The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (June 2014)

Take a walk by the Community Center, near 1st Ave, at the loop, and you will see some nice gardening.

 

There's an awful racket going on during work on the new management office. Wasn't a promise made of no drilling? The DOB has allowed work to proceed after hours and on the weekend. I believe such an allowance is made only for particular, pressing cases, and I don't know if the new management office fits that stipulation. But who cares, right? (Click photo to make larger.)

That's going to be one big cellar extension!

STPCV just loves students and encourages them to rent here. Pictured below is a banner along 1st Ave purposefully directed at students. Other banners abound along that perimeter, promoting other perks in the complex.

Hmm, an "Open House"? I guess apartments are not selling fast enough to fill the vacancies from people needing to leave because 1) school is over, or 2) they can't afford the rent here anymore.

What the sign below should say is "This Gate Will be Closed to Low-Income Minorities Between 2:45pm and 7:15pm Daily." The closing of the gates opposite the Asser Levy pool begins to prevent black and primarily Hispanic youth from going through Peter Cooper Village and Stuy Town on their way home to the Lower East Side.

Let's admit it: Public Safety has given up on the dog situation here. Nowadays, people walking breeds that are banned in the complex or dogs that fall outside of the dog rules (more than 2 dogs, weight limitations, etc.) are never stopped and queried by PS. Nothing is done, even when dog-owners from outside bring in their dogs to STPCV for crap and piss duty, walking right by PS officers. And certain areas, like the back of 510/522 East 20 Street, are now known as depositories for dog turds with no pick-up from dog owners.

Nothing quite exemplifies "luxury living" like seeing dog turds and running streams of dog piss throughout the complex.

CW Playing Hardball, Why Aren't We?

Everywhere you look, you see CW screwing with tenants, both RS and MR, any way they can. The Roberts settlement and payouts, the MCIs, and undoubtedly more MCIs on the way (the new Public Safety office, the new management office, more walkway repaving to be done, etc.).

Today there was a comment on the TA Facebook page about someone overhearing at least two rental agents advising prospective renters to use Oval Concierge because their packages would get left in the lobby and, presumably, possibly stolen.

Just think: We are paying an MCI for an award-winning security system with over a thousand cameras, including cameras in lobbies, and yet the crime of packages being stolen from the lobby cannot be solved by our crack Public Safety department.  But...you can have your packages delivered to Oval Concierge--at a price, of course.

We have, however, right before us, a potential legal problem for CW, or any landlord, that could shatter the normal way things are run around here. I've noted this problem in the past and am surprised that the TA seems not to have considered it, though with the lack of transparency in that organization, it is possible they have considered it, but aren't telling us their thoughts on the matter.

I'm speaking of the filings to the DOB regarding partition additions, like the one below. (Click on graphic to make larger.)

As one STR reader wrote me:

"The physical modifications to the apartments should have been fought with a restraining order and should now be fought in just the same way. The tenants have all of the ammunition they need. Management submitted false building permits, or made false statements to the building department. A lawsuit to reverse the modifications would stop the current construction and would probably win."

Has the TA looked into these filings? If so, what's been the response from their lawyers? It is inconceivable to me that we can't fight these filings as falsely stating that there is "no change in use, egress or occupancy" with the addition of partitions in an apartment, partitions that can then change a one-bedroom apartment to a two-bedroom, or a two-bedroom to a three bedroom!

When I first addressed this concern, probably years ago, I suspected that the TA didn't want to get involved in any lawsuit because it would put the sale of this complex (to tenants, the TA hoped) in a holding pattern that could extend for years.

But CW is not our friend. Nor was Tishman-Speyer. We have to fight everything here, even such minor things like the "For Residents and Their Guests" enforcement at Oval Cafe and the greenmarket. Why is the TA not mandating that zoning rules for both the cafe and greenmarket be enforced?

And why is there no fight against putting more than three unrelated individuals into an apartment, something against rental law in NYC?

It amazes me at times, and dispirits me, that there's just zero "take-no-prisoners" attitude regarding the battles that we should be engaging in.

Meanwhile, week after week, management continues to find any justification to shaft tenants and make them pay more for "affordable housing." In case you haven't noticed it, management is winning; we are losing.

Roberts Tenants Getting Screwed Again?

Many current and former residents of Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village who are members of the “Roberts v. Tishman Speyer” class action are getting less in damages than they were expecting. Specifically, over 5,000 of them have had non-payment deductions taken out of their damages, as well as close to a third taken out for legal fees and expenses, and in some cases, with money also taken out for retroactive MCIs.

More at this link:

http://town-village.com/2014/06/18/many-roberts-tenants-getting-less-money-than-expected/

Required Parking Spaces for ST/PCV Buildings?

I don't have time right now to research this fully, but I believe zoning requires that a certain amount of parking spaces be available to tenants. I was curious about this regarding the new management office being built and the lack of parking spaces in that area now--and certainly for the future.

http://www.tenant.net/Other_Laws/zoning/zonch07.html

This Is What I Have to Deal With

I found this comment meant for the Public Safety Cell Phone thread pretty funny and would like to post it here to show blog readers what I have to deal with. These kind of comments generally do not get passed, of course, so you never see them. I also have a tendency not to pass comments that are aching for a flame war with another commentator, though I still let some slip by.

Anyway, here's the comment that got a couple of laughs out of me:

You are an Army veteran with no life, if you use this much time and effort against the New World Order maybe quality of life would be better and people would care but Americans are so dumb down you're like sheeple. Get your head out of your ass and go do some real reporting, instead of staring at some guy in a booth who makes minimum wage. He was probably on his phone looking for a new job compass cock sucks!!!

Where We Are Now

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/real-estate/2014/06/8547200/stuy-town-residents-fighting-again

Extract from above:

But the developments of last week provided some comfort—and breathing room—to both tenants and the officials on their side, leaving them all encouraged by Friday.

First, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer was able to secure commitments from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—the nation's largest sources of housing equity—not to guarantee any deal that does not ensure long-term affordability for the roughly 6,000 units that are below market rate. He said they will not help any purchase that does not have the consent of both the city and tenants, “no ifs, ands or buts.”

“Without Fannie and Freddie's backing, it will be very hard for one of these rapacious lenders to come in and change the whole way Stuy Town is,” Schumer said at the rally Friday morning, where he drew many cheers from the crowd. “It will be very hard for them to say they are just getting rid of the affordability and charge any rate the market wants.”

Then, Alicia Glen, the deputy mayor for housing and economic development, was able to secure a commitment of her own: CWCapital agreed to give the city at least 60 days to find a way to support a sale that would indeed guarantee the long-term affordability for those 6,000 units. Andrew MacArthur, the managing director of CWCapital, put the agreement in writing by way of a letter dated last Wednesday. He said the plan has been for some time to begin “evaluating resolution alternatives in late 2014 or early 2015.”

“As such, we have no immediate intention of pursuing a resolution of the property and believe we should both commit the next 60 days to exploring structures that could ensure the continuance of some of the City's policy objectives, while also allowing us to satisfy our obligations to our investors,” he wrote to Glen.

Public Safety More Interested in Their Cell Phones

Right now, there's a public safety officer inside the Oval guard booth. Two bicycles pass him by, but he doesn't notice because his eyes are buried into the wonders that his cell phone offers. Two more bicycles pass him by, and by chance he raises his head. He notices them, doesn't move, and then they are already exiting the Oval. He changes position...and goes back to his cell phone.

Just now a food delivery guy riding a bicycle goes by the booth. Not sure if the public safety officer has stopped his cell phone activity, but even if he has, he doesn't do anything.

Several bicycles have passed him by in the space of five minutes, but this guy is immobile inside the guard booth.

Have a nice day!

Trouble on the Affordable Housing Front?

The most prominent concern was found in this report:

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/real-estate/2014/06/8547130/glen-talks-housing-stuy-town-congressional-delegation

And this statement:

>>The lawmakers told Glen they believe it is important to create “'technical assistance teams' to work with New York City residents residing in affordable housing who may be notified of the need to move to another unit in order to update their current units,” Maloney's office said.<<

Technical assistance teams? Helping tenants who will need to move to another unit?

While folks are picturing tenants being moved permanently to a lesser apartment, even in another part of the city, I do think (and hope) that what the above means is that tenants who live in buildings/apartments that are in severe disrepair may need to move--temporarily--while their apartment or building is fixed up and made habitable. If the above doesn't mean that, then we are in for some serious trouble. (You say you want a revolution?)

The other concern, that I have at least, is that the affordable housing that may be built will be butt-ugly.

Like Sugar Hill in Harlem:

As NYC builds affordable housing, it has to make sure not to hire architects who fashion something resembling a cross between a prison facility and a government office in the old Soviet Union. Let's stop it with the egos of architects who desire to be different and noticed. Let's focus on crafting buildings that will give residents a sense of home and beauty. Can you imagine if you were forced by a "technical assistance team" to move from ST/PCV into the above?

More on Sugar Hill here.