top. In fact there is no dress code here! But as suggested earlier, let management decide much like the breed & size of dogs, issue them a dog tag for all approved sun blathers! Plus let's move on to more pressing matters..........what's the status of the Tenant Approved Beer Garden? I'm waiting. Plus if you call out another, do not hide behind anonymous.
There are not "thousands" of vacancies. Commnents like that are pure nonsense and devalue the meaningful discussion that takes place on this blog. The rental office has no more than a few dozen available apartments at any time. Just speak to someone who actually knows rather than making it up. Harder to do, but will get a better result.
>>There are occasional sunbathers<<
Have you been there on the weekend? Last weekend the Oval fountain plaza area was packed with sunbathing bodies.
If its not a beach like atmosphere, why can I buy a barbecue, charcoal, water toys & deck cheers at the local hardware store? >>>
They're selling stuff for you to take to the beach. Duh? You know, that place at the edge of the ocean. You can get there quite easily from here if you want to have your bbq, wear your beach duds and make your sand castles. BTW, "Tommyboyardee" tells me nothing more of your identity than "Anonymous."
"BTW, "Tommyboyardee" tells me nothing more of your identity than "Anonymous." "
Yeah .....I was thinking the same thing. It does, however, provide some insight into all of his inane comments if that's his thought process. You go tommyboy (or whoever you are!). Anonymous out.
Absolutely DEAD wrong. There are not just a few dozen vacancies. You have no idea what you're talking about. Near Avenue C alone, empty apartments abound.
Management would likeus to think (since you are an employee posting that there are only a few dozen) this, simply false. That is a FACT.
Again, what's the proof of this "fact"? Thousands of vacancies is a lot of vacancies. I believe I read somewhere (more official than on blog's commentary section) that the vacancies here were far, far less than that. I'll check around.
2:44--You are the reason this blog doesn't help much, despite STR's best efforts. Really, anyone who disagrees with you is management or a "bunny." Why are you attacking everyone personally? Challenge the FACTS, don't attack a person for having an opinion. It's very ineffective and truly demeans real discussion.
@May 23, 2012 7:54 AM
I agree with Anon 2:44, judging by the swarms of people in and out of the leasing office. At one point, the vacancy rate was around 10% because Tishman and then Rose were warehousing vacant Rent Stabilized apartments in preparation for eventual renovation. You can walk around the complex and see the rows of windows (sans shades) which indicate empty apartments. Various posters on this blog and LuxLiving reported vacant apartments that stayed vacant for long periods of time in their buildings. But to counteract their high vacancy rate, Rose pushed as many pressure walls as possible into as many apartments as possible in order to create more dormitory living. You see, it's much easier to rent an apartment in NYC to 3 or 4 students, each paying $1000 a head than to find a working family willing to pay $4000.
Everyone knows they've been warehousing apartments for years here. Not new news folks.
The fountain area is PACKED with sunbathers on the weekends. It's so packed it makes the area unusable to ANYONE not sunbathing. Young and old, dogs and cats!
This property wasn't designed for 35,000 people to do whatever, whenever. We can't live like this.
The Oval is now a park, greenmarket, food court, beach, ice skating rink, dog run, bar, dorm, am I forgetting anything?
>>Rose pushed as many pressure walls as possible<<
Don't forget the word is that there are no pressurized walls right now in PCVST, at least not put in by management.
>>Everyone knows they've been warehousing apartments for years here. Not new news folks.<<
The question is are there thousands of vacant apartments in PCVST? I find that an incredibly high number. According to Wikipedia, there are 56 residential buildings, with 11,250 apartments in PCVST. And thousands are vacant???
Stuy Town Reporter said...
Don't forget the word is that there are no pressurized walls right now in PCVST, at least not put in by management. May 23, 2012 5:55 PM
I had a clear view from my apartment of the flatbed trucks delivering huge loads (to the ST store rooms) of sheetrock and framing materials used to construct those walls. I don't care what Rose calls them, unless they're made of concrete and plaster, they're pressure walls.
"The question is are there thousands of vacant apartments in PCVST? I find that an incredibly high number. According to Wikipedia, there are 56 residential buildings, with 11,250 apartments in PCVST. And thousands are vacant???"
Probably not thousands, STR, but may several hundred. The shame of it is that there are so many families of middle income means who would really love to have those apartments at an affordable, legal, rent stabilized rent and who would make excellent tenants and would rebuild the community to the family-oriented, stable community that it used to be and that it was originally built for. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening. The most profitable (short term at least) demographic is the students and twenty-somethings who will pay through the nose to share chopped up flats (with one bathroom per flat!) and don't care because they are only here for a short time. Churn, churn, churn is the mantra of Rose Associates and their ilk. The long term impact is outweighed by the short term profit from their point of view. These people are not the builders of our society, rather they are the grab what you can get and the hell with what you have to destroy in your path mentality. Kind of like the people who destroy the rain forrest because a quick buck on timber is more desirable then the sustenance of the ecology. That is the mentality we are dealing with, unfortunately.
PLEASE post as a new thread:
IMPORTANT!!!!! ANY RESIDENTS OF 6 STUY OVAL.
IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN NOTIFIED ALREADY,
SOMEONE IN OUR BUILDING HAS TESTED POSITIVE FOR BED BUG INFESTATION!!!
PLEASE CALL RESIDENT SERVICES (direct line 212-598-5276) KAITLYN TO ARRANGE FOR THE CANINE UNIT TO COME TO YOUR APT TO TEST FOR BEDBUGS!!!!
Wait until the dorm bunnies get bit by the fire ants!
The dog shit on the walkways here gets worse and worse. It's like walking thru landmines to get to our buidling entrance lately. Disgusting.
Vacancies: Our building alone (not that large of a building) has at least 5 to 6 that I know of. How many buidlings are there in stuy and pcv?
According to Wikipedia, there are 56 residential buildings. My building may have a couple, but I doubt it's one on every other floor.
Again, the "thousands" number is way off, and the real number is far, far more limited.
What I don't understand is your statement that your building is "not that large." What's a "not that large" building in PCVST?
There are 110 buildings in ST and PCV and about 11,230 apartments (some apartments have been combined). If every building has one or two vacancies--well, just do the math.
"The dog shit on the walkways here gets worse and worse. It's like walking thru landmines to get to our buidling entrance lately. Disgusting."
Dog owners here don't mind feces and urine all over the property (e.g. fecal smears, the smell of urine at various points on the property).It follows then, that we all must not mind it. Dog owners: please enlighten the individual who made this comment. I mean, What's his problem?
The easiest way to determine on a community wide basis if and where they are installing pressure walls in ST and PCV is to check the Department of Buildings Building Information system for ST and PCV.
As to vacancies, who knows. However, they must be having some issue with vacancies r they would not be offering rent teasers and Amex cards for referrals.
well, let's see... 277 avenue c is much smaller than 430 and 440 east 20th isn't it? And there are larger. They have separate addresses, but they're attached in one building.
Well, what we do know is that there is a continual yearly turn-over, with students and other residents leaving. Of course, the rentals would be perked up by ads and special deals. The more people are interested in renting here, the greater the pool of prospective residents, which translates into higher rental prices (renewal of leases), etc.
There's bed bugs in the building next to Oval Concierge as well. They were steaming and apartment the other day.
Except every building has more than one or two vacancies. Comment re: dog feces. Seriously? everyone here likes it? I certainly don't.
I don't think you know what you're talking about. I have two dogs here and I'm constantly harassed by public safety if I come within 20 ft of that fountain. Asking me where I live, if they're registered etc. I stopped walking my dogs around the oval because of it. You older folks pay half of what I pay in rent, at least let me walk my dogs around the grounds. And I don't mean the grass, I mean paved walkways. And not only am I harassed by P.S. but by residents as well. Literally my next door neighbor, a man in his 50's, expresses his distaste for dogs every time he sees me. However he seems to think it's ok to do vocal warm ups through out the day so loud that I can hear him through the walls. Also, the other day one of my dogs did her business and before I can even reach for my bag a woman in her 60's hollered from across the street threatening to call the police.
You all claim that young kids came here and ruined the place but the older folks are just as loud and just as rude. AND THEY PAY HALF THE PRICE! Now I hate college kids and neglectful pet owners just as much as the next guy. In fact I left my last building because it was turning into a dorm. But what about me? I'm not a college student - I'm a 29 year old business owner, Mommy and Daddy have never payed my rent, I work 7 days a week to afford my apartment and I think that allows me to not be harassed by angry older folks that feel the world is owed to them because they've been living here for 100 years.
Actually, we do know what we are talking about. The reason Public Safety is now around the Oval so much, and checking dog tags, is because of posts on this blog and the response from residents. (I will be soon reporting on the visibly more rigorous enforcement of the dog rules.)
Sorry, but all we are asking owners to do, whatever rent they pay, is to obey the rules around here. Just because you pay more than other residents does not entitle you to ignore them.
Maybe you misunderstood my post.
Me saying that my higher rent should allow me to have my dogs walk and crap where they like despite the rules is like saying that older folks can basically say whatever they like to me at the mere sight of my dogs just because they've lived here longer.
Get it now?
And I think you misunderstood my reply. In no way did I take you to task for just having a dog. If someone does that, then they are wrong to do so. My point is that you, as well as other, should just follow the rules. If the dog rules state that a dog can't be in the fountain plaza, then a dog can't be in the fountain plaza. And you are one who brought up your rent. For what reason, if not to suggest that your rent gives you some extra perks in the complex.
Do you get ME now?
You know, I am frigging sick of this argument that I pay double in rent so go drop dead. First, this premise is BS. Second, you have a dishwasher, built in micro wave and other apartment amenities and improvements that non-renovated tenants do not have. Also A-holes come in all demos and age groups. On that, we can agree. And please, you work 7 days a week? Cry me a river. Well Sherlock, guess what, we are all doing 2.5 jobs now. “In fact I left my last building because it was turning into a dorm”. Well, Einstein, that’s what PCVST is currently being marketed to and being turned into, the 18-25demo of 4-5 unrelated people crammed into an apartment. This is happening in PCVST, the EV, the LES, Williamsburg, LIC, Greenpoint, etc. Jeremiah’s Vanishing NY blog and the EV Grieve blog document this unparalleled suburbanization that has turned this city into mall. Manhattan as a luxury product, as per the words of the little dictator Bloomberg himself. Vent over, at ease.
"For what reason, if not to suggest that your rent gives you some extra perks in the complex."
I understood you the first time - you however have yet to get my point. If I am abiding by the PCVST rules which I have no problem with by the way - then I should be entitled to walk my dogs in peace. I bring up rent to show my frustration that not only am I paying double, I live in the apt without room mates, am following guidelines I am basically the exact opposite of what the older folks of stuy town hate. Yet I'm still harassed by neighbors - now if you can't agree that it is uncalled for than I would have to come to the conclusion that you advocate such behavior.
Speaking of neighbors, the poster above sounds like one of the many cordial Stuy town older residents. I can tell by the name calling that class most certainly doesn't come with age.
>>I should be entitled to walk my dogs in peace. I bring up rent to show my frustration that not only am I paying double, I live in the apt without room mates, am following guidelines I am basically the exact opposite of what the older folks of stuy town hate. Yet I'm still harassed by neighbors - now if you can't agree that it is uncalled for than I would have to come to the conclusion that you advocate such behavior.<<
Did you miss the part in my previous response to you, where I stated: >>In no way did I take you to task for just having a dog. If someone does that, then they are wrong to do so.<<???
@Anony 11.50-You were the classless one here who bought up age by the statement “because they've been living here for 100 years.” We could exchange stereotypes but that would be fruitless. Your point is that you are someone who follows the rules and should not be harassed. That’s fine. I am in total agreement there. I also follow the rules and just want to live in peace. Also, I understand by saying that you were a “business owner”, you were trying to differentiate yourself from the student and just post college demo tenants that are supported by Daddy. But if the person was a nurse, or plumber, or even a student, if they are following the rules, they also deserve protection against harassment as well. To anyone who see rules being broken, call Public Safety, do not confront the person. I learned this the hard way. The problem here is that many of the rules are not being enforced by the Property Managers. Notice I use the word Property Managers, not Public Safety Officers, which in my cases, they have been responsive to every call I have made. All the new Property Managers seem to care about is churning apartments.I have had a major noise issue with tenants above me for a year that I had to force Legal to get them to comply with the 80% carpet rules. After a recent roommate exchange, I am now back to square with these 20 something DBs. My complaints are ignored with this new crop of property managers. By the way, my building has had 2 major bed bug infestations and both of them were caused by long term tenants. While dealing with management , I bought up the issue of eviction but they were both protected under SCRIE and DRIE Scree. As I had said, A-holes come in all demos and ages.
Post a Comment