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.

Thursday, July 10, 2014

Approximately 5,000 More People Live in ST/PCV Than Ten Years Ago

And our landlords admit it!

Here's what Stuy Town and Peter Cooper Village's official website stated back in 2003. (Try not to laugh too hard at the sentence that follows, which I have not edited out due to comedic value.)

Today over 25,000 people call Peter Cooper Village/ Stuyvesant Town home, as countless others have done throughout the past 50 years. The values that built this complex - family, friends, cooperation and community pride - continue to make PCV/ST a unique and wonderful place to live. (Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20030207122650/http://pcvst.com/History.html)

 And now?

PCVST encompasses 110 buildings, 11,250 no-fee rental apartments, and is home to approximately 30,000 people.  (Source: http://www.pcvstliving.com/about-nyc-apartments .... Note: no mention of "the values that built this complex....")
   

Is this a story of partitions and the ever-growing student body in these apartments? 

Here is a photo that has been judged to picture 5,000 people:


Now, ask yourselves, if the landlord increases a property's population by 5,000, doesn't that take a toll on the infrastructure and the resources available? If it does, how is it possible that the landlord can request and get an MCI for replacing something that has outlived its "useful life" if the landlord, by his own policy of increasing the tenant base, has degraded such "useful life" more expeditiously than it would have been degraded otherwise?

75 comments:

Anonymous said...

Excellent point STR

Anonymous said...

Is this why the water pressure is so low at times? Why the recycling room is totally overflowing and looks and smells rather like the former Staten Island Landfill? These greedy, money-grubbing assholes are letting the place deteriorate and then will add MCIs when they are forced to make necessary repairs to keep the buildings from crumbling.

Anonymous said...

I think we are owed a detailed breakdown of the MCI charges, who is being charged and how much - we know RS is paying more than MR - is NYU paying any of the mci charges and is it by apartment room count with the increased rooms taken into account or by number of unrelated people in an apartment.

Yes I think the mci charges need to be challenged. The wear and tear is greater with the increase population crammed into the same number of apartments and infrastructure.

Anonymous said...

I think they inflated the number of apartments too--only 11,230 or 11,232, as I recall. I suspect the 30,000 number is a guesstimate. Do we think CW is actually capable of counting how many people are living here?

Interesting point about useful life (although I'm not sure we've yet seen second-stage MCIs for things we've already paid for). It's not clear to me how DHCR determines useful life, and some things here (not saying which!) have lasted far longer than their official useful life. Still, I don't think the security system we're all paying for is much affected by how many people live here. Water tanks and valves--sure. Walkway--probably, although weather is a factor. Really poor workmanship? Jackpot!

Anonymous said...

That increase is 5000 adults. That is a lot of wear and tear. A lot of plumbing stress, electrical stress. Was that given due consideration at all in the MCI closed door talks that were done without tenant representation?

Anonymous said...

So right, so true STR. Yet our problem lies with DOB and DHCR. Who is responsible for 'approving'.

Anonymous said...

5000 more people yet no change in Use, Occupancy or Egress?! Corrupt to the core.

Anonymous said...

NYU leasing Stuyvesant Town apartments, destroying community open spaces, rewiring property for student commercial spaces.....

Breaking laws, violating housing regulations, violating building codes, causing safety hazards.....

Which politicians pushed this corrupt deal through the city system and are they still in office orchestrating the cover up?

Anonymous said...

For all his campaigning and support he got from Stuyvesant Town, Mayor de Blasio owes the residents an explanation of his involvement in the NYU deal when he was Public Advocate and his commitment to residents to get us out of the NYU mess. A direct communication from the Mayor to residents and not a crafted worded statement sent via untrusted messenger sources that help the Politicians push their agenda through this community.

"The values that built this complex - family, friends, cooperation and community pride - continue to make PCV/ST a unique and wonderful place to live." that no longer exist due to the transient leasing deals to up the Rent Roll for the CW / Brookfield vultures circling, all those who destroyed the place where our grandparents and parents raised us and we are trying to raise our children.

Mayor de Blasio you need to directly speak to the middle class residents here with a plan to remove the transient housing and restore this community. The only way to restore the stable family values that once existed here is to restore 100% RS regulated community that worked well for generations. Generations of families.

NYU or PCVST? Which is it Mr Mayor?

Advocates for NYU expansion plans


http://www.nyu.edu/community/nyu-in-nyc/core-plan-commitments/documents-and-downloads/advocates-for-nyu-2031.html


http://www.nyu.edu/community/nyu-in-nyc/core-plan-commitments/documents-and-downloads/advocates-for-nyu-2031/bill-de-blasio-public-advocate-advocates-for-nyu-2031.html

Anonymous said...

NYU Housing construction in PCVST started in 2008 and not 2010 as an earlier poster stated. Tom Feeney oversaw it for Robbie Speyer, Tishman then changed employer name and continued under CW Compass Rock.
I think the only thing DOB made them do is adjust a plumbing feature in the cellar of every building to accommodate the increased number of people living in the buildings but they allowed them to make false statements of no change in use, occupancy,.

Anonymous said...

Interview with Brad Hoylman. What he said in 2012 on NYU greedy expansion and saving the homes of rent stabilized communities

Q. Any specifics on efforts you would make that affect the East Village?
A.

Well I know that there are a number of bad landlords that I think the next state senator, working with the other representatives, need to keep tabs on and I’m going to pursue that. And, you know, trying to continue the efforts to expand historic preservation and sensible zoning is all part of the same project, I think. Of course the East Village historic district is coming up for a vote, so that’s a big thing. I’ll continue to make certain that that is protected and strengthened.

I’m also continually concerned about N.Y.U.’s encroachment into the East Village. I’ve been a leader, battling them back in Greenwich Village. Generally speaking and particularly, your sponsor – this calls for a sponsor announcement, but putting that aside – N.Y.U. I think has a responsibility to the local community to pare back their current project and to work more closely with elected officials, community boards and local neighbors, on their plans. So, I want to be at the forefront of that effort.
hoylmanJefferson Siegel Mr. Hoylman helps lead a rally against the end
of M8 service in the East Village in 2010
Q.

So you’re for them scaling back their plan?
A.

Yeah, absolutely. I led the community board in its unanimous resolution opposing it. And Senator Duane and Assemblymember Glick were extremely helpful in coalescing community opposition to the plan. We’ve achieved some cuts to the project but it hasn’t gone far enough. So the next stage is the City Council hearing where they’re going to consider, hopefully, more proposals to scale the plan back, but as it stands now it’s not remotely palatable to the local community.

There are also a significant number of rent-stabilized tenants in the area and I’m very concerned about the impact about what the commercial up-zoning in the Washington Square area will do to those tenants as well as the two decades of construction that are predicted for the area should the plan succeed in its current form. Most of those tenants are in their golden years so to think of your retirement being a construction zone is a pretty depressing thought. So there’s a lot of work to be done in making certain that N.Y.U.’s plan is one that the community can live with.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1837176580996082182&postID=2927469204748824685



What he has done, actions taken in PCVST to match those words:

Anonymous said...

Today's news

Is the Mayor doing enough to preserve Rent Stabilization in PCVST and restoring this once stable community of family values that has been destabilized by NYU and Market Rate housing? (illegally)

“The tide of deregulation needs to stop,” Department of Housing Preservation and Development Commissioner Vicki Been told Crain’s. “We hope to work with our partners at the state and get a handle on that, as rent regulation is coming up for renewal in Albany.”

Financing in the administration’s first six months went toward a 422-unit Mitchell-Lama co-op in Brooklyn Heights, enabling the facility to remain affordable for the next 20 years. But other complexes with rent-regulated units, such as the 11,200-unit Stuyvesant Town-Peter Cooper Village, could fall out of the system, Been said.
http://therealdeal.com/blog/2014/07/10/de-blasio-administration-makes-strides-toward-affordable-housing-goals/

Anonymous said...

"I think we are owed a detailed breakdown of the MCI charges"
DHCR sent you the information. If you don't have it or can't find it, contact DHCR.

"who is being charged and how much"
The DHCR form details the breakdown of the cost per room. Total cost of an MCI is divided by an 84-month amortization period, then by the number of rooms in the individual building.

"we know RS is paying more than MR"
Not so. The cost is broken down by room. Doesn't matter if you're renovated or unrenovated. Since most people in renovated apartments are paying less than the absurd legal rent, their inflated preferential rent easily covers the cost of MCIs, should management choose not to collect them separately. The Roberts settlement contained language about MCIs.

"is NYU paying any of the mci charges and is it by apartment room count with the increased rooms taken into account or by number of unrelated people in an apartment."
I don't know what NYU is paying, but the room count is determined by what the landlord has filed with DHCR. We all get a form every year about the registration of our apartment. If the landlord files for three rooms (e.g., a 1BR apartment) and a wall is put up to create another "room" but the landlord doesn't file for a change, then it's still three rooms. Number of occupants doesn't enter into it. Keep in mind that these created rooms probably don't qualify as true bedrooms because they don't have closets. The reduced living/dining areas probably don't have windows, and there are regulations for what constitutes a room.

"Yes I think the mci charges need to be challenged. The wear and tear is greater with the increase population crammed into the same number of apartments and infrastructure."
The MCI charges were indeed challenged, initially in 2009 for this latest round--that's why there was a settlement and we all got our retroactive amounts waived (about $1,000 I won't have to pay to our corrupt management and for some people it was thousands of dollars they got to keep). Individually or collectively, we've always challenged MCIs. The problem is that DHCR is understaffed and sympathetic to landlords, which means they don't investigate the costs closely enough, among other things, although they seem to regularly knock off 20%-25% of what landlords ask for. Result: tenants lose, even when we're clearly in the right.

But even after an MCI has been granted, it's possible to file for a rent reduction if the MCI item isn't functioning. Don't have the details on that, but the DHCR website probably does.

Anonymous said...

They tore up the Oval, killed the healthy trees, and built the student amenities for Verizon Fios wifi

They destroyed the Park and the community with their underground wiring and their student amenities.

Here is a little bit of their bragging on the extent of the construction.

http://www.bbpmag.com/property/prop1108.php

Anonymous said...

9:05 i'm not RS, i'm MR SO I can tell you you're not paying more than me. our rent went up another $56 every month due to mci

stop posting lies. we're paying too much here and keep getting hit and you don't.

Hippo said...

In a number of buildings, if you look closely, maintenance has put up air freshener vials attached to the walls on the main and terrace levels. I asked the worker why and he responded, " to disguise the smell of weed wafting through the halls...wouldn't want potential tenants to get the right idea...haha"
So funny...so sad...dorm living at its best!

Anonymous said...

I guess this is why people have to use the stairs as bathrooms. Maybe they should invest in buckets and pee-pots to augment their bathroom facilities? But then, they would probably empty them out the window. Regardez de l'eau!

Anonymous said...

After reading all the rants on the mci charges it would seem the missing piece of information is the number of apartments the landlord has registered with dhcr and therefore the number of rooms. Seems not all the apartments are being considered in the calculations. does anyone believe all the apartments are registered?

Anonymous said...

Totally OT but a good friend here tried to post a review on Yelp ---- Would not post. Replies with your review posted, but WE CHECKED 3 times. Did not post.

Anonymous said...

DeBlasio is a total lying asshole. He said he was going to abolish the carriage horse trade, but the horses are still pulling fat tourists through the crowded streets, nose to tailpipe in brutal heat and humidity.
He said he was going to freeze RS rents. Didn't happen, no matter that there is a 1% increase on 1-year leases - better watch out for what comes next year.
DeBlasio is puffing himself up because he got the City Council to pass a law giving illegal immigrants an ID card. Whoopdee-doo. I guess they're his next batch of voters. I am not against illegals per se, but these are the people he's pandering to while he doesn't give a flying fuck about the people who are born and raised here and are being driven out by the sky-high condos with sky-high prices being used by money-laundering oligarchs and international criminals.
Big Bill, you certainly don't have my vote for a second term. You don't give a shit about New Yorkers and you are no better than Bloomberg.

Anonymous said...

July 11, 2014 at 8:41 AM "NYU Housing construction in PCVST started in 2008 and not 2010 as an earlier poster stated.
I think the only thing DOB made them do is adjust a plumbing feature in the cellar of every building to accommodate the increased number of people living in the buildings but they allowed them to make false statements of no change in use, occupancy."

The blue light mini security kiosks may have been installed to satisfy NYU security requirements. A college-age relative told me that on his campus similar kiosks were required to be spaced a certain distance apart. Management never mentions them in any of their communications, and no one seems to know if they work.

Anonymous said...

The numbers are actually even worse when you factor in the number of visitors coming to visit these hyper-social transients. to hang out, party, drink, smoke, and flush. The wear and tear they put on the system with all the extra flushes, elevator rides and foot traffic takes years off the useful life of any infrastructure or improvements, so enjoy those MCIs while you can. You can add several thousand more to the total population based on the large number of visitors alone.

Anonymous said...

Thank you 3:06 that raises more questions we need answered.
Were the costs to install kiosks included in any of our MCI increases?
Is this an NYU security requirement? Is this part of the contract with NYU?
Was it a requirement by NYU and 100% paid for by NYU?
Was this a requirement by NYC to have PCVST install security kiosks for NYU and should the city then pay for it?
How much money was exchanged in this NYU deal, between whom, approved by whom, and did PCVST residents bear any of the costs associated with the NYU requirements?
Is CW double dipping getting money from NYU and PCVST residents?
Is CW getting any money from PCVST Residents for any of the NYU requirements? We should bot pay for any of these.

Anonymous said...

Excellent point 6:00AM and another big reason the Residents needed to be included and represented at the MCI negotiations and not the Buyers Association.

Anonymous said...

Are Residents paying for the water valves for the NYU deal?!

We should not pay for any MCI's that were to accommodate this illegal deal and this business transaction - they are not Major Capital Improvements that benefit nor were necessary for Residents! Maybe they should be eliminated entirely!

Anonymous said...

Security features installed for NY Colleges include
campus electronic bulletin boards, emergency notification systems

Sound familiar?!

Anonymous said...

More New York State college security measures

The OCC Blue Light Call24 System

Blue Light Call24 Boxes that communicate directly with Campus Safety and Security are located at various points around the campus to assist students with emergencies and information requests.

The call boxes have two buttons:

Red button to be pressed for:
Medical emergencies
Life threatening situations

White button to be pressed for non-emergencies such as:
Information
Lockout assistance
Jump starts
Directions

Why are Residents paying for NYU Campus Security requirements? Why wasn't charging Residents for any of these costs stopped and applied to NYU only.

Anonymous said...

Are we paying for the additional manpower, security systems, etc to make PCVST compliant with New York State Laws on Safety and Security on College Campuses? Not only should we not pay for that but all the names of the people in the city agencies the politicians and lawyers involved in the deal need to be revealed along with the NYU personnel and CW Compass Rock and Management employees. they are intentionally ripping off residents to pay for NYU costs. We need to know who is involved in ripping us off.

Anonymous said...


In 2010 NYU students paid all of their rent to NYU.
All maintenance requests, door lock outs went through NYU.
How much did NYU pay to PCVST?
Were the apartments registered with DHCR?
Were the MCI charges applied to the NYU contract?
Seriously what is the financial arrangement between NYU and Compass Rock because it has obviously grown a heck of a lot since the 70 apartments leased a few years ago.


"NYU basically told us to disregard all info about the situation,” said Andrew Cardenas, a student. “All our rent was paid directly to NYU and even super-related work requests were always made through NYU, never using the Stuy Town services.”

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2010/09/16/nyu-not-planning-to-buy-student-occupied-apartments-in-stuy-town-university/

In fact, the only
“official” relationship between NYU and Stuy Town has been the 95
apartments the university rents out for graduate students. Next year
there will only be 70 apartments, according to John Beckman, a
spokesperson for NYU.
August 5 2009
http://nypress.com/welcome-to-stuy-town-u/

Anonymous said...

Check out the story on the Stuy Town groper who has struck twice in the past month or so. Guy is groping women in their buildings in the early morning hours.

CBS and NBC ran stories this week, complete with security camera video. Apparently, according to the story, management does not know how this guy gains entry.

Incredibly, our crack security department appears to think that this no big deal. Tenants who were interviewed were unaware of the issue. Have there been any postings in ST - none in PCV. No security alerts on pcvst.com. Nothing, nil, nada.

Clearly, another security failure.
See the story here -

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Stuyvesant-Town-East-Village-Groping-Suspect-Video-266699121.html

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Said this before, but we should never have had an MCI for the security stuff. Doesn't work to stop crime. The TA's legal team should have fought the MCI by asking for proof of how many times a crime was prevented due to all the security gizmos we wound up paying for.

Anonymous said...

Clearly the security system is not to keep the residents safe. It was installed to meet New York State Laws on Campus Security and Safety and should be paid for by NYU and or the City. Residents are not being kept safe! And Residents are being charged and paying for NY State requirements for NYU. DOB was clearly involved with requiring water valves installed just prior to the 3500 wall partitions installed for the increase population. DHCR was involved up to their necks too with the deregulation of the RS apartments for NYU. Who and How do we file a court case against these City agencies who colluded on this then "negotiated" for PCVST Residents to pay for NYU's Campus Safety requirements? And I don't mean a class action suit where lawyers make millions, residents get less than the overcharge returned to them, and when we win a ruling they all have behind closed doors negotiations to undo the ruling. I mean criminal charges too. This is outright fraud.

Anonymous said...

New here but I am not sure why I have a 2 BR signed at $4979.00 here and now have MCI as well on top of.

Anonymous said...

Senator Holyman was out on the corner of 14th and 1st giving out notices about this creep (complete with his photograph). I doubt that management cares about this, except may to the extent it may interfere with their hardsell marketing to students.

You are absolutely right about the secrity cameras, STR, we should never have been charged an MCI for these. They are purely ornamental. Too bad the TA didn't challenge that MCI.

Anonymous said...

For anyone who didn't save the Oct 2013 MCI order, it says in part:
1. TV/Security system consists of security cameras, key cards (key fobs), interior access door and access card readers.
2. Security cameras are installed throughout the building.

No mention of blue light kiosks, and I don't recall ever seeing a charge for them.

Gerald Guterman said...

STR:

I have just finished my own review of the "complaint".

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=UNTjtbjCpgs6qRmDRA36HQ==&system=prod

It appears to me, that the complaint brings to public light, a deliberate and purposeful attempt at "slight of hand" deception.

I believe that the Complaint is valid and it confirms my original understanding of the documentation for the Mezzanine Loans .

In my professional judgement, based on my experience during forty-four years of transactions and hundreds of Loan and Security Agreements, that the Mezzanine Loan and Service Documents as originally written, specifically direct the "repayment position" and "control of interests" in case of default.

Additionally, as I understand the Mezzanine Documents, they were deliberately drafted to frustrate the reader and obscure the writer's intentions. I would give you substantial odds, that the original participants in the unsecured, Mezzanine Loans, never thoroughly read or understood the transaction or the default controls as written.

Further, as I understand the Roberts Settlement, I believe that the same type of "slight of hand" deception was used to settle the Roberts litigation, delay the distribution of proceeds and soften the reactions of the plaintiff/tenants.

To me, it appears to be very similar to the "slight of hand" deception being used to re-populate the property, through a conversion to "dormitory" housing.

And, last but not least, the process by which the base rent and MCI increases, are being added and substantiated.

I believe that the tenants as a group, should take substantial and forceful legal positions, to reverse the unmitigated abuse of the individual and community rights being inflicted, by the "Special Servicer" turned
"Landlord" and soon to be turned "EX".


Anonymous said...

Here is what Hoylman said in 2012

"so Hoylman will fight to ensure that CW Capital and Rose Associates fulfill their responsibilities to maintain the property, and that they stop block rentals to students"

Too bad his words were NOT met with actions.

Here is more of what he said and did not do:

August 13, 2012 : PRESS RELEASE

Democratic State Senate Candidate Praises ST/PCV Tenant Association’s Work for Community’s Future

New York, NY – Brad Hoylman, Democratic candidate for the new 27th State Senate District containing Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village, announced today an agenda for a future for the Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village (ST/PCV) community that respects the rights of the long-time tenants who call it their home.

ST/PCV must remain affordable, middle-class housing for its residents, Hoylman declared. The property must be properly maintained, and adequate funds must be set aside to do so. And the historical configuration of the property, including all of its open spaces, must be preserved.

Says all the right words then turns a blind eye and deaf ear as CW tears apart the property and rents to thousands of NYU students.

Why didn't he match his words with actions?

Anonymous said...

I forgot to include the link to earlier post on NYU students and Senator Hoylman. Here it is

http://bradhoylman.com/2012/08/13/brad-hoylman-announces-agenda-for-stuyvesant-townpeter-cooper-village/

Anonymous said...

As I walk around the property and smell the stench of dog urine all around and it's not even hot out, I am starting to think we would be better off coop or condo. I WOULD never buy my place, be stupid to do so, but I know I'm protected and my lovely RS will not expire.

But, I'd rather now have other humans owning me, us. I cannot imagine they'd get anywhere near letting this place fall as it has through the corporate greed we've had since MetLife. At least if my neighbor were an owner, collectively we could stop or curtail the madness. Ive never said this or spoken this, but it's very bad here. Too many other reasons to list. And not safe.

Anonymous said...

If PCVST goes condo the apartments will be bought by foreign investors and hedge funds as BlackRock - the biggest hedge fund landlord of rental properties in the USA.
They will not be bought by middle class families with family and community values who raise families for generations.
Only with RS was this a middle class community with family values and community values where our grandparents, parents and we raised our children and now our kids are starting families here.
This used to be the largest middle class community in NYC.

Anonymous said...

How the hell are all these tenants using ONE BATHROOM? Disgusting.

Anonymous said...

11:19 they also said "no change in use, occupancy" on official documents yet we know that to be untrue.

Unless the paperwork is closely scrutinized and all payments and monies investigated they could easily tuck away costs under the headings you list.

Anonymous said...

NYU has sent a loud message to the Real Estate Community:

Any banker, hedge fund, landlord looking to remove apartments from Rent Stabilization in New York City, NYU will work with you on a Dorm Scheme to churn apartments by populating your buildings with multiple transient tenants at a time, which will boost your profits and destabilize your apartments.

NYU - the higher education organization that prioritizes profit over ethics.

Does NYU have non-profit status?

Anonymous said...

"New here but I am not sure why I have a 2 BR signed at $4979.00 here and now have MCI as well on top of."

As long as you signed a lease saying that MCIs were pending and specifying what they were, the landlord can add the MCIs to your rent, no matter how high it is. See page 4 of DHCR fact sheet #24, concerning MCIs. http://www.nyshcr.org/Rent/FactSheets/orafac24.pdf

Anonymous said...

WOW!! I think the leasing office needs more advertising on it's windows. Looks like they may have missed a spot!

Anonymous said...

"As I walk around the property and smell the stench of dog urine all around and it's not even hot out, I am starting to think we would be better off coop or condo."

Theoretically you're right. But can you imagine how much more self-entitled the offenders would be if they were owners? And the rules would still need to be enforced. From talking to coop owners I can tell that good management is necessary regardless of who is the owner.

Anonymous said...

However, you can challenge if the lease amount of $4979 was fraudulent, illegally increased, and should challenge it.

Also, the question on the MCI charge being on top of the $4979 can be challenged as the so-called negotiations included that the MR "were already paying the mci in their base" so they were omitted from being charged as the RS were. So yeah, sounds like you could challenge the MCI on top of your $4979.

Anonymous said...

Someone needs to tell Citi Habitats it is illegal to post false Yelp reviews.

Anonymous said...

8 ; 06 yes and no or maybe. But that ship has sailed. Every day we lose more of RS and tenants die or move away.

So you're still living a fantasy from 1956.

Anonymous said...

Our neighbors, their apartments were once filled with memories, photos, art, memorabilia from vacations and travels around the world from a richness of storied lives well lived by generations of families. Now it is cheap ikea NYU dorm furniture, overflowing recycling areas with beer and liquor bottles, peed in , plastic crates and discarded crap on the sidewalks at the end of every school year. I can't believe how quickly this management deteriorated Stuy Town.

Anonymous said...

Periodically all the RE interests check in with all the tenant blogs and the following is the most likely scenario. They turn to each other at all their respective places and say to each other...'You think they're going to make any trouble for us?" And then comes the answer: "Nah."

Anonymous said...

I guess a lie, repeated often enough, becomes "true." NYU rents a tiny number of apartments at PCVST. That is just the fact. Complain about other stuff.... but that one item just makes you look stupid because it is so EASILY disproven.

Anonymous said...

Gerald Guterman - Agree but wouldn't it be better for the Attorney General to file suit than for the tenants to go through another court case that gets undone by a bad settlement?

Anonymous said...

2:36 PM I would rather be stuck in the "1956" that values family and people then be stuck in the 1980 Greed is good culture that was reignited by Bloomberg who famously said all he cared about during the MetLife sale of PCVST was that it was a profitable good deal for the purchaser with no regards for the families and people in the community.

Anonymous said...

In response to 10:59

A. You mean it is EASILY covered up.

B. Every time you start calling the tenant's making comments on this blog names like "stupid" it makes you look like you have no legitimate points to your opinion ... only name calling to try to get tenants to stop revealing what is going on in PCVST.

C. Then put your cover up material er I mean proof on the table. Your so called proof will be EASILY proven to be a lie.

Anonymous said...

2:36 It is the year 2014 where politicians shake hands on community street corners campaigning with words as "family values" and "protecting homes" to get our votes then when in office shake hands with the Brookfields and CW campaigning with words as "profitable deals" and not homes but "houses as assets" to further their political careers.

Maybe it is the Politicians using 1956 family values to get into office then when in office act on contrary values as if 2014 is all about profit over humanity.

Maybe that is what term limits are designed to curb. Why we must look at the actions and inaction of the politicians during their entire tenure and not just what they do in an election year for appearance sake.

Anonymous said...

"...lie repeated..."

I know for sure that over the past 5 years I've had students right and left of me, medical students down the hall, and have seen new students come and go on other floors. You an't miss them. They're often on the elevator in groups and they're not all graduate students.

We've seen this same person comment before. The lie is his/her confidence...this person doesn't know the actual figures anymore than the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

How blocks of PCVST apartments would be sold in hush-hush private all-cash deals to foreigners or no-real-money-but-just-numbers-on-papers in a system of loosely-regulated-wall-street-mortgage sales to high end investors and not sold in the public market to middle class families.

http://realestate.msn.com/blogs/post--exclusive-listings-growing-in-popularity

Anonymous said...

Ruined forever! Sad..............

Anonymous said...

That crowd in the photo is 5000 people - wow.

Anonymous said...

9:24 pm. SO MAKE TROUBLE. WTF is wrong with you people?

We live in the greatest city in the world, Many of us have been here for generations and you can't challenge your sleazy landlord?

Anonymous said...

"We live in the greatest city in the world, Many of us have been here for generations and you can't challenge your sleazy landlord?"

Maybe it would be helpful if we had a Tenants Association worthy of the name, instead of one that capitulates to our sleazy landlord.

Gerald Guterman said...

Anonymous said....Gerald Guterman - Agree but wouldn't it be better for the Attorney General to file suit than for the tenants to go through another court case that gets undone by a bad settlement?

July 14, 2014 at 11:20 PM

No. I believe that a laser focused tenant's group, can achieve more than any government agency.

There are 11,232 apartments in the combined STPCV community. No matter what the occupancy is or how many apartments are now rented as dormitory apartments, the sheer size of STPCV with a "mind blowing" amount of monthly rent being paid or not paid, if properly organized, presents an insurmountable economic and political force, against which no landlord in New York or America, can successfully litigate or pragmatically survive.
believe that the significa
My own experience, leads me to nt changes required to return stability to the STPCV community, will only be accomplished by a Community-wide economic and political "REVOLT", taking the form of a laser focused litigation, with sufficient collateral to draw the 100% absolute and unwavering attention of the Owner/Management.

In my opinion, this aforementioned economic force, together with laser focused litigation, can result in the following;

• the Roberts litigation can be re-settled,
• prior MCI increases can be resettled, with future increases moderated,
• conversion of STPCV apartments to dormitory housing, can be stopped and reversed,
• an agreement to restore the OVAL can be completed,
• an agreement to keep all open spaces permanently "open" can be completed,
• an agreement to combine Stuyvesant Town with Peter Cooper Village can be accomplished,
• an agreement to convert all the rental apartments in the STPCV community to ownership housing, with a cost ( to tenants in occupancy) of 60% of market value and pre-approved financing for 85% to 95% of the purchase price for each separate tenant owned apartment, can be accomplished,
• a pre-arranged contract to sell the unsold apartments to a non-profit organization with a pre-settled agreement to retain said unsold apartments under rent stabilization, for approximately twenty years, can be accomplished.

Gerald Guterman

Anonymous said...

So there are 30,000 people living in 11,250 apartments, so on average it's 2.67 persons per apartment; the majority of apartments are 1BR and 2BR with some 3BR ones and no studios. The apartments here are good sized for Manhattan - that doesn't sound like it's overcrowded. Sure, it could be 25k 10 years before due to demographics trends - MR units are more likely occupied by young families with kids who moved into units that were previously occupied by older residents. I would be surprised if population of PCVST was less the 30k shortly after it was built.

Anonymous said...

having been here for many many years, the NEW renovated apartments are full of 3 to 5 people in one/two bedrooms.

Literally every older unit that is one to two br here has one or two elderly tenants in it.

Anonymous said...

Can anyone on here comment about the rent renewal rate received recently with a VERY LARGE base rent apartment? Was your rent renewal 1 to 5% or more? Thank you.

Anonymous said...

4:39 pm: those increases don't go into effect until Ovtober. Anyone renewing before then renews at the current rate (whatever that is) that was set last year.

Anonymous said...

11:19. has nothing to do with the question. The poster is asking about said increases for those withe very HIGH BASE RENT. Not subject to normal 1 to 5%.

Anonymous said...

11:19 - Our base rent is almost 5k on a one bedroom and yes, a total joke. Renwal now and LL raised us by another $350.00 per month.

We're leaving. You can all have your nyu students living above and next to you. We're on time paying respectful and quiet. Done here.

Anonymous said...

Some of the RS have been fighting for ways to protect MR and RS for the very reason as you 5:44. NYU is driving out good neighbors, destroying a good community. So to those on this blog trying to get all of us to stop having conversation the NYU scheme, we can't do that or we will lose more good people like 5:44.
NYU is almost single-handedly destroying PCVST.

Anonymous said...

4:43 yes, NYU, but more importantly, CR CWC, DHCR, DOB and elected officials.

Scummiest.

Anonymous said...

You are right 8:14.

The DOB is responsible for safety and personal welfare and the enforcement of all City codes, and laws and ordinance relating to building, wiring, plumbing, heating and cooling - and PCVST was brought up to State laws and Codes for University Campuses with the DHCR approved security, plumbing, etc.

DOB et al were part of the planning and developing of the NYU dorms.

Anonymous said...

I don't know how you fix the student problem.

It's not like we or anyone can state that 1. you can't live here as you're a student or you're under 25. 2. you can't have friends come over and have a keg party.

Even if two student live in a one br here and there are no walls, they'll have parties. that's what girls do, guys do. they invite 10 friends and it becomes 20. the city is perfect for this.

Anonymous said...

Lost another nice family today. Moved to a place they could buy in Kips bay.

Getting the beer kegger ready along with our earplugs. Every time someone moves out of our building, we get 3 or 4 20 somethings.

Anonymous said...

Lost another senior this week on our floor. She was too ill and alone to stay.

Getting our beer coolers ready. College start date soon enough!