Comment Policy

All comments to posts have to await approval. Approval does not happen immediately. NOTE: Comments reflect the opinions of the person writing them and should not be assumed to reflect the opinion of the blog.

Management has two priorities: 1) Making sure money is made, hence upgrading and filling up apartments is their goal. "Amenities" are important in selling the place, though few residents use them. 2) If someone needs medical attention, Public Safety will be there, if alerted.

Quality of life issues are not that important, however. Things like the carpet rule or outsider dogs. These "rules" tend to be ignored, on purpose it seems. So you will see a lot that isn't taken care of properly, and complaints will be met with a creative excuse and a smile.

"Peace and quiet" must be a cruel joke, though this property is sold that way. There can be no peace and quiet as ALL apartments must be upgraded, which includes the installation of an AC unit below the window. Aside from the continual construction about the neighborhood, there is a new and noisy subway extension being built along East 14 st and the shut down of the L line. "Choosing" to live in NYC, now the newest mantra, is a fabrication when the talk is of ST and PCV, which was traditionally quiet, with no construction noise.

Though money was always important, it is now more important than ever. Money rules many things, as you will find.

At this point, 30 years into living here and seeing many things, I can state that Management and their reps are BS-ing us. I can't say that loudly enough: We are being BS-ed. I don't see any genuine change, though the "selling" of this place is intense. Few of the "rules" will be enforced, as Management doesn't want to lose customers or potential customers. Where personal integrity is a hallmark of an excellent management style, this integrity is not seen in enforcing some of the rules.

Our Tenants Association is, basically, null and void. Oh, it is still around, but it lacks the will power to confront much of anything. The TA will ask for your dues, however. By now, the TA is a charade.

About those "club cars" we see going this way and that way, and outside of Stuy Town or Peter Cooper Village:

Sunday, February 21, 2016

General Manager Rick Hayduk Responds About the Dog Issue

Barry Shapiro, a resident of this complex, stepped up to the plate and contacted our General Manager, Rick Hayduk, about the ST/PCV dog policy. Mr. Hayduk responded. Below is Rick's letter; then the extensive response. The posts are at the independent Facebook:

Subject: Dog Policy


Pardon the delayed response; it's one of the pitfalls in trying to respond to resident inquiries on my own.

We'll be introducing a new process to identify registered dogs (see the attached photo) thus enabling Public Safety Officers to clearly approach offending dog owners. The registration will hang from the leash handle; clearly identifying the dog as registered.

If the dog is not registered by May 1; a summons will be issued at the point of contact. If we learn the dog owner is not a resident, they will be escorted off the property.

Yes, enforcement has been lax but in defense of our team, they would have had to stop every dog owner because the registration tag could not be seen. The new process will allow the rules to be enforced.

Please don't hesitate to reach out with any other observations that will make our community better.


Very encouraging hearing from you. But to be honest, so far very little has been fleshed out. During our meeting with you, you mentioned the possibility of the new tags back then, so it seems as if in the past 5-6 weeks, nothing else has been developed.

I have several questions.

1. At the Stuyvesant Town Peter Cooper Tenants facebook site (not the TA site), there was a report of a child knocked down by an excited dog on extendable leash. The law across both public and private property requires a 6 foot leash, but the extendable leashes are ubiquitous. What if anything can be done about this?

2. Someone also reported that her dog's eye was ripped out during an attack by another dog. Tishman-Speyer very publicly published a list of certain breeds that would not be allowed. But everyone knows that these breeds are here, owned by residents. What will be the policy about these breeds moving forward, what done about those already here?

3. To be absolutely clear...there is no NYC law requiring clean up. The applicable law is actually New York State Public Health Law 1310 requiring clean up in any city with a population over 400,000. I think any policy statement management makes should reflect this. So what will you do about people who might be caught not cleaning up after their dogs?

4. Again, to be clear and transparent, NYC health code 161.03 which has been quoted at the STPCV site does not apply here. It doesn't involve clean-up. In place since 1978, it involves curbing dogs, not cleaning up after. Under this provision, dog owners are not allowed to let their dogs defecate on public sidewalks. But since STPVC is on private land, code 161.03 does not enforce curbing here. So if dogs are allowed to defecate on sidewalks within STPCV, it should be clear that this is due to a policy set by STPCV management, has nothing to do with city ordinances per se.

5. Tishman-Speyer published indecipherable maps showing where dogs were allowed to defecate. Needless to say, dog owners paid no attention. To be clear, are there designated areas for dogs to go or is anywhere fair game? Not talking about just the sidewalks now. Currently, owners lift their dogs over the fences to go in the grassy areas. Sometimes they walk their dogs openly within the fenced-off areas. Again, what is policy? Not every grassy area is posted 'no dogs allowed'.

6. With respect to enforcement, what is the impact of a summons? I assume these aren't NYC tickets. Since STPCV is private property, if the tickets are privately issued, these might be enforceable as owners are allowed to set a lot of policies on their own land . I assume there would be fines; you can't evict someone for not cleaning up after a dog. Not sure if these fines could be challenged if not stated in leases.

7. T & V reported there are 1200 dogs registered. Is there a limit on the number of dogs you will license? If there is, how will management address if and when it discovers unregistered dogs once the limit has been reached?

8. If you go to the STR site, the tenant site at facebook and the TA site on facebook, you will see ample complaints about the responsiveness of Public Safety. I would say that with respect to prior dog policy, lax is not an accurate description. Non-existent might be closer, but that's not even accurate. When I pointed out an 'illegal' breed dog (German Shepherd) around the Oval to one PS sergeant, he just made a snide remark to me and kept walking. So it seems to me that it is more accurate to say that PS has regarded enforcement of management dog policy in the recent past as something of a joke. What can you do about that?

A lot to be addressed. And I imagine on the other side of it you have your management pressing for measures that won't discourage dog-loving renters. And PS folks stating their problems asking exactly what you expect them to do under difficult circumstances.

Nonetheless, I hope that in the weeks to come you're able to release policy measures that will put these issues to rest.

Many thanks again, Barry

Garodnick Will Now Make More Money Than His Districts' Median Household Income

It's good to be a NYC councilperson these days. 

"City Council members Dan Garodnick and Ben Kallos will likely make more than the people they serve this year, thanks to a council-wide 32 percent pay raise. Both councilmen voted in favor of the pay raise that was approved on Feb. 5, making their annual salary $148,000, effective immediately."


"Garodnick, who represents District 4 — spanning from Stuyvesant Town up to the west of Second Avenue and west of Lexington Avenue above East 79th Street — will make 1.34 times what his constituents make.

"His district's median household income is $110,826."

While Kallos responded to, Garodnick was a no comment.

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

Blackstone's New Stuy Town - Peter Cooper Promo Video

My initial reaction is disappointment. One of the first things mentioned is that ST/PCV is "pet friendly." If you thought there was going to be a lessening of the dog population in the future, you were wrong. This is a major selling point being used.

"Organized community amenities" is next on the list of major selling points. Blackstone has already shown the value it places in amenities when it introduced itself to us in their literature. (This stress on amenities clearly outed Blackstone as being unaware of the value of this complex placed by most tenants.)

A "fun environment" is also mentioned. When I think of Stuy Town, that's the first thing that comes to mind: FUN!

While most of the rooms shown have some carpeting, there appears to be none at the 51 second mark. I'm always bewildered as to how ST/PCV can show in its promotions either a lack of carpeting or minimal carpeting that does not meet the lease requirements of a tenant.

"A seasonal ice-rink" is part of this promo, of course. So even if the rink loses money, which seems to be the case, it's a selling point and will stay.

There's more being promoted, including the Oval Cafe where you can buy lukewarm coffee and tea and Oval Study where you have your own "corner office" (!) and "library resources" (!). Sorry, but having the daily NY Times and shelves filled with random uncatalogued books that were bought at 10 cents per book, or donated, do not constitute legitimate library resources.

So this is just the same cliched bs that we hear from every landlord. Sad.

Sunday, February 14, 2016

The Private Rental of Stuy Town and Peter Cooper Apartments?

The work here is not mine, but someone who has been linking these in the comment section of the "City Council" pay raise post:

As an example, here is a Stuy Town apartment listing at VRBO, which is a vacation rental site. 

The average rental is $379 per night (weekend nights $399 per night), two night minimum stay, for a three-bedroom apartment that sleeps eight! Longer rentals are $2,650 for a week and $8,900 for a month!!!

Here are reviews from some people who have stayed at this apartment:

One review: "FANTASTIC LOCATION!!! The unit exceeded our expectations providing a fully equip kitchen, tennis courts, basketball and Bocche courts, There are quite a few children's playgrounds, a great lawn with huge beautiful fountain. Just a very comfortable place for our party of six to dine in and the sleeping arrangements for a party of 6 were great. In comparison to a hotel stay, it was also more cost effective. I would absolutely recommend this apartment for families, corporate functions, friends and the alike."

Hmm, a party of six? Related, okay, but if not, that makes it against the law.

Another review: "Very accommodating. our flight was delayed and we were 7 hours late for the agreed upon check in time. Antonio was understanding and waited for us until 22:00. The flat looked new and had everything you could possibly want in a holiday rental. very cool location east village and gramercy park just a few blocks away. the area has lots young professional families and some cheeky nyu students. lots of police around, a bit odd but you do feel safe. also very convenient to the metro, whole foods and lots of restaurants and pubs! we travel to ny two to three times per year and we've now found our nyc home away from home."

And this one: "I'm not one to post reviews but after Antonio contacted me to request i add a review and i saw what was written below i had to write about our wonderful experience. Our party of 6 LOVED this apartment and the location. David was a pleasure to deal with during the reservation process. He answered all our question in a timely fashion. Antonio the caretaker was AMAZING he was always available during our week long stay to answer any questions we had and came to the apartment immediately to help us with the internet when the Wifi went out. The beds are all good quality mattresses and very comfortable, as are the linens and towels. The appliances are all new and easy to operate. I can't say enough about the professional customer service we received from these guys. They are true professionals and they know how to take care of their property and how to treat their customers. We highly recommend staying in this apartment."

CHECK OUT THIS REVIEW: "We booked this apartment well in advance of our visit to NY for 21 Dec to 03 Jan 2012. My daughter, a student in NY, could only manage to secure a viewing a fiew days before our arrival. Althought the pictures were misleading (not the same furniture as on the listing) we thought the apartment nice enough to go through with it. On 27 Dec 2011, our doorbell rang, and the Manager, Lease Administration of Stuyvesant Town presented us with a court order, obtained the day before, to vacate the property!! "The owner" was not the owner, and he was busy renting this property out illegal. The court procedings took 9 months, and it was just our luck that it came to an end for this people right in the middle of our stay!! They even bypass the legitimate entrance code that we could enter without the legitimate cards (which we did not know of course) and they have changed the locks on the door too. We also had a recurring problem with a blocked toilet, and when I phoned Antonio for help, he suggest that we fixed it ourselves, seeing that he was out of town! We were informed afterwards, that, if this was a legitimate rental, our problem would have been fixed within one hour. I will do my utmost best to bring these people to light, look out, this review is just the beginning of it all. And now I know why we could not get an earlier viewing, they were not sure if they would have been caught out by our booked time."

The "owner" responded: "PLEASE DISREGARD THIS FALSE REVIEW. This is an erroneous review. This person clearly did not stay in our apartment. As you can see this review is two years old and we've had many other guests stay in the apartment without incident, since the date of this allegation."


Here's another one of interest. Note that FIVE girlfriends stayed here and there were complaints from a downstairs neighbor about walking on the hardwood floor with heels on!!!:

"We stayed at this apartment for 4 days/3 nights in town to host a surprise birthday party for one of NY girlfriends. Five ladies stayed at this apartment, although there is only one small bathroom. However, our transportation arrived late and Antonio, the caretaker, waited patiently for us. He provided us with directions and suggested eateries and even peaked our interest in exploring Costa Rica! He even came over to bring us a corkscrew. The pictures of the apartment don't do the apartment justice. They have upgraded the amenities to a modern contemporary feel. Loved that! The neighbors were nice and helpful, and the neighborhood was safe, which was very important to us. The subway and grocery store is in walking distance just down the street. The only issue was one of the neighbors leaving an anonymous note on the door asking us to not walk on the hardwood floor with our heels or put carpet on the floor, although we were hardly ever at the apartment and were usually exiting the apartment. We thought that was rather rude. Overall we had a great experience. David the owner was very responsive to our inquiries. We would definitely stay here again."

Some AIRBNB listings: 

Check other PCVST listings from this link:

Note how the rooms for rent on these sites typically do not show any carpeting or minimal carpeting.

Cold Break

Saturday, February 6, 2016

City Council Votes to Give Themselves a 32% Pay Raise

"Less than 24 hours after two police officers who'd gotten 1% raises from the city were shot in a Bronx housing project, the City Council voted overwhelmingly Friday to grant themselves a 32% pay hike.

"The move will raise their salaries from a robust $112,500 a year base to a whopping $148,500.

"Forty members voted for the raises, and just seven — including the three sole Republicans in the Council — voted against the huge hikes.

"City Council Minority Leader Steven Matteo, in a statement, said the Republicans didn't support it because it went above the recommendations of the pay raise commission Mayor de Blasio convened. That commission called for raises that would bring their salaries $138,315."

More at the above link.

Friday, February 5, 2016

Undoubtedly More Money Donated to the "Garodnick For...." Cashbox

"Under the Garodnick and Brewer proposal, owners of landmarked buildings could sell up to 4 million square feet in unused air rights to developers across the district at market rates."

Meanwhile, Dan apparently is NOT running for mayor, but has other positions in his sight:

"Some of his options, according to an earlier report from Politico, include state positions such as attorney general or state comptroller. The report said that the positions, currently held by Eric Schneiderman and Thomas Napoli, may become vacant if Governor Andrew Cuomo decides not to seek a third term."

Dan has a considerable warchest already, undoubtedly made ample by members of the REBNY:

"When Garodnick makes his next move, he would have considerable financial muscle to fund his bid. He has so far raised $1.5 million for his next campaign, with a fraction of the amount carrying over from his aborted run for the comptroller seat.

"According to campaign finance filings, the amount is split between three accounts. Two city campaign accounts, 'Garodnick 2013' and 'Garodnick 2017,' contain $888,000 and $202,000 respectively. Meanwhile, a state account under the name 'New Yorkers for Garodnick' contains $400,000."

Dan and his buddy Scott Stringer are a tag-team match, so expect Stringer to run for mayor.

Build, Build, Build. Don't Let Anything Get in Your Way!

Another crane tragedy in New York:

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Nothing to Cheer About...Unless You're Big Real Estate

The mayor’s economic development team has also presided over several big public-private real estate projects and deals — the redevelopment of Domino Sugar, the Hallets Point project and the sale of Stuyvesant Town — that have delivered generous public subsidies to developers.

For example, at Stuy Town, the city is shelling out $225 million in subsidies, including a $144 million de-facto cash gift (in the form of a self-amortizing loan) and a waiver of the mortgage recording tax valued at $77 million. And although the city won a commitment from Blackstone and its partner Ivanhoe Cambridge to keep 5,000 units affordable for 20 years, some affordable housing advocates noted that many of the apartments are merely affordable for families with six-figure incomes. 

Michael McKee, treasurer of the tenant advocacy group Tenants Political Action Committee, called the deal a “mixed bag,” lamenting that most of the units deemed affordable are out of reach for middle-income families and that the deregulation of Stuy Town’s affordable units over past years was not reversed.

Much more at the above article, including:

Although de Blasio initially sparked concerns in the real estate industry over his push to adopt mandatory inclusionary zoning, which would require developers in newly rezoned neighborhoods to set aside a portion of units as affordable, the mayor’s final rezoning proposal has turned out to be not as scary as many had feared.

The plan, which is set to go before the City Council this month, would eliminate several zoning restrictions for developers on height, design and parking in rezoned areas....

The Real Estate Board of New York and the Partnership for New York City, a business advocacy group, have both come out in favor of the mayor’s rezoning proposal.

Tuesday, February 2, 2016

The Dog Problem Will Never Be Dealt With It Seems

Do we think our dog problem will ever be dealt with seriously? Just in the last couple of days, I've seen so many infractions and so much dog crap and piss residue (why do dog owners allow their dogs to create urine streams right in front of building entrances?) that I'm completely disheartened about management's earnestness in dealing with these issues. The other day I saw an oversized, non-blue tagged dog being walked into the complex right by the PCV booth on 1st Ave, and the Public Security officer inside did nothing.

And what is with Public Security anyway? It seems the will to enforce the dog rules has vanished. And, yeah, I suspect that somewhere along the line we will see PS monitor the situation--for a week or two, and then it will be back to the familiar negligence and looking the other way. If management can't deal effectively with the dog situation (which calls for just enforcing existing dog rules), then it's a significant fail on its part.