Example of Pit Bull. Not actual photo of Stuy Town dog, unless he moved in yesterday.
Public Safety has been doing a commendable, and thankless, job in checking to see if dogs are registered in Stuyvesant Town, and in keeping dogs off the Oval Fountain area and pathways. The attitude of the Public Safety officers I have seen doing this has been friendly and respectful. Obviously, they get blowback from some dog owners, who consider these actions harassment, promising protests, an attitude I can understand if one has been repeatedly stopped while walking one's dog around the Oval, where most, if not all of the checks are done. (And that's the problem. I've as yet to see Public Safety conducting these checks in other areas of STPCV where many people bring their dogs. Perhaps these checks happen, but from what I've seen, they are done exclusively in the Oval area.)
All that said, there is a real problem that is still not being dealt with: pit bulls in Stuy Town. Pit bulls and pit-bull mixes are banned in Stuy Town/PCV, and yet I have seen three such dogs being walked with impunity in Stuy Town--dogs owned by Stuy Town residents! Two of these dogs were being walked around the Oval area. When I inquired of Public Safety about them, I was told that both dogs had Stuy Town registration tags. How is this possible, I inquired further? None of the Public Safety officers was able to tell me, as mystified as I.
Somehow, a few residents are getting away with having their pit bulls/pit bull mixes registered here. A glaring hole in Stuyvesant Town's dog policy and an insult to those dog owners who obey the rules.
Looks like a Boxer/Pit mix.
ReplyDeleteNothing gets your day off to a finer start than stepping into the elevator bright and early on a sunny morning ready to begin the day...and stepping into a huge pile of freshly laid dog sh*t...and believe me this pile of turd didn't come from a miniature poodle?!
ReplyDeleteAnother example of the slow ( not so slow ) inexorable decline of Stuyvesant Town.
And I love those slobs who are too lazy to open the carriage room door but leave their garbage right outside the front. Real classy! Nice!
People urinate in the hall all the time and I've seen condoms in the stairway.
But thank the Lord, we have the pony rides, the sound blasting hideous concerts on Saturdays and the overpriced "produce" at the Greenmarket which has raped the beauty, peace and tranquility of the Oval.
Makes life worth living...lol!
This is ridiculous at this point. Maybe they are mixes and not pure pitbull and even if they are, that doesn't mean they are bad dogs. If they are not allowed in Stuy Town but have tags, that is to bad. The attack on dogs is getting out of control. They are allowed.
ReplyDeleteThe picture you show with the "mean looking dog" on a chain was also ridiculous. And completely unfair. If you took a picture of the pits you saw in Stuy Town I have a feeling it would look very different.
ReplyDeleteNow Lo, please, no dogs as part of the food chain posts :)
ReplyDeleteIn general, Rose's policy is to react, not act. I hope I'm wrong, but before Rose deals with this issue, something bad will have to happen. Or, if anyone knows specifically where any of these dogs reside, you can alert Rose. If there is an incident, they may be legally liable for not preventing it. (Just a guess. In liability law, if someone is hurt, aren't there higher penalties for knowing about a dangerous situation and not fixing it?)
ReplyDeleteST policy re dogs, including weights and allowable breeds have changed several times over the years. Add to this the fact that many (and possibly most) shelter dogs are at least put mixes...and it's not hard to see how some dogs were registered.
ReplyDeleteA bigger concern should be if the dog is aggressive...rather than simply being a pit mix. A vicious (insert breed here) can also inflict a bad bite.
As per the PCVST “Good Neighbor Policies” link:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.pcvst.com/resident-info/living-basics/good-neighbor-policies.aspx
“Please Note: Aggressive breeds are NOT allowed. Aggressive breeds include: Pit Bull, Doberman Pinscher, Rottweiler, German Shepherd, or any breed the Management determines, in its sole discretion, to be aggressive. Any dog that is a mixed breed which includes an aggressive breed is not allowed.”
However, no mention of aggressive breeds as per the newly installed lobby glass enclosed dog policy.
Well STR perhaps you should ask security "who would know how they got their dogs registered if you don't"? Seems to me to be a reasonable question. Perhaps the head of security? the property manager? Someone authorized it.
ReplyDeleteGuaranteed...security will do nothing. There are no enforcement means to prevent people from breaking the 'rules'.
ReplyDeletePolicies change...just because they were banned doesn't mean they still are.
ReplyDeleteA law suit waiting to happen. The moment one of these dogs attacks or terrorizes somebody. I won't get on the elevator with a thing like that.
ReplyDeleteI've been stopped several times, even though my dog wears the ST dog tag, and the officers have been VERY friendly. I'm glad they stop me! It shows they are taking this issue seriously.
ReplyDeleteI have a feeling a lot of the people we consider irresponsible dog owners, the ones leaving poop behind, are the people coming in from the East Village. The sooner they stop them, the better.
But I agree, the Pitt Bull situation is out of control.
>>Policies change...just because they were banned doesn't mean they still are.<<
ReplyDeletePit bulls and mixes are BANNED in STPCV. Always were.
Not to be a rat, I can regularly see pit bulls outside 250 First Ave main, near playground 7. These owners always appear skittish and knowingly avoid contact with other dogs. Due to the violent nature of these dogs, I feel compelled to offer this insight.
ReplyDelete"However, no mention of aggressive breeds as per the newly installed lobby glass enclosed dog policy."
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean? That sentence makes no sense to me.
Why do people need to make everything an emotional issue. Pitt Bulls / mixes are not allowed on the property. End of story.
ReplyDeleteAlways were doesn't mean they still are. The management probably just changed the policy.
ReplyDelete>>Always were doesn't mean they still are. The management probably just changed the policy.<<
ReplyDeleteYou're having a comprehension problem here. Pit bulls and pit bull mixes have always been banned here, past and now present. Unless you know that the policy was changed an hour ago.
@ A dog owner concerned said...
ReplyDeleteNot to be a rat, I can regularly see pit bulls outside 250 First Ave main, near playground 7. These owners always appear skittish and knowingly avoid contact with other dogs. Due to the violent nature of these dogs, I feel compelled to offer this insight.
If you were really concerned, you would alert Security, instead of metaphorically wringing your hands here. Reporting a potential problem is not being a rat, it's being responsible. How would you feel if there was an incident with these dogs and you know you could have prevented it?
I'm not a dog hater by any means, but pit bulls are a known "dangerous breed." Have you ever personally had one bark at you with bared teeth as though it was going to kill you, as the owner pulls on the leash with all their might? Unfortunately someone (or a dog) is going to have to be bitten/killed before this is addressed. I'm also sick of hearing people defend their pit bulls by saying "oh, but HE'S always nice to people..." How many of those terrible stories you see on the news where a pit bull attacks a child or senior has the owner said the exact same thing? "Well, up until this happened, he was always so well-behaved..."
ReplyDeleteAnony 12:27 PM-Dog polices are now being posted in the lobby areas of all buildings in the glass display cases. This was reported in the T&V as well. Looking at the policy posted in my building, I do see any mention of forbidden breeds but the policy does state to refer to the dog policy rider in one’s lease for further information.
ReplyDeleteMy dog (50+ pounds...registered when the limit was 60 or 80 lbs.) frequently encounters pits and pit mixes in nearby dog runs. Only had a problem once...and that was due to an unaltered, aggresive male boxer...not a banned breed.
ReplyDeleteMy point is that there are several very good pit mixes living in Stuy Town...and many of them are medium sized, lovabe dogs....that have been registered.
I don't care about "lovable" pit bulls or pit bull mixes. They don't belong here.
ReplyDelete"To register your dog the following information should be submitted to the Management Office located at 317 Avenue C, New York, NY 10009, Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
ReplyDeleteBreed of Pet (if mixed you must specify constituent breeds)
Name of Pet
Present Weight (lbs)
Mature/Grown Weight (lbs)
Date of Birth & Age
New York City Dog License Number
Date of Rabies Vaccination
After you register your dog, you will receive a Stuyvesant Town or Peter Cooper Village dog registration tag. The tag must be attached to your dog’s collar and must be visible at all times when your pet is out on the property. In addition, dog registration information is available by emailing to dogregistration@pcvst.com."
So just lie since there are no repercussions anymore to almost any lease violation, especially to renovated apartment tenants.
Of course that's what is happening. The dog owners of illegal breeds just write down whatever they want to get the dog tag. Amazing that this big loophole is present.
ReplyDeletePerhaps what SHOULD happen is that Public Security should take down the names of owners who have illegal breeds with registration tags, and then the dog application should be checked by management. If the dog application statements do not match the dog, then an initial warning has to be given. Let's give them a couple of warnings to be nice. If nothing happens after that, then a procedure comes into effect to evict the tenant and his/her illegal dog.
Now, that seems the right thing to do if you want to have a sound dog policy that is obeyed. I wonder if any steps like this will be taken, however.
"If the dog application statements do not match the dog, then an initial warning has to be given. Let's give them a couple of warnings to be nice. If nothing happens after that, then a procedure comes into effect to evict the tenant and his/her illegal dog."
ReplyDeleteNot sure what you mean about an "initial warning" STR. Shouldn't the dog be evicted at this point?
Apart from the friggin' pitbulls, which are safety hazard in and of themselves, I can't believe that Rose still hasn't commented on the fire safety hazards. I'll take my chances with an encounter with a pitbull because I carry mace and will blind the bugger if I ever get attacked, but what about the fire hazards? I think that should be of much more concern to all of us. Being trapped in a burning building is no joke and we are more and more at risk with all these people jammed into apartments that are divided with pressure walls; people turning closets into kitchenettes (OMG! The mind boggles) and a lot of smoking and drinking going on in the party animal flats. We should really be majorly concerned about this and not so much about the dogs. Rose is so silent on this issue (of fire hazard) that I am wondering if they would really like the place to burn down so they can get rid of people and claim the insurance and use the land more profitably. Believe me, fires have been set for such motives many, many times in the history of this city! I don't think Rose would set a fire, but I sure as hell don't think they would mind one.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure Rose wouldn't want a fire here. What a nightmare!
ReplyDelete>>Not sure what you mean about an "initial warning" STR. Shouldn't the dog be evicted at this point?<<
ReplyDeleteWell, the dog owner should have time to give away/sell/whatever his illegal dog.
I don't know how the dog registration process is being handled now, but when I registered under TS, you had to BRING THE DOG with you to the registration table/desk, along with the completed paperwork.
ReplyDeleteAlso, as an aside, I was stopped last week by a prospective new tenant who owned a dog about the same size as mine...and they were concerned that it might be too large and rejected once they signed the lease. He said that their real estate agent just told them to lie about thw weight of the dog in the leasing office...nice, right?
So when you have sleazy RE types running circles around the leasing office (either knowingly or in league with management), this is what happens!
STR- I think, as we all suspected, the announcement (with a media drop in the T&V) that PS would be enforcing the dog regulations was simply a feel good PR ploy, engineered by CW Capital and then given to Rose Associates to implement. As you have questioned and I have also witnessed , outside the Oval area, there is no PS dog regulation enforcement. With the total fabrications and lies involved with the dog registration process not only being ignored but, as per Anony 9.19 AM, encouraged by the brokers affiliated with CW Capital, all we can expect from CW Capital going forward re anything are lies disguised as QOL window dressings at best.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who sees a dog that doesn't belong here should immediately call Security and give a description of the dog, the person in charge, and the location. That will let Security and Rose know that we're not going to be shat on, literally or figuratively, and maybe we'll get some action.
ReplyDeleteAfter four years of non-enforcement, Security gets around to enforcing the dog rules. Unfortunately, in my opinion, it is too little and too late on the size and vicious breed issue for anyone who is currently here. Moreover, as is usually the case with Rose’s inept operations and as pointed out by others on this thread, all you do is fill out a form. No need for anyone to actually see your pooch to see if one has complied with the size and breed rules. But that is what we have come to expect of Rose – useless, ineffective gestures.
ReplyDeleteYou can't really see it if you haven't lived here for more than 10 years but the place is steadily getting ruined compared to what it once was. Before TS it was a place that fit in its own skin. Very nice middle class housing that didn't pretend or try to be anything else, and the absence of dogs and the chain fencing really protected the grounds. Now large dogs are all over along with dangerous breeds. Many sections now look like concessions in an amusement park: tons of trees in one area, tons of ground over in another, tons of shrubs in another...all so overdone, all trying to make the place something it never was. Some areas with protected with black wire penitentiary fencing. The simple chain fencing was so much classier...but couldn't keep out today's dogs. Too bad, but what it once was is just about gone. The sense of solidarity within the community is also gone. Whether it is dog owners vs non-dog owners, student supporters vs non-student supporters, rent stabilization supporters vs would-be buyers, TA-Brookfield supporters vs TA-Brookfield opponents, the sense of a single community is currently gone.
ReplyDeleteI can't believe people are bitching that they're spending money on the landscaping. Especially since it's only half done. For god's sake, do you want them to not do it? This place needs it bad.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure how this policy can work. I doubt the managing agent has anybody on staff qualified to make breed determinations. If I say my dog isn't a pit bull mix and you say it is, how does anybody prove it?
Weight is theoretically less subjective, but there's no scale at the office, no way for security officers to verify in the field. And, short of evicting a tenant, no way to really punish people who lie or cheat.
I've seen some greyhounds around here. Lovely, calm, sweet dogs who sleep all day. They often run 70 pounds or more. And I've seen some littler dogs that make tons of noise and don't stop yipping and barking. How do we draw the line on a what's allowed in a way that can be factually proven?
http://www.pcvstdog.com/petition-for-dog-runs-peter-cooper-village-stuyvesant-town/
ReplyDeleteAnd just exactly outside of whose building does this genius think a dog run(s) would be appropriate in STPCV?! Not outside of mine (or anywhere near it), I can tell you that.
Dogs weren't allowed here for decades because of exactly this kind of thing, among many other very valid reasons. The head of Security here told me that he begged Tishman Speyer NOT to allow dogs here. Unfortunately, to no avail.
And people wonder why so many of us intensely dislike the many self-absorbed, inconsiderate, rule-breaking, dog owners who live here. NOTE: I did NOT say that I don't like dogs. I do. It's their entitled, obnoxious owners that I can't stand.
Just to clarify the situation with the grounds. Up until T-S got involved the grounds were fine. All grass growing well except in some areas where the trees had gotten so big they blocked out the sun. Then T-S came in and did two things to louse things up. First, their shrub landscaping was from hunger. Tasteless and grossly overdone. Second, instead of properly planting new grass where needed, they laid down turf. The grass roots never took so the turf died year after year and was replaced year after year. Then after the financial debacle, work stopped & the turf was no longer replaced. It just died and looked lousy. I'm told that the new landscaping will go on for another year or so. Yes, it's better than the immediate post-TS era. But it's just a landscaping carnival compared to 20 years ago. I expect next they'll try to paint the brick to look like granite and use statues to give the impression we have doormen.
ReplyDeleteOpposite points can be debated without the mockery. Calling someone a "genius" sarcastically and combining a group of people together "self-absorbed, inconsiderate, rule-breaking" is unbecoming. Not all the residents are as sophisticated, educated, polite, and perfect as you. Does writing these offensive, immature posts make you feel better about your yourself?
ReplyDeleteOpposite points can be debated without the mockery. Calling someone a "genius" sarcastically and combining a group of people together "self-absorbed, inconsiderate, rule-breaking" is unbecoming. Not all the residents are as sophisticated, educated, polite, and perfect as you. Does writing these offensive, immature posts make you feel better about your yourself?
ReplyDeleteOpposite points of view? What exactly is there to debate here? There's a very good reason why dog runs are NOT located in residential communities: BECAUSE THE BARKING OF THE DOGS COULD DRIVE YOU CRAZY! How about if we put one right outside YOUR building, right above where YOUR apartment is located. Guarantee you'd be singing a different tune then, unless you were deaf or very hard of hearing!
And I did not lump all dog owners together. I was referring to the "self-absorbed, inconsiderate, rule-breaking" ones, of which there are MANY as most of us who travel the grounds around here know all too well.
The fact of the matter is that you can't say anything against the presence of dogs here because then you will be labelled a dog hater by dog owners.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anon 11:03. It's not the dogs that are the problem, it's their owners. I also agree that a dog run here is not appropriate. We have enough problems without adding a dog run to the mix.
PEOPLE FIRST; DOGS SECOND. NO DOG RUN HERE.
ReplyDeleteThese posts are so self-indulgent. Some fellow neighbors feel a dog run will be beneficial to the community vs. some fellow neighbors who do not want a dog run for valid reasons. Two different opinions which can be pondered without attacking our neighbors. Let the anger go – your life will be happier!
ReplyDelete"and use statues to give the impression we have doormen."
ReplyDeleteThat's a new one and a keeper. Nice. I heard that the Joe Paterno statue is available.
Re: dog runs. Anyone who thinks there is a good place for one here should look at the map (check your lobby). Although there are lots of grassy areas, all of them are close to a building. The only exception is the Oval, and we all know how that area is being abused. Dog runs belong in places where the noise won't be under someone's window.
ReplyDeleteRe: weight of dogs. Security should have a scale. We could take up a collection to buy them one. Some New York buildings have weight restrictions, and owners have been known to put their dogs on diets to meet the weight limit.
Re: breed. Dog owners should provide a document from their vet if it isn't apparent what breed the dog is. How do you prove the breed? If you can't provide any documentation, you're in the wrong place.
What it all comes down to is Rose doing its job--which it isn't.
"Pack Leaders" are in a short supply here. We need Lady Maya to book Cesar Millan ASAP.
ReplyDelete'Shhh!'.
Just the fact that someone's consciousness could devolve to the point of asking for a dog run in a residential community is evidence enough that dogs at stuytown are a mistake. Instead of arguing over a dog run (which even under the incompetent auspices of Rose Associates will never come) we need to start discussing the reversal of this failed policy. It would take some time to implement completely, but could very much be done. Of course, it could only happen when and if we have some level of autonomy around here.
ReplyDeleteWow, it's nice to see that the racism of the 1980s in Stuy Town is still going but has now been transferred to prejudice against dogs.
ReplyDeleteFor all of you ignorant people out there:
1. THERE IS NO SUCH BREED AS "PIT BULL" It is a general description of any dog that resembles a mix of one of several breeds. This includes Bulldogs, French Bulldogs and Boston Terriers.
2. ANY dog can be aggressive if mistreated. Some cities are trying to ban Golden Retrievers, Labradors and Airdales as "aggressive dogs".
3. Dogs that are called "pitbulls" are usually VERY sweet dogs. The ones you see in ST/PCV have never been near a fighting ring.
4. There are MANY pitbulls in the media with wonderful records. Check out Sarge Stubby, who was a WWII hero! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_Stubby
We are supposed to be joining together against the management, not creating a more hostile environment. I understand not wanting an aggressive dog around, but then say that. Don't blame innocent, loving dogs just because you don't like the look of them. That's RACISM and PREJUDICE.
btw, studies have shown that ALL "pitbulls" in media reports were horribly abused and THAT is why they attacked - not because of what breed they were, but because of the way they were treated.
Before you support breed bans, try reading about why they DON"T work.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/breed-specific-legislation.aspx
From the ASPCA website, about dangerous dogs:
ReplyDelete84 percent were maintained by reckless owners—these dogs were abused or neglected, not humanely controlled or contained, or allowed to interact with children unsupervised.
This is REGARDLESS of breed. Don't blame the sweet dogs. Blame the idiots that abuse these dogs.
There is no such breed as Pitbull. Get a clue.
ReplyDeletePitbull or Pit bull is any of several breeds of dog in the molosser breed group.
SEVERAL BREEDS. Basically, it's racism. You see a dog with a big head and you ban it. That's the stupidest thing I have ever heard. These dogs were called "nanny dogs" at the turn of the century because they are so good with kids.
It's fine if you don't want dogs here. That's your prerogative. But don't encourage the harassment of nice families with nice dogs just because you don't like the way they look.
""and use statues to give the impression we have doormen."
ReplyDeleteThat's a new one and a keeper. Nice. I heard that the Joe Paterno statue is available"
The Joe Paterno statue would be perfect because he looks like he's hailing a cab!
I have a dog and I would not petition or support a dog run in Stuy Town. I wouldn't want one outside my window and, likewise, I wouldn't want to force one on another building. We have enough disruption with the concerts, events and ice skating rinks. People can only take so much external stimulation.
ReplyDelete>>THERE IS NO SUCH BREED AS "PIT BULL" It is a general description of any dog that resembles a mix of one of several breeds.<<
ReplyDeleteThen all breeds that fit the pit bull term are banned:
Aggressive breeds are NOT allowed. Aggressive breeds include: Pit Bull, Doberman Pinscher, Rottweiler, German Shepherd, or any breed the Management determines, in its sole discretion, to be aggressive. Any dog that is a mixed breed which includes an aggressive breed is not allowed.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteWow, it's nice to see that the racism of the 1980s in Stuy Town is still going but has now been transferred to prejudice against dogs.
For all of you ignorant people out there:
1. THERE IS NO SUCH BREED AS "PIT BULL" It is a general description of any dog that resembles a mix of one of several breeds. This includes Bulldogs, French Bulldogs and Boston Terriers.
2. ANY dog can be aggressive if mistreated. Some cities are trying to ban Golden Retrievers, Labradors and Airdales as "aggressive dogs".
3. Dogs that are called "pitbulls" are usually VERY sweet dogs. The ones you see in ST/PCV have never been near a fighting ring.
4. There are MANY pitbulls in the media with wonderful records. Check out Sarge Stubby, who was a WWII hero! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_Stubby
We are supposed to be joining together against the management, not creating a more hostile environment. I understand not wanting an aggressive dog around, but then say that. Don't blame innocent, loving dogs just because you don't like the look of them. That's RACISM and PREJUDICE.
btw, studies have shown that ALL "pitbulls" in media reports were horribly abused and THAT is why they attacked - not because of what breed they were, but because of the way they were treated.
July 27, 2012 10:58 AM
Thank you for justifying exactly why there should be NO dogs allowed in PCV/ST. I couldn't have done a better job explaining why no dog should be allowed than you just did. Great work!!
You know you have gone over the top when a STR poster refers to a landlord and tenants who support that aggressive breeds be banned from our community as “racist”. As Cesar Millan has said many times on his show, “dogs are animal”. They are not people. They are pack animals who will ignore their owner if the owner is not the pack leader. I also believe that by the 80’s, racism was no longer part of the PCVST management housing strategy. The 40’s, 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, yes.
ReplyDeleteFor all of you ignorant people out there:
ReplyDelete1. THERE IS NO SUCH BREED AS "PIT BULL" It is a general description of any dog that resembles a mix of one of several breeds. This includes Bulldogs, "French Bulldogs and Boston Terriers.
2. ANY dog can be aggressive if mistreated. Some cities are trying to ban Golden Retrievers, Labradors and Airdales as "aggressive dogs".
3. Dogs that are called "pitbulls" are usually VERY sweet dogs. The ones you see in ST/PCV have never been near a fighting ring.
4. There are MANY pitbulls in the media with wonderful records. Check out Sarge Stubby, who was a WWII hero! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_Stubby"
I ask this "non-ignorant" person is any part of this diatribe in the least bit relevant? I do presume that he or she IS NOT ignorant. Last time i checked these dogs weren't allowed, even the "sweet" ones.
3:48--huh?
ReplyDeleteCommon sense dog rules = Racism and Prejudice. LOL !!!!! Dogs aren't a race, they're a species.
ReplyDeleteDo you live near one of the toddler (runs) playgrounds? How do you like the constant screaming from dawn to dusk?
ReplyDeleteA dog run need only be open limited hours, like 7-9 and 5-7.
This is never going to come together. It's only going to get worse. All of you dog supporters who make your arguments in favor with some kind of edge...you're just adding to the problem. What you're really doing is showing just how tough and intransigent you are. Guess what. Non-dog supporters can be just as tough and intransigent. It's only at matter of time before the shouting matches (or worse)start. Then we'll see where we are.
ReplyDeleteHey are salamanders allowed? I've got over 50 in my apartment. Come by and buy them -only 50c each!
ReplyDeleteThe world changes people! Dogs are allowed - if you don't like it, then move out or accept it! You are all so angry! Smile - it is a beautiful summer :)
ReplyDeleteCan we get over the fucking dogs and unite to get rid of this blood-sucking so-called management that is destroying our homes?
ReplyDeletePart of the "destroying our homes" problem are the infractions of the dog rules.
ReplyDelete>>You are all so angry! Smile -it is a beautiful summer :)<<
ReplyDeleteWhere have you been? It's been a killer summer so far.
"if you don't like it, then move out or accept it! You are all so angry!"
ReplyDeleteI love these people--and we have seen plenty of them here and on LL previously. You know, the "if you don't like the way I ruin your home, you should live someplace else" people.
You know the kind:
I play the stereo too loud and its your fault you don't like my music at 3am people.
My dog shits in the elevator and you better not expect me to clean it up people.
We stomp around on your ceiling at all hours but it's not our fault we don't have carpet--or consideration--people.
And, my favorite, the "it was my friends that pissed in the stairwell--not me" people.
These are our kind of people...
Please see this web site. This is how important our pets are.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dogheirs.com/dogsarefamily
I'd welcome a pit bull in every unit rather than 4 yunnies/students and their revolving door roommates, 3 am visitors, etc.
ReplyDelete>>Please see this web site. This is how important our pets are.<<
ReplyDeleteFine. No one is arguing against the value of pets for certain people. But that doesn't change the fact of the dog regulations here which do NOT allow certain breeds. Period. Case closed.
"I'd welcome a pit bull in every unit rather than 4 yunnies/students and their revolving door roommates, 3 am visitors, etc."
ReplyDeleteHow about neither? That was the case at one time.
This is so sad! Instead of a respectful informed discussion about the prudence of allowing pit bulls in our community, your article sparked a contentious free-for-all fueled by vitriolic comments. If pit bulls are the issue, check out the ASPCA's policy on breed-specific legislation (and pit bulls in particular) at: . Perhaps then we might have a constructive conversation about 'breed-specific' policies in STPCV. The real question – one that affects dog owners (upwards of 2000 dogs live in STPCV) and non-dog owners alike – is how to live together peacefully. Unfortunately, the situation has been made more difficult to address due to management's idiosyncratic and hostile attitude towards dog owners. Instead of engaging them in a dialogue, owners were presented with an edict that concluded with thinly veiled threats. It's a pity that instead of addressing the problems that affect all residents: pedestrian safety, (on sidewalks and pathways that are used by utility vehicles, deliverymen and cyclists, and loop roads where few drivers observe the speed limit), the deteriorating infrastructure, and the never-ending landscaping (thanks to prior badly considered and abortive schemes). Giving disproportionate importance - and allocating more resources - to dog-related issues is a smoke screen that takes attention away from the issues that really matter to our diverse, multi-generational community.
ReplyDeleteI have to comment to the people that sit on M or T smoking and throwing their nasty cigarettes on the ground: I can assure you I am much more offended by the amount of cigarettes you throw on the ground than you are about my dogs crap that I clean up.
ReplyDeletePlease don't monitor me and comment that I better clean up when I have a bag ready to do so. As you throw yet another cigarette on the ground.
>>Instead of a respectful informed discussion about the prudence of allowing pit bulls in our community<<
ReplyDeleteNice post, but you are making an error in the above. Pit bulls are NOT allowed in STPCV. No discussion needed, except on why management is not enforcing this rule.
I was at the office today, and while I was there a woman came in to register two dogs, or maybe one was already registered and she wanted to register the other. The person to do the registering was notified, and the woman waited a little while--not very long. When she realized the dog needed to urinate or defecate, she went outside for a few minutes. While she was outside, the woman to register the dog came out. The young woman behind the counter told her the dog owner had had to take the dog outside. Then the two women proceeded to chat. I said that the woman was right outside. No response. So as I was leaving, I told the woman with the dog that the person she needed to see was now available. I guess Rose doesn't allow employees to come out from behind their barricade, because the registrar couldn't be bothered to go to the door to call the woman.
ReplyDeleteEverybody, say hi to Max and his 90 lb black lab!
ReplyDeletehttps://www.airbnb.com/rooms/387061