Comment Policy

All comments to posts have to await approval. Please be aware that, depending on when I'm logged onto the internet, it may take me hours, even longer, to moderate comments, so if they don't turn up in a speedy fashion, they are still in the queue. Comments that cross a line I'm not comfortable with will not get approved. NOTE: Comments reflect the opinions of the person writing them and should not be assumed to reflect the opinion of the blog.

Sunday, June 8, 2014

Odds and Ends in June, 2014

 

Do you suppose that when Dan Garodnick uses the Oval Cafe, he asks why there are no "For Residents and Their Guests" signs about or why staff doesn't check IDs?  Or is the answer that he simply doesn't care after he and the DOB agreed that the Oval Cafe was only meeting zoning requirements if it was just for "residents and their guests"?

 

And, yes, the Oval Cafe restroom is for customers only now. You don't quality if you are a resident or a guest of a resident, but you do qualify if you buy something.  And, yes again: I tried the door and it was indeed locked.


File the above photo in "Stuy Slum." This the way the 20th Street Loop frequently looks as you near its exit--that is when there's no mound of garbage or discarded furniture and mattresses.


CWCapital loves students! The company certainly knows where its bread is buttered!


Let's hide it as best we can. The new Public Safety office is getting camouflage.


It's beginning to resemble Jones Beach! Residents and their guests (and hordes of outsiders) flock to the Oval Lawn. Hey, New York City, it's open to everyone! Come on down!


Epic!


Epic continued.


Epic continued again.


Another day, another epic!


No wonder Oval Cafe wants a license to sell alcohol. They'd make a fortune! Meanwhile, the bros bring their own to the Oval Lawn. At least they are nice enough to use our garbage facilities.


Open food left overnight at the Oval Lawn. The rats thank you.


Our grounds are so nice, and Public Safety has completely given up checking for ST/PCV dog tags, that dog trainers/walkers find it a wonderful place to bring their banned breeds.


I love the smell of fresh dog urine in the morning! I'm considering entering this photograph in a contest, as it's very unique and shows one of the charms of living in this complex.

102 comments:

Anonymous said...

These photos were made possible by the back room deals made by Dan, TA, and CW these past few years.

Anonymous said...

There has been a large open dumpster parked on PCV Road for months. For weeks it has been full tothe top with bbroken furniture other debris and garbage. It got so bad last weekend that debris fell out of the dumpster and blocked PCV Road. I reported all this . The geniuses at CW removed the debris that was blocking PCV Road but the dumpster which is still overflowing with debris and garbage remains. It is inconceivable that CW isn't totally aware of this disgusting health hazard, yet they let it continue to remain for all to see

Stuy Town Reporter said...

I don't know what back room deals you mean. Dan doesn't care, unless his constituents call him on it. The TA is involved with other things, while CW does what it can get away with.

Anonymous said...

TA is not involved in trying to buy the property any longer. We need to stop insinuating this. EVEN they know when to quit. It's so over, the fix was in long ago folks.

Anonymous said...

Also, the so called "Public Bathrooms" are truly only for those tenants and guests who have ID cards; you cannot access them without one. The entrance to the Oval Café, the Ice Rink, etc., should have doors that one can only enter with an ID card. I know that leaves the Green Market out but if you notice the sign there no longer has the "tenants and guest" sign either. What a joke. In addition to having no signs inside saying this "Resident Amenity' is for tenants and guests only, the sign outside the Oval Café has no mention either although it once did. What we have here is a commercial operation that can limit bathroom access to customer use only, just like any other commercial operation. Shame on Dan G. for patronizing the Oval Café.

Anonymous said...

I feel sorry for the porters who have to deal with all that shit in the carriage rooms (or whatever they call them now).

Anonymous said...

Can't give details on deals I witnessed for obvious reasons.

Anonymous said...

Can't give details on deals I witnessed for obvious reasons.>>>>

Why should we believe you? Anyone can say what you are saying anonymously.

Anonymous said...

Porters are miserable. The gardeners having a nice time here though... 15 guys to plant 6 tulips.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone official and in writing challenged or verified the Oval Cafe bathroom policy and applicable laws? I don't think a key to a semi-public bathroom 3 blocks away suffices.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/nyregion/rule-shift-cuts-restroom-requirements-at-new-york-restaurants.html?_r=0

Under legislation that Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg signed on Aug. 8, small restaurants and coffee shops with an occupancy of 30 people or fewer are allowed to provide patrons with one bathroom rather than two, as previously required — one for each sex. The changes also brought the city’s plumbing code in line with a health department code that allowed places with fewer than 20 seats to not provide patrons with any bathroom.

In short, in a city already starved of places to answer nature’s call, the future may hold fewer options.

The changes served both to clarify and to befuddle, revealing byzantine criteria that help determine the precise number of restrooms a restaurant or cafe must have.

The answer depends not only on how many seats it has, or people it can hold, but also on when the building was built, when the restaurant opened, what its certificate of occupancy says and whether it underwent renovations and, if so, how extensive.

A building is subject to the law it was built under, and if a restaurant moves into an old restaurant space and does not change its bathroom fixtures, the old requirements apply.

The city also does not have just one building code; there is a 1938 code, a 1968 code and a 2008 code, and all have different bathroom requirements. The 1968 code required one bathroom for each sex for up to 100 people. The 2008 code required one for each sex for up to 150, a Buildings Department spokeswoman said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/21/nyregion/rule-shift-cuts-restroom-requirements-at-new-york-restaurants.html?_r=0

New laws are not retroactive — they apply only to new construction and if a site changes its use or occupancy load. Adding to the complexity, waivers have often been granted to smaller restaurants allowing them to have just one unisex bathroom when they otherwise might have needed two.

Anonymous said...

"Shame on Dan G. for patronizing the Oval Café."

Agree.

Anonymous said...

STR, that last photo is PCV, ya? I notice the stains on this particular stretch of walkway on a daily basis. My walk to the M15 is like what Jack Nicholson did at the beginning of As Good as It gets, except instead of stepping over cracks in the sidewalk it's streaks of urine.

Anonymous said...

Seems to me that all these horrors--that is indeed what they are--should be spurring us on to do whatever it takes to own this place ourselves (not advocating for Brookfield, though, and I don't have the expertise to put forth a plan). That may be a pipe dream unfortunately. If it were up to me, I'd put a gate around this place, a la Gramercy Park, so you'd need a key to get in and a key to get out (please don't respond with why this wouldn't be safe--I'm fantasizing). There's no reason why we're paying for facilities that outsiders feel free to use. And all that crap in the recycling areas--fire hazard! Report, report, report. And keep complaining to management--jam the phone lines and crash the website. Let unbridled anger reign--why should we have to swallow what they're dishing out? Just saying.

Anonymous said...

You know, recently I had a threesome with Kate Beckinsale and Amy Adams. But I can’t give the details for obvious reasons.

Anonymous said...

Bud Light. That says it all, we are truly living in a Bromageddon.

Anonymous said...

Students have proven a goldmine for CW. Who's to say that Brookfield or any developer wouldn't continue the practice of renting to students?

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Yes, the last photo is PCV.

Anonymous said...

I live in PCV. 2 days ago there was dog shit in right front of our building and the back pathway. It's disgusting. But what is even more disheartening it that it's the older tenants who have most of the dogs. And in some cases they have 2 dogs. I suppose it's loneliness and needing something to love. But what can you do when the very people who knew what a great place we used to have, are the very ones out there crapping it up for the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

THIS PLACED IS COMPLETELY RUINED!!! RUINED FOREVER!!!
DON'T YOU JUST LOVE LIVING HERE????

Anonymous said...

I hear the porters are going to be given new assignments. 8 buildings for every one porter.

Anonymous said...

The students are DESTROYING this place. THEY DO NOT BELONG HERE.

Anonymous said...

"STR, that last photo is PCV, ya? I notice the stains on this particular stretch of walkway on a daily basis. My walk to the M15 is like what Jack Nicholson did at the beginning of As Good as It gets, except instead of stepping over cracks in the sidewalk it's streaks of urine."

This is what dog owners want for their homes. Unfortunately, normal people have to be dragged into their cesspool as well. Newsflash: it's not going to get any better no matter what the disposition of the property is. Do you really think the dog policy will be reversed?

Hippo said...

Dog urine and feces ON THE OVAL...who cares?...a mere annoyance...what gives Stuy Town its particular cachet is the dog urine and feces IN THE BUILDINGS!
What a treat it is to step into the elevator in the morning and find a freshly laid pile of dog shit...and the smell of urine...so pungent...almost as sweet as the malodorous piles of manure our crack gardening department stores throughout the Loops...

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't it be great though if the dog urine was in the elevator (i've had same) at the exact time the agent shows the 'model' unit?

that'd be real cute.

Anonymous said...

Hello Stuysevant Town Report,

Spotted today a group of college students in and out of buildings. Followed a couple of the groups and most of the items noted "this time around a lot of graduates students are looking and then said ____ stated prices for students."

I only hope they announce to them that outside drinking (and underage drinking) and smoking pot is always allowed at Stuytown/Petercooper and its many outdoor facilities and no "public safety office" will ever bother you.

Anonymous said...

Wish we had an age limit on rentals. NO ONE under 26 yo. I know this is not PC, but I can't take their crap any more. Every night now --- music blast until 3 am.

Anonymous said...

Where can we report a case of known bedbugs on the property?

Anonymous said...

Most people do pick up after their dogs. Some don't pick up after their dogs and they also don't pick up after themselves or their kids. The problem isn't the dogs. The problem isn't the kids. The problem is the few adults who think there are maids walking behind them picking up everything they drop including their gross cigarette butts which are piled up everywhere. Put accountability where accountability belongs - on the adults leaving the messes for others to pick up. And don't get me started on the entitled students. In general there used to be a better caliber community here who was more considerate of their neighbors. I always pick up after my dog. I wish my loud neighbors would stop the loud partying in the middle of the night!

Anonymous said...

The barf and pee in the corners of the building stairways from the partying students is more disgusting. Whoa re these kids? We never peed in stairways and we partied hard in our days.

Anonymous said...

CW owning the security force MUST be a conflict of interest. Shouldn't the TA bring this up with the 13th precinct??? Shouldn't the 13th precinct designate one or two officers per shift to cover the 25,000 person community? It doesn't seem unreasonable to ask the precinct to designate 5-6 officers per day to our affairs. Damn, I paid NY/NYC more than 10% of my earings last year (not including sales tax).

How about a Stuy Town auxiliary police force??? We can form small bands that work evenings answering (and ensuring security answers) these QOL issues.

Anonymous said...

Got your Susan Steinberg auto-call yet? You will.
The TA rally is about one thing: Brookfield. That's all. You can forget all the rest. It's Brookfield. Guaranteed this will be more one way propaganda. But the questions you need to ask if you ever have the chance are these:
1. Why should we trust Brookfield more than any other developer?
2. What is Brookfield's position about renting to students?
3. What is Brookfield's position about MCIs?
4. What is Brookfield's target for participation? What percentage of the tenants would it like to be able to buy? (Telling us this much is no violation of the Martin law.)

Anonymous said...

Let me just say with respect to long time tenants, had the TA supported any co-op plan whatsoever, I would attend its rally. But in supporting a condo plan (more expensive, more prone to subletting), the TA has clearly opted in favor of those tenants who have been here for about eight years or less who are paying and can afford to pay the higher rents. This may have been a miscalculation. We've seen sveral complaints from many paying the higher rents that they are too stretched.
Long time tenants have to realize that the TA-Brookfield deal offers them next to nothing. Next to nothing!
The TA has only implied one thing that is true: the tenants' potential to make trouble is their only leverage.

Anonymous said...

"I hear the porters are going to be given new assignments. 8 buildings for every one porter."

If that is true, then I think we should all stop recycling. Cleaning the recycling rooms and emptying those bins (which are usually full of all kinds of shit that is not recyclable) takes a lot of the porters' time and energy. Apart from things that would break the compactor, I suggest we put everything down the chutes and save the porters some work. Sure, they have to schlep all the garbage out to the sanitation trucks, but the recycling is a chore in and of itself. I would rather their time and energy were spent on vacuuming the hallways. If recycling is so dear to the heart of our City leaders, they will go after money-grubbing slave-drivers such as CW and make sure they have the manpower to do what is necessary. I don't know if the porters are unionized, but they sure as hell should be. I am soooo sick of these avaricious vultures who try to suck every last bit of flesh and blood off the working people of this city, tenants, building employees alike.

Anonymous said...

To "Most people pick up..."

We've heard this before. The point is that there are and always will be people who can't be bothered picking up. And one pile of dog crap in front of your building is too much. So if these dogs are crapping in front or behind of a buildings where 5 or 6 dog owners live, they are simultaneously crapping in front or behind of a building where close to a hundred other people live. People who have to put up with the dog shit that they never bargained for. Great. I hope you enjoy little fido. And I hope one day you step in fido's mess or you see other people track this into their buildings. This is a disgusting situation that cannot be reconciled.

Anonymous said...

Three years and nothing has changed.

http://nypost.com/2011/09/19/this-place-is-a-pig-stuy/

Anonymous said...

Of course it is a Brookfield rally.

Wondering what Brookfield would be like as the owner? No different than Fortress. Cut from the same cloth. Look at past few years.

Brookfield TA and Fortress interests represented at mci negotiations - both made out well with increased rent roll. Residents not represented and got crappy end of deal.

Brookfield TA and Fortress interests represented at Roberts settlement and got beyond terrific results undoing court judgement favor of residents, hundreds of residents evicted mid-lease, and increased rent roll. Residents not represented and got crappy deal.

Oval commercialization, lost open space, brand new offices, benefit Brookfield TA and Fortress. Residents lose Quality of Life.

There. That is what it will be like under Brookfield. No different than Fortress.

The Tenant Association has not been inactive. To the contrary they have been very active just not on behalf of residents. They have been acting on behalf of Brookfield then spinning it to residents backed by a press headline by politicians declaring "good deal reached for PCVST tenants" when all along the deals reached were good for Brookfield and hurt residents.

The NYU dorm construction and population increases unchallenged because good for Brookfield and Fortress and they don't care it is bad for residents and property.

If Brookfield were good for residents they would have been on residents side these past years protecting the open spaces, the quality of life, challenging the fraudulent rent roll, etc.

The frauds will continue with both Fortress and Brookfield.

Rally for Brookfield? - hell no.

Tommyboyardee said...

How many Stuyvesant residents does it take to clean up after a dog? 15 to document it, 30 to post complaints, 0 Maintenace workers & 1 other dog owner who is tired of all the complaining.

Anonymous said...

"I always pick up after my dog. I wish my loud neighbors would stop the loud partying in the middle of the night!"

Really, do you pick up the piss too, and do you carry around a water bottle to clean up the shit residue? I didn't think so....

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with the first comment. By definition a back room deal (a trick most often employed by politicians) is:

"meet to plan secretly or from which they exercise control in an indirect manner"

That is precisely what happened with the MCI, Roberts,Brookfield, commercialization, NYU Housing, every deal made in secret then announced in crafted pr communications and sometimes followed by rally photo ops decrying opposition in vain.

Thus rally is not for Affordable Housing, is not for anti-predatory equity. this rally is for Brookfield, a predator.

Anonymous said...

More dogs, more students, more bud light, more garbage, more.....(you can fill in the rest.) AAAHHH! A typical day in life in where we live. It can only get worse before it will get better.
Amazing what is going on around here.

Anonymous said...

DOGS DO NOT BELONG HERE. PERIOD. END OF STORY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

"CW owning the security force MUST be a conflict of interest. Shouldn't the TA bring this up with the 13th precinct??? Shouldn't the 13th precinct designate one or two officers per shift to cover the 25,000 person community? It doesn't seem unreasonable to ask the precinct to designate 5-6 officers per day to our affairs. Damn, I paid NY/NYC more than 10% of my earings last year (not including sales tax).

How about a Stuy Town auxiliary police force??? We can form small bands that work evenings answering (and ensuring security answers) these QOL issues."

THOSE ARE THE MOST SENSIBLE SUGGESTIONS I HAVE HEARD TO DATE!

Anonymous said...

"Shame on Dan G. for patronizing the Oval Café."

Dan G. has no shame. He is as shameless and phony as they come. He is no better than Bloomberg when it comes to having no shame. At least Bloomberg didn't pretend to care about us; he made it clear that he didn't. Dan G. cares only about himself, but pretends to be on our side.

Anonymous said...

12:41 PM, I agree 100% with you.

Anonymous said...

Exactly how stupid does someone have to be to attend this rally??

Anonymous said...

New TA strategy on the facebook page. Some questions to the TA and some negative comments about the TA have been coming up on the TA facebook page. The old strategy was just to delete them, but apparently, the criticisms of the TA's censorship and one-way communication are beginning to stick. They now allow the negative comments to stay but immediately start posting some nonsense...like irrelevant tweaks...or start commenting on older, less relevant posts. This has the effect of driving the critical posts/comments downward and burying them. I guess they thought we wouldn't notice.

Anonymous said...

A friend told me to visit your site. We pay 3433 for a one bedroom in Peter Cooper. Rent, real rent or higher rent on lease is 4200. I am afraid to challenge this rent, complain or make any noise as I know they will end up penalizing me or evicting me. I can't afford the real rent. We have a baby and wanted to make a home here. Very upset about the price of a rental for middle class like me.

Anonymous said...

You ought to check the grease stained sidewalks on 20th Street in front of Petite Abeille.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

If your "real rent" is 4200, then the landlord can charge that when you renew your lease. It's terrible that you have that over your head.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Exactly how stupid does someone have to be to attend this rally??<<

As stupid as STR, it seems. I'll try to make the case for attending the rally. It won't be a long post at all, though.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Shame on Dan G. for patronizing the Oval Café.<<

Well, it's because of Dan, in part, that the Oval Cafe exists the way it does. He must feel a connection.

BTW, I don't mind Dan patronizing the cafe. I decided to try one of their hot brews once and it was so tepid and undrinkable that just for that I vowed never again. So if Dan wants to drink that slop and pay extra for the suffering, let him do so.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

What I would like Dan to do is to make certain that zoning regulations are being followed at the Oval Cafe and other "for residents and their guests" amenities.

Anonymous said...

Check out the ad running all over for Pc st

http://www.rent.com/new-york/manhattan-apartments/peter-cooper-village-and-stuyvesant-town-4-57999774

Yet they raise decent, hard working, paying on time tenants by thousands of dollars increase per year per renewal, while also slapping on a Mci fees.

Anonymous said...

7 :36. Actually can't the CW legally charge them $4200 + the city agreed increase?

Anonymous said...

Nah, the model units shown always have the cleanest paths and the porter works 24/7. I believe that building has 2 or 3 porters in it. Next up : MCI for porters to clean up.

Anonymous said...

In all cases, the TA speakers will say repeatedly we need a "tenant-led plan", "tenant-led plan", "tenant-led plan" and they'll tout Brookfield and their leadership.
But whether your go or not, there are no good possibilities with respect to this rally.
Scenario 1: Next to no one goes. The TA is completely undercut. Good. I don't like Brookfield. But bad. Tenants have no official representation & look weak.
Scenario 2: A lot of people go and boo every mention of Brookfield. Good but bad. Same as #1.
Scenario 3: A lot of people go and wildly cheer mention of Brookfield. All bad. If that's the case, the people who show are either the ones who can afford to pay $700K-800K for their places or they are the garden-variety tenant who hasn't a clue what's going on but support the TA blindly by force of habit. In which case, we'll get Brookfield & find out how screwed we are later.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, But June 10, 2014 at 7:18 PM does not sound like a legit comment. Forgive me if I am wrong.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Actually can't the CW legally charge them $4200 + the city agreed increase?<<

Yes. I'm assuming that the $4200 would then be the base rent from which the allowed landlord percentage increase would be tabulated.

Anonymous said...

Oh my mistake. It was 10 buildings for every one porter.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>In all cases, the TA speakers will say repeatedly we need a "tenant-led plan", "tenant-led plan", "tenant-led plan" and they'll tout Brookfield and their leadership.<<

We'll see, but I suspect more will be said about predatory landlords and affordable housing, despite the latter being squeezed out of ST/PCV by the month with nothing being done about it.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Oh, and if Maloney turns up, we may hear something about the Tea Party.

Anonymous said...

There's not going to be a Brookfield and there's not going to be a tenant buyout. Are you who post this delusional? Not a __ing shot in hell that would ever happen. For 85 different reasons or more. Please stop posting this. This is not our problem. Like saying the sky is falling and let's waste our time working on skies falling.

Anonymous said...

Here's an interesting story this morning: Council Hearing on Bill de Blasio Affordable Housing Plan Abruptly Cancelled

http://observer.com/2014/06/council-hearing-on-bill-de-blasio-affordable-housing-plan-abruptly-cancelled/

I read this and it makes me wonder. Can this rally at City Hall be Dan G.'s first move in his 2018 mayoral election campaign? Is he using the tenants as a megaphone to highlight an issue that many NYers can rally around? It seems de Blasio can do very little to curtail the free market trade of real property. (Hell, Maloney acknowledges that her legislation has absolutely no chance of getting out of the House). So is Danny G. using this and subsequent Stuy Town oppty's to reinforce the failures of the mayor so he can base his campaign on 'change'? I keep asking myself, 'why rally at City Hall?' There would be greater turnout at Stuy Town with the same press coverage (Dan did get that fluff story placed in the NYT yesterday, right?). Only thought can be to place de Blasio on the chess board and begin to out maneuver the mayor.

Maybe it's just me seeing every move by a politician to be for their interests and not mine.

Tommyboyardee said...

Don't get me started on the garbage, in the not so distant past, garbage was brought out the night before, not paraded through the lobbies via the elevators. How many more sidewalks need to "cave-in" before this inane complex wide door to door pickups need to occur.
Overnight garbage bags strewn across main entrances, the fencing in areas, the inappropriate sun tanning, this place has bypassed the Projects and has achieved the streets of Calcutta, India.

Anonymous said...

To all respectable RS tenants - I hope more the living off the teet RS Stuy Town Renter/Home OWNERS get smoked out like this abuser - http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/tribeca-artist-evicted-airbnb-deals-article-1.1823280

Your unit would be better in the hands of a one of those college graduates you loathe making $40K a year rather than you raping and pillaging the system for 20 out of the 30 years you've been living in your glass apt not adding little to the economic and social contributions to the neighborhood. And just to be clear ... RS in this city needs to be a must ... but those who hold for more than 10 years need to be verified by all legal means to remain eligible.


Anonymous said...

None of these photos would have happened under the MetLife ownership. They treated PCVST as their crown jewel.

Anonymous said...

Yesterday a Resident overheard a construction worker on the offices say "there are animals down there" followed by another worker saying "dead animals now" ... followed by sounds of construction, a squirrel's crying screams then deafening silence.

Assholes.

Anonymous said...

STR: Yes, naturally we'll hear about predatory landlords. No matter what, we always hear about that. In this case, it's part of the build-up to the TA making its case. The simple question is: what it the mission or purpose of this rally. It's to promote the Brookfield deal. Period.

Anonymous said...

9:45 your use of the word "responsible" and John Marsh's use of the word "responsible" in the same manner to imply market rate renters are responsible yet RS are not responsible people is dead wrong. There are responsible RS tenants too. John marsh was wrong to call the MR responsible and not the RS too and it is wrong to follow his lead on that.

Anonymous said...

"Yesterday a Resident overheard a construction worker on the offices say "there are animals down there" followed by another worker saying "dead animals now" ... followed by sounds of construction, a squirrel's crying screams then deafening silence. "

Cruelty to animals, even squirrels, is a crime. Maybe the ASPCA should be notified about this sadistic bozo working here.

Anonymous said...

"bypassed the Projects". I like
that!

Anonymous said...

"To all respectable RS tenants - I hope more the living off the teet RS Stuy Town Renter/Home OWNERS get smoked out like this abuser - http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/tribeca-artist-evicted-airbnb-deals-article-1.1823280

Your unit would be better in the hands of a one of those college graduates you loathe making $40K a year rather than you raping and pillaging the system for 20 out of the 30 years you've been living in your glass apt not adding little to the economic and social contributions to the neighborhood. And just to be clear ... RS in this city needs to be a must ... but those who hold for more than 10 years need to be verified by all legal means to remain eligible."

Serves the bitch right, but don't assume that all of us RS tenants are doing that kind of thing. I am an elderly, longtime RS tenants and I have been working in and contributing to the local economy for over 40 years. My rent is more than half my income now. I'm not sucking on any teet and I resent the constant insults and demeaning remarks about RS tenants. Some RS tenants need to be kicked out and brought up on fraud charges, but MOST do not.

Anonymous said...

8:27 Great insight but God forbid Garodnick be in a position like City Mayor of anything where he can destroy an entire city as he did this community of 30,000 which is the same population of a standard city.

Anonymous said...

9: 53. lol of course the place was Met life crown jewel --- they sold it for 4.5 billion right b4 the crash!!! Smart men.

Anonymous said...

I'm screwed if they check our incomes. We are obviously over the limit now.

Anonymous said...

Not necessarily true, 10:08 AM. The reporting on the transfer of ownership has been mostly misreported by Chas Bagli and others, including by the TA. The WSJ got it right. CWCap/Fortress did not take title to the property, they transferred ownership to the senior lenders. Only the WSJ got it right: "The senior creditors in control of the giant Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village apartment complex in Manhattan on Thursday completed a yearslong long action to take title to the 11,200-unit property, wiping out other debtholders."

At this point it's anybody's game, but since a huge majority chunk of senior debt was held by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, political pressure can maybe be applied to keep the sale price down.

Anonymous said...

10:08 that begs the question why isn't the TA being straightforward, saying this is a Brookfield rally and here are our reasons Dan and I want you to rally with us? Why are they trying to disguise the rally if its such a good deal for residents?
Its a bad deal.

Anonymous said...

@8:13 oh, it's going to happen, if you have strong feelings, either way, it's better to stay informed and involved. Wishing it away is not a good response.

Anonymous said...

The two defining moments of the TA were John Marsh giving parade tickets to the bully moms hoping he'd win them over as TA members and Susan Steinberg chastising young women for wearing bikinis in the sun. The two of them are like something out of an absurd John Waters film. I'll be damned if I get on one of their foolish buses and attend their usual poorly attended rally. Please just go away already and step down.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

What parade tickets?

Steinberg wasn't chastising young women for wearing bikinis in the sun, but for the presence of such women in a playground and crowding out those who wanted to use it as a playground.

Anonymous said...

After Brookfield buys this place and converts it to condos, will we be able to buy apt's other than our own?

Edmund Dunn said...

"Susan Steinberg chastising young women for wearing bikinis in the sun"

I have already called major bull shit on this, I see you have come back again to repeat this lie ad nauseam. Why should anyone believe anything you have to say?

Anonymous said...

Here's the quote. She wants bikinis banned on the property lol.

"“This used to be a very strait-laced community,” said Susan Steinberg, head of the tenants association, who believes all "two-pieces" should be banned. “The sunbathing is tasteless, it’s not very classy, and it doesn’t belong in a mixed residential development.”"

http://jezebel.com/nyc-playground-battle-bikinis-vs-babies-505624908

Anonymous said...

"Susan Steinberg, head of the tenants association at Stuy Town, told the New York Post that two-piece bathing suits should be banned at the development."

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/05/12/bikini-clad-sunbathers-near-playground-lead-to-complaints-in-stuy-town/

Anonymous said...

"Some tenants predict the tumult will subside once Stuy Town’s Oval Lawn opens in the coming weeks.
But Susan Steinberg, head of the tenants association, said all two-pieces should be banned.

“This used to be a very strait-laced community,” she said. “The sunbathing is tasteless, it’s not very classy, and it doesn’t belong in a mixed residential development.”"

http://nypost.com/2013/05/12/stuy-town-tenants-fume-over-bikini-beauties-sunbathing-in-childrens-playground/

Stuy Town Reporter said...

You're right! LOL.

No actual quote about two-pieces being banned, but if she was correctly quoted on the rest.... Susan, Susan....

Anonymous said...

5 52 - It's not going to happen. There is not a shot in hell (as I do wish there was) that any sale would be made to the 11,250 + residents here. It will never happen. You and I will be long gone and you'll still be pining for it,still talking about it.

Edmund Dunn said...

Sorry, it's the NY Post as the source. That bastion of journalist integrity.

Anonymous said...

So the NY Post put ALL of those words in her mouth? Fabricated the entire quote?

Anonymous said...

@8:17, not a wish of mine, it's a question of return on investment. The market value sale of apts along with maintenance fees that'll come close to exceeding the current rent roll make it an almost done deal. Continuing a rental property has no appeal for the money changers eyeing this place.

Anonymous said...

I hope that puts to rest the op[posers who were denying the Susan bikini ordeal. Yes it did indeed happen. Instead of getting press on the illegal partitions and walls and apartment conversions to overcrowded fire hazardous dorms Susan focused on bikinis and made this community look like a joke. There are serious matters on which she should have focused. It was an embarrassing moment for Stuy Town.

Anonymous said...

"5 52 - It's not going to happen. There is not a shot in hell (as I do wish there was) that any sale would be made to the 11,250 + residents here. It will never happen. You and I will be long gone and you'll still be pining for it,still talking about it."

You do realize sir/madam, that it's going to happen? You or I not wanting it is irrelevant (our feelings are not that important in the grand scheme of things). You would be better served looking into possible financing for your unit (if you even live here). A sale to the "11,250 +residents here" is not necessary for it to take place. Time to hunker down! Buy or fry!!!!

Anonymous said...

It's all about the money. EVERYTHING else is secondary.
There will be more bikinis, budlight, students, noise, dogs,drunks who yell and scream at the early hours in the morning,overflow of garbage in the recycleable area,MCI'S,and more POT smoking, which is more visibly evident now than ever before. They walk around casually as though it is being smoked as a regular cigarette. A MAJOR overhaul is needed, which will never happen. WOW!!!!!!!!!! And to pay $4,000/ month for this? You just have to wonder. SUCKER!!

Anonymous said...

These pictures posted look soo delightful, don't they?

Anonymous said...

So the NY Post put ALL of those words in her mouth? Fabricated the entire quote?

Don't even bother. He still thinks Benghazi was about a video. He isn't capable of discerning the truth, he is so far gone. Kool Aid anyone?

Anonymous said...

7:30 a.m - Wait, what? Stop spreading lies.

Anonymous said...

9;41 pm . No , it won't be a rental but it won't be a coop for residents. My best guess is that they'll run it as a rental for a while, slowly clear out buildings, knock down, put up 4 to 5 more on the oval and other spots. it's a win win. You are wrong.

Edmund Dunn said...

"Don't even bother. He still thinks Benghazi was about a video. He isn't capable of discerning the truth, he is so far gone. Kool Aid anyone?"

Hey Teabagger, no balls to put your real name out there?

Anonymous said...

7 27 -- Really? Low class comment no matter how you vote.

Anonymous said...

Once again Edmund gets to get personal but you don't allow anything to be said about him because it's personal???? You're like that incompetent NFL or NHL referee who only catches the retaliator but misses the original foul that started the whole thing.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

If you are the commentator at 11:59 AM, then you had your jab also.

I actually regret allowing through any tangential political stuff. Sometimes, at work, I don't have time to carefully read through a comment. But I'll try to be more focused on this matter.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Again, I sympathize with the problem, but I can't let a back and forth evolve into a flame war here.