According to this week's, T & V newspaper, our Tenants Association is still hoping that condo conversion be will actualized in ST/PCV so that affordable housing can be saved here. I guess that's the logic that's at work.
Susan Steinberg, chair of the TA, is quoted: "What we would define as affordable would depend to some degree on median income, what is considered middle class. Three thousand for a one-bedroom, five thousand for a two bedroom is not affordable. I'm of the mind that affordable is not market rate, so a fireman could live here, a nurse could live here, a teacher could live here. Not five students crammed into a one-bedroom apartment."
Of course, only tenants with money to spare will be able to afford to purchase a condo in ST/PCV and their "rent" will surely be at least, or over, $3K for one-bedroom or $5K for two, taking into account mortgage payments and maintenance fees.
One also wonders that if Ms. Steinberg, and the rest of the higher-ups at the TA, believe that students are cramming into apartments here, why does the TA not take CWCapital to court over this illegal rental situation?
The likely explanation is that the TA, having been so long fixated on the idea of condo conversion, will not take CWCapital to court over anything major because a court battle would hold up the remote possibility of condo conversion for years. So tenants are being bludgeoned by the landlord daily, monthly, yearly, but little is done by the TA, except complaints on such matters as laundry machines--and so far without success on even that!
There's even worse news for tenants in this week's T & V--our market-rate tenants. Quoting the paper:
"Reps for the mayor have previously said tax incentives or subsidies were a possible solution to keep affordable apartments affordable while also admitting there's no turning back the clock for 'Roberts' tenants and others paying higher rents."
It's over.
81 comments:
It's been over for a while STR. You make a good point about tenants who are overpaying for their apartments probably buying because it would make financial sense. The TA wasn't letting on about the units being unaffordable so thank you for bringing that fact to the fore as well. I guess I won't be buying.
I wish we had a real TA like the one at Riverton.
I feel like I am constantly swimming upstream, and at the point of exhaustion with this new MCI , façade work, on ALL of the buildings. The cost of buying one of these condo's is going to be more than the monthly rent for the average rent stabilized tenant. I think they are just going to pass along this property to the next owner, etc, etc, etc.
I feel hopeless as many of you might feel as well. When I first moved in here years ago, I was soo happy. All of the happiness has now been drawn out of me. I feel like I am constantly putting my hands in my pocket to give these owners more and more of my hard earned money. I am just an average worker folks, just trying to make ends meet. I don't know how long I am going to be able to last. Have a good day everyone, and don't give up hope!
Its over because the market rate people didn't fight back and question the renovation charges, the mci charges, the legality of the deregulation of their individual apartments -- instead they joined with the TA plan for unaffordable affordable housing in a scheme to throw out the RS tenants.
The MR did this to themselves.
"higher-ups"
you mean low-level...
I saw some bastards with suits walking around the property a while back. They all have the same look, completely disinterested in the tenants about them, but smug with purpose and a regal sense of entitlement to be power players.
EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One also wonders that if Ms. Steinberg, and the rest of the higher-ups at the TA, believe that students are cramming into apartments here, why does the TA not take CWCapital to court over this illegal rental situation?
Anon 10:50AM:
I hear you and the tenants hear you--at least those tenants who are not transients. Many of us are in the same boat, of course. For a long time, I've wanted to post about how we can live as sanely as possible here and still not have to grab our ankles. (Check Google for the reference, if you don't get my meaning.)
10:50 here. I know. Thank you STR. I guess the only thing we can do is hope things can turn around somehow.
WWGD?
What Would Guterman Do?
How is facade work an MCI?
Seems like it should fall under regular wear and tear maintenance.
WE DON'T know that buying won't be affordable. Stop posting as if you know this. Some of us are approaching a very $$$$$ rent even though we've been here a while and have it a bit lower than MR. What about us STr? maybe we need some equity, a cheap loan and a home. Stop badgering as we want to live here in peace , without shitty landlords and being thrown out. and, why does it bother you all? you don't have to buy. just stay as you are. omg, there is no making you happy. Let's think about others for a change. It's not going to make a damn bit of diff to you if it's a conversion. And for the record, IT WON'T BE. they won't let it get to there. so stop wasting time on this.
>> you don't have to buy. just stay as you are. omg, there is no making you happy. Let's think about others for a change.<<
Yeah, I'm thinking about "affordable housing," which will diminish with people going condo. Surely that is evident? Those who are thinking about going condo are the ones who are just thinking about themselves.
TO October 3, 2014 at 12:04 PM,
That's exactly how I feel. It's still in the Application stage. How could we pay for ugly patchwork on the outside of our buildings, and that being a permanent increase? Sounds like a repair and not a replacement. Please look at the following as posted on NYS Home&Community Renewal's website:
To qualify as an MCI, the improvement or installation must:
1.be depreciable pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code, other than for ordinary repairs;
2.be for the operation, preservation and maintenance of the building;
3.directly or indirectly benefit all tenants; and,
4.meet the requirements set forth in the useful life schedule contained in the applicable Rent Regulations.
To be eligible for a rent increase, the MCI must be a new installation and not a repair to old equipment.
SEE?
Str- RS does not and will not offer affordability to STPCV. Even the somewhat affordable old school RS apartments are inching towards unaffordability every year. Conversion. however flawed, offers a fixed mortgage that won't increase every year like RS rents.
That reasoning just doesn't work for me. Rent stabilization and other tenants laws (some requiring "new legislation") are the only way to keep affordable apartments affordable. Going condo eliminates affordable housing. Every true RS apartment that is converted to a condo is an apartment that instantly becomes unaffordable for regular middle class folks.
One piece of "new legislation" would be the elimination of a landlord's ability to add 20% to the rent of an apartment that becomes vacated if that apartment becomes vacated within a short period of time. This would take care of the game being played by our landlord with the churning of students here to raise the true rent of apartments.
And, when an MCI is fully paid for, it ends right there, not tacked on for eternity.
Same old round and round. No surprise that the TA remains on the same course. About affordability, we know that co-op would be less than condo. That's for sure. It's actually possible for a developer to bid high, and still make a good profit while keeping prices relatively low. It's really a matter of how much of a profit the developer targets as its goal. A company like Brookfield is all about maximum profit. So if Brookfield does win (which I doubt), we'll see the prices and then the TA can begin to go into its spin.
I called DHCR, 718-739-6400, press option 1 and then 9, and they informed me that there is neither a pending nor any filing of any MCI application for my building. I suggest everyone do the same.
I'm still trying to understand how a di Blasio 'fix' will be implemented here. There are rent control laws on the books that have been manipulated for years to the disadvantage of the middle income renters. There has been no discussion by di Blasio camp on a revisit to these laws. What has been discussed is a property tax/incentive plan that I guess would be attached to the deed restricting owners in an effort to comply with an agreement with the city. (you keep rents low in a specific number of apartments and we'll give you a tax break).
First, this arrangement benefits who??? It benefits CW capital since the tax abatement reduces the operating cost of the assets and increases the cash flow that what??? supports the service of more debt!
The same scumbags will be bidding on the assets. They just need to figure out how to game the city in addition to us (and since the city cannot even implement the current arsenal of laws, why should we expect them to have a better chance with a one-off deed restriction).
I call DHCR and asked about my pending overcharges in said rent. That was 5 mnths ago and confirmed filed. Alas, nothing done, no news, they know nothing. sigh.
Real RS is gone imho. You'll see it creep up and up and sharply in the next 4 years. There's really no going back.
And fwiw, more than half of us want an affordable home - the same half who is MR here. If not more than half now.
Our rent was $3504. It should have gone up just 1% - which would be just $35. But, nope - it is up $74. This is how they do it. They add the a/c separate, more mdi, on top of the mci and basically, the 1% does not exist. Yeah us.
5:43 you already had an ac charge so your ac charge is not a new one. The extra $39 charge is not ac.
"Every true RS apartment that is converted to a condo is an apartment that instantly becomes unaffordable for regular middle class folks."
Again, a limited equity co-op, like Penn South, keeps apartments affordable long term, no matter what happens to RS laws.
Are you all THAT comfortable in the knowledge that your elected reps will ALWAYS go to bat for RS tenants? I'm not...
How does living with R/S (even real R/S) ensure affordability? That's lost on me. Been real R/S for last 15 years and things aren't that affordable.....and they keep going up. Let's all pray for some kind of conversion.
Yes, RS rents do go up. Always have. The thing is to keep the percent increase as low as possible.
http://nypost.com/2014/06/24/rent-guidelines-board-enacts-nycs-lowest-ever-rent-hike/
But let's move away from trying to frighten RS tenants (a constant to those wanting to go condo or co-op) to reality. I now pay almost 2K for a two-bedroom Stuy Town apartment. I'm surmising that this is an average that long-time RS tenants pay, give or take a few hundred dollars, with single bedrooms being less. How much do you think my two-bedroom would cost me if it went condo? Monthly mortgage and maintenance fees? Anywhere near 2K a month? No way.
The instant I go condo, my apartment is taken out of RS protection, and becomes an apartment that will at least double in monthly payments. These condo payments will, like RS rental payments, INCREASE as maintenance fees go up, perhaps even more than RS increases.
In a realistic scenario, affordable housing dies the more tenants opt to go condo.
STR you've made the argument for conversion yourself. A fixed mortgage versus 2k month rent that's ever churning upward. Which one is affordable in the end?
You're forgetting that maintenance fees will go up, too, and probably at a higher rate than RS lease increases.
Yes but you're forgetting the great middle class entitlement we lose out on as renters, writing off maintence and mortgage interest on our taxes. And let's not forget about the equity which, as renters, is accrued by the SOB owners.
Does anyone know anything about this new MCI that is coming?
Meh. I can be involved, vote on and watch MY maintenance fees. Feel much better about T H A T than the crooks stealing from me now here.
I"m not trying to scare anyone str - i have a good rent for the moment - I can go either way on the conversion, or not. But just saying - THIS CONVERSION BS will not happen. Let's drop it. Don't matter if you want it, or not.
Same arguments about conversion we've seen for over a year so it's clear, nobody has changed any positions. Whether reflective of finances, principle, reason, practicality or reality, the community is divided. Then again, it's not our decision. If the winning developer stays rental, you can expect more students and more MCIs. You can fight the good fight but if past predicts future, we'll lose more than we win. If it's a condo conversion, you can expect high prices. The developer will shoot for a little over 15% participation to meet legal requirements which means a 2 BR will go for close to 1MM. Only well-heeled will buy. Student rentals may abate but expect more MCIs. A co-op conversion is unlikely. Far too tenant-friendly. So bottom line, MCIs will be key. Consequently we ought to develop an MCI brigade expert in handling the challenges. About the best we can do.
@10:22 we fail to address the inevitable at our own risk. A conversion is the choice business model for any investor, the rate of return is superior to a rental plan. To not engage this reality and fight for a favorable outcome is shortsighted. Raging against MCIs's is a sideshow of a sideshow.
That is a good point 10:26. A MCI group. Let's ask Assemblyman Wright and the Riverton TA about their MCI challenge and lawsuit. Maybe they know somethings we do not and we could be using to protect ourselves here like they are there.
raging against laundry rooms is a sideshow of a sideshow of a sideshow
raging against mci charges saves tenants money, stops illegal charging, puts tenants rights front and center in the spotlight
I doubt we can stop the student rental. But raging against the MCIs...that's a good thing. The MCIs are the strongest levers against the long time tenants.
Str - you forget that ST is affordable only TO YOU. Most of the people here and the new people who rent have nothing NEAR AFFORDABILITY. So what exactly do you mean? And , again, again, again, you dont have to buy your place. Who exactly are you protecting? Those already protected????? Please elaborate. I repeat, YOU (ME) OTHERS, ARE ALREADY PROTECTED.
You are wrong. ST is not just affordable ONLY to me. There are many, many long-term RS tenants with similar rents. Yes, we are currently protected, but the less of us, the more apartments go out of true RS. I'm "protecting" affordable housing, therefore, which our TA and politicians should be protecting, too.
The TA and our politicians should also be suing our present and past landlords in a massive lawsuit that tacks on every abuse and illegality that can be uncovered here, including the rental of apartments to transients who exceed the three unrelated persons law. And all those DoB filings for partitions should be examined. Add on the harassment of tenants through continual and excessive construction noise, the lack of proper laundry facilities, the lethargic renewal of all facilities in Peter Cooper Village post-Sandy, etc., etc. Ideally the city should take over ST/PCV, lower rents for "market-rate tenants" and throw the bums out who have been using this property as a cash cow at the expense of its middle and working class tenants.
"Str - you forget that ST is affordable only TO YOU. Most of the people here and the new people who rent have nothing NEAR AFFORDABILITY. So what exactly do you mean? And , again, again, again, you dont have to buy your place. Who exactly are you protecting? Those already protected????? Please elaborate. I repeat, YOU (ME) OTHERS, ARE ALREADY PROTECTED."
Not that STR needs me to speak for him, but I think he is "protecting" future generations. I happen to strongly disagree with a lot of his points regarding conversion however. I'm not sure how STR can come to the conclusion (other than personal bias) that mci's will be lower than increases in maintenance fees. He sites a 1% increase for next year, but I can just as easily site 6 1/2% and 7 1/2% increases. Completely irrelevant. He mentions that affordable housing dies the more people opt to go condo. I think what he means to say is that R/S dies. R/S ultimately has nothing to do with affordability (currently, for the fake R/S tenants). As others mentioned there are other benefits of ownership (i.e. building equity and tax benefits) which would certainly compensate for any added maintenance fees. Can't see how MCI'S are going to give us any benefits.
Bottom line is affordability is done as far as R/S is concerned: real or not. These scuzzy landlords will do whatever they can to constantly get MCI'S through and it will cost us A LOT more than any management fees which tenants would often have a voice in.
That's why we need to take the administration of this property out of the hands of a landlord like CWCapital or Tishman-Speyer. A "last stand" with a massive lawsuit and the take-over of the property by the city which will return it to its original vision so "that families of moderate means might live in health, comfort and dignity in park-like communities."
hat's why we need to take the administration of this property out of the hands of a landlord like CWCapital or Tishman-Speyer. A "last stand" with a massive lawsuit and the take-over of the property by the city which will return it to its original vision so "that families of moderate means might live in health, comfort and dignity in park-like communities."
YOU ARE SO RIGHT. STR. WTF ARE WE ALL WAITING FOR? evictions? more increases ?
"Add on the harassment of tenants through continual and excessive construction noise, the lack of proper laundry facilities, the lethargic renewal of all facilities in Peter Cooper Village post-Sandy, etc., etc. Ideally the city should take over ST/PCV, lower rents for "market-rate tenants" and throw the bums out who have been using this property as a cash cow at the expense of its middle and working class tenants."
There's no law against construction noise. If you think the ghouls are using it as a weapon against tenants, good luck proving that in a court of law. Landlord doesn't need to provide laundry facilities.
You're becoming Don Quixote STR.
Closing statement of TA's announcement on its website:
"There may be a moment when we will again need to more loudly and aggressively push our interests — and we hope we can continue to count on you for your support."
How about they loudly and aggressively push the interests of the tenants concerning the QOL, outrageous MCIs, noisy, disruptive students, massacring of trees and non-stop construction and pollution? Isn't all that enough for a TENANTS association to focus on?
Please, Riverton, can we borrow your TA. You are so fortunate to have a real TA.
This new MCI should not qualify as being legit. This should be for normal wear and tear of the building. How the hell can this be permanent? How? HOW?
There are laws against construction noise at certain times of da and night. If landlord advertises that the provide laundry facilities then they are legally bound to provide such facilities.
Keep dreaming folks! Keep dreaming!
StR: you might want to devote an entire section to the leases that are coming out from CW CR. They allow the landlord to Not renew said tenant at any time. And worse. HOW IS THIS LEGAL WITH A 'STABLIZED LEASE' taking tax exempts from the city? HOW IS THAT NOT ONE LAWYER HAS QUESTIONED THIS either as a tenant or other? I DON'T GET IT.
Can you forward the pertinent part to: stuytownreporter@gmail.com
Oh yeah. There's a post on yelp saying same thing. Better check the leases newbies!!!!
Affordable housing? Are you kidding? I can barely pay my R.S apartment as it is with all these constant yearly renewal increases and these bull$%**@ MCI'S. PEOPLE ARE REALLY STRUGGLING TO MAKE ENDS MEET. Our children are NEVER going to be able to live here as once was. You know why? Because housing is no longer affordable, and it will NEVER BE. OUR generation was the last to see it.
4:29
Generally, tenants in rent stabilized apartments must be offered renewal leases. The renewal lease can be for a term of one or two years, at the tenant's choice and is at a rate set by the local Rent Guidelines Board. The renewal lease offer must be made on a form created by or on a facsimile approved by the Division of Housing and Community Renewal.
The Lease Renewal Process
1.In New York City, the owner must give written notice of renewal by mail or personal delivery not more than 150 days and not less than 90 days before the existing lease expires on a DHCR Renewal Lease Form (RTP-8).
>>Generally, tenants in rent stabilized apartments must be offered renewal leases. The renewal lease can be for a term of one or two years, at the tenant's choice and is at a rate set by the local Rent Guidelines Board. The renewal lease offer must be made on a form created by or on a facsimile approved by the Division of Housing and Community Renewal.<<
That's correct. And ALL apartments in ST/PCV are now considered rent stabilized.
All apartments at STPCV are not really rent stabilized. Yes, they are legally protected under current rent stabilization law. But those apartments that fall into the Roberts class or post-Roberts class have a sunset on RS protection. That sunset is the expiration of the J-51 benefit period (or any time prior should court ruling or legislation alter the J-51 requirements). Here is the Rider to the Lease (abridged):
" Landlord represents that it has received a tax exemption for the... the apartment may be subject to rent regulation...with the approximate expiration date of the tax benefit period being 6/30/2020".
"If it is otherwise determined by legislation, a court or administrative agency... then this apartment may not be subject to rent stabilization at all".
"It is understood... that as of the expiration date of the tax benefit period... the tenant's apartment will no longer be subject to rent regulation... the tenant's apartment shall be deregulated as of said date. The landlord can elect not to renew the lease, or if landlord elects to renew, to charge the tenant the market rate for the apartment".
That's the highlights of the one-page rider.
I hope this helps.
Iggy
The only way we can save affordable housing is to end these RIDICULOUS MCI'S. WHY should we have to pay for something, forever. FOREVER? Why? WHY?
It's not even as if these MCIs are really "Major Capital Improvements." Most of them are repairs that have become necessary due to wear and tear and neglect by past landlords. MetLife let the place go to hell before selling it to that dopey Speyer asshole and his pals. Sure they did a few cosmetic touch-ups to the place, but they had let it rot for years. We tenants should not have to pay for repairs the landlord (past and present) did not do because they were too fucking cheap and negligent to do them.
Anonymous @ October 8, 2014 at 8:09 PM said...
"MetLife let the place go to hell before selling it to that dopey Speyer asshole and his pals. Sure they did a few cosmetic touch-ups to the place, but they had let it rot for years."
MetLife greed deserves much blame for what happened here, but not letting the place go to hell or rot for years.
If anything, MetLife was obsessive-compulsive about maintenance and repairs. Within 15 minutes after reporting a leak two plumbers would be knocking on your door. Within 2-3 minutes after reporting an outsider bringing a dog into the complex they would be surrounded by security responding in vehicles and on foot.
There was a lot of unnecessary frivolous upgrading - standard cosmetic touch-up preparation for a sale - taking place at the end. But one thing MetLife cannot be accused of is letting the place rot and go to hell.
ST-PCV was handed to Speyer in pristine physical condition. If anything, except for cutting down a fair number of tall, healthy trees to promote potential commercial use of green space, the entire complex never looked better.
In less than four years Speyer destroyed everything. ST-PCV infrastructure can be salvaged. The historic ST-PCV community is gone forever.
5:48 TOTALLY AGREE!
MetLife treated this property as its crown jewel and not as a cash cow.
Isn't that why we have the MR tenants - to pay for the MCI and upgrades?
How often did MetLife repair the pointing brickwork? Never, to my knowledge. They didn't replace the windows until the old ones were literally falling out of their rotting framed. Then they relaxed them with inferior crap that imploded until the ergon gas was removed, rendering them no good as far as insulation was concerned.
Meant to say "replaced," not "relaxed!" This is what happens with the darned iPhone when you are trying to post a comment while riding on the bus! You don't always notice the predictive text.
OUTRAGEOUS! A/C CHARGE FROM $27.89 TO $36.63. THAT'S A 31% INCREASE. 31 P E R C E N T ??
YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AN AVERAGE DAILY SUMMER TIME TEMPERATURE OF AROUND 100 DEGREES TO JUSTIFY THIS. AND, IT WAS ONE OF THE COOLEST SUMMERS ON RECORD. S O M E O N E HAS TO HELP US HERE. DHCR APPROVES E V E R Y T H I N G !! WE ARE BEING ROBBED FOLKS. THAT'S $8.74 MORE A MONTH TIMES 3 A/C'S WHICH EQUALS $26.22. MONEY THAT IS BEING THROWN AWAY FOR NOTHING, ESPECIALLY THE MONTHS WHEN THE A/C'S ARE NOT IN USE FOR 9(NINE) MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR. SOMEONE PLEASE CALL THE COPS, I'VE BEEN ROBBED(AGAIN!) WHAT A JOKE! THIS H A S TO BE ADRESSED! YOU HERE THAT T.A.?
MetLife absolutely repaired the pointing brickwork -- they however did NOT pass the cost onto residents.
Don't bother fighting with the AC charges or the Mci charges. The dhcr is in bed with the landlords and management of this city. And each day it gets uglier. So having had the coolest summer in history, how did they come up with 35% increase? And next summer when it's back to a normal summer, what? a 75% increase?
I have a lot of questions on our lease, signed months ago (we are new-ish tenants). Who can I discuss some very questionable things with? Would the Tenants association help or take my call? Thank you.
Pure B.S. Nothing less than!
They are getting away with murder. There has to be a way to put an end to all of this. HAS TO BE!
Here's # on that Defector List: we're moving to Queeens/ J Heights in 5 weeks.
Let's start the fantasy of all the things we'll do when a conversion happens and we're in control of this place:
1st - fire anyone related to the events. The worst thing that has happened here is having people who don't live here determine the life of this community.
We don't want an ice skating rink (and living over a construction site for 8 weeks). Maybe 300 families use that rink and the rest of us are stuck with looking/listening to it for months.
Cancel the concerts. After this summer's fiascos... 'nuf said.
Cancel movie nites... again.. 50 people go and 100's of families have to listen to the noise in their homes.
OK ... that's my dream today... what's yours?
8 04 no one can help you. We've tried, friends tried. GL filing an overcharge form. Dhrc probably throws into the trash under the desk. Many have filed = you will never hear from them and if you do, they will respond with:
Charges are valid.
next?
9.55 AM-Your dream list is my dream list as well. Just add the end of the dormfication of PCVST. Can't wait for the NYU wing of the "forever in construction" management office. I heard it will all be in violet......BTW, I’m only kidding.....Or am I? Sad.
That office building is huge. Saw it today. Pathetic loss of peaceful quiet open space and trees. Is it really 1000+ workers coming and going everyday? Traffic and noise will be a mess for those living in those buildings. Way to decrease quality of life for 6 more buildings. First the Oval and now the 1st Ave Loop. Seriously how fast can we rid of this corrupt Buyers Association "TA" and start protecting our quality of life?
No such thing as affordable housing anymore. This is more like Emerald City, for the rich only.
Yeah, but this is Luxury Living?
So your kids can't afford to live here. BOO HOO! What happens to people's kids who can't afford to live in other places? Why is PCVST the Peoples Republic of Cuba Housing in Manhattan?
TO: October 14, 2014 at 12:16 AM
You obviously are not aware of how it once was a very nice place to live, compared to what has transpired here in recent years. BOO HOO! and a very Happy Halloween to you too.
12 16 am - Easy to say when you have a decent rent. Shame on the obvious.
Because 12:16 that is what made this a "community" - generations of middle class families raising kids with parents and grandparents helping or babysitting while both parents have to now work - kids who grow up and then raise their kids here and so on. A community. Not a commodity.
Post a Comment