Stuy Town Residents Call For Stabilized Future

You should contact the lawyer for the tenants' in the Roberts case. If you give him your address and current rent they can compare it to what TS is claiming is the RS rent on your apartment. If your rent is more then the excess is going into the escrow fund (according to the lawyers) and you will eventually get the excess back

The people who work in the Leasing Office are a reflection of Tishman Speyer. They obviously work for a sleazy employer who has no respect for the employees or the tenants here. I am sure the morale in that office is down the toilet.

Interesting that you also have an issue with this. That section of the East River Greenway is especially dangerous because it is so narrow. I stopped trying to use that as a walking route after I was intentionally run into by a cyclist, too impatient for me to clear the last 15 feet of the path. I wasn't injured, but trying to walk through there, constantly worrying about what's speeding up behind you is nerve wracking.

I complained to Parks, and they claimed that section of path is actually under DOT control, and not part of either park. (nice way to pass the buck). I called DOT and they did nothing.

If you're serious about making a change here, you need to bring this to the attention of the CB 6 Transportation and/or Waterfront committees, both of which would have interest in this problem.

You can find out when these committee's have meetings scheduled by consulting the CB 6 calendar at:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/mancb6/downloads/Monthly Calendar

The Transportation Committee already had a presentation made to them on November 2nd about the bike/pedestrian path. You might want to contact the Committee Chair, Transportation Lou Sepersky and find out if a solution to this might already be on the CB 6 agenda.

CB 6 telephone # is 212-319-3750

You have to wait for the dust to settle. Eventually they (meaning the courts and DHCR) need to decide on exactly what increases above the last stabilized rent are going to be legitimate. I don't know how this will all be resolved, but your question requires the $1,000,000 answer.

It does seem likely that at a minimum, there would be the renovation increase and at least 1 (one) 20% vacancy allowance. There could be other legitimate increases too (like the longevity vacancy allowance), but what is unknown would be what base would be used to calculate increases (pre or post renovation) and would Rent Guidelines Board increases be factored in. There are other issues. Time will tell, there don't seem to be any obvious quick answers or solutions.

This is happening to a lot of market rate tenants. I can't say how many but more then just a few. The "new" rents are all over the place and no way to know how it will all play out. That number is the number TS came up with and I certainly hope the lawyers will work to get it down. I agree not "affordable".

Geez. Then hopefully you are enjoying your granite counter tops and wine fridge.

There was no gun to your head when you signed that lease, right? Now you are going to complain that you're not going to save any money on your rent because the rest of us get to keep our homes?

Please.

Thank you Anon...that's very helpful.
I'll post an update when have something further on this.

Except for the fact that people who were not on the ST/PCV waiting list for stabilized apartments essentially bought their way into the complex by paying market rate. You weren't promised an affordable rent when you moved in, and you knew the amount. The fact that you now have a STABILIZED rent is a plus, but you also enjoy far more of an improved domicile than the non-renovated tenants. Why do you think that you would be entitled to that without paying for it ? Rent stabilized tenants pay MCI increases for every extra feature of their apartments (new refrigerators, air conditioners, windows, electrical wiring, elevators, repaving, roof repair, brick pointing, boilers, water mains, water towers, video intercoms etc.) If they had granite kitchens, dishwashers, wine coolers and new bathrooms, they would be paying for those too.

Hardly.

You are confusing rent stabilization with below market prices.

RS means you are entitled to a lease every time you come up for renewal and that that renewal is based on guidelines set by the corrupt RG board. It also means you can't be arbitrarily thrown into the street.

It does NOT mean you are entitled to a fresh apartment renovation every few years with fancy appliances at no cost to you. That would be great by me but that's not the intent of the law, nor the letter of it.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who signed up for an overpriced apartment and are now looking for a concession based on someone else's hardship and effort. This is about people being treated fairly and within the law. It is not about discounted dishwashers.

Read that post again. That poster is mad he/she won't be saving any money because of the court ruling. If you think that was what the Roberts case was about then, let's just say you are "missing something."

Now that I think about it, I think YOU are the parrot.

stuyguy wanna cracker?!?

Sorry, Anonymous.

stuyguy ALREADY told us that EVERYONE in this forum agrees with HIM.

I guess that means that YOU must be wrong, too.

LOL, this blog needs emoticons... ;-)

HA!

Who is going to come up with the granite counter top emoticon, or the WHINE cooler emoticon?!?

For now, I guess we just have to suffer fools with the English language and the caps lock button....

The way I understood the post, Interstate8 was saying that his/her rent was going to go UP because of rent stabilization. So, while he/she signed a lease for a market rate apt., the new rent would be even higher than that.

Is that your understanding of how the recent court ruling will impact tenants?

It is not mine.

Rent stabilization laws govern how much a landlord can increase a tenant's rent--among other things. It does not proscribe the level of rent that must be paid.

Now that this tenant is subject to RS, the tenant may only have his/her rent raised by the amount allowed by the RGB.

Frankly, I'm not even sure what his/her complaint is about. He/she is already paying a 'below market' rent and now will not be subject to random increases!

Feel free to tell me what I'm missing.

We're still at the same place we were when the Roberts decision was announced. Nobody really knows what the new stabilized rents will be, and that includes the attorneys. They're speculating on possible scenarios, and that was made pretty clear during the conference FAQ call that the TA had a couple of weeks ago.

I have MR neighbors who were told the same thing (rent actually would go up as RS), and I can only hope they're wrong because they're a young family that should be part of the fabric of this community as has been tradition.

But the only fact that RS tenants (old and new) can now truly count on is that their increases will now be set by the RGB, and they'll get those MCI increases in perpetuity (until we get the law changed).

Look, I think the right amount of rent to pay to these f-cks is -$0-. Unfortunately, we all know that's not gonna happen. Well, you can do it for 6 months until they put the sticker on your door and the city marshal throws your sh-t into the street. But, after that, you are back to market rate....

OK, now back to reality.

These poor MR folks walked up to the counter and made a deal for their new Lux Living apartment here in Shady Acres. Arms length and all that good stuff. Must have made sense to them at the time.

Too late to try to pry up the granite counters, the marble baths and all the Kohler sinks. They're already sunk. Even our crooked landlords (hopefully, soon to be someone else...) are entitled to something for installing all this sh-t.

That said, I don't want it and I sure as sh-t don't want to pay for it. Wouldn't have taken the apt if I had to.

What many (not all) people seem to be missing here is that RS does not supersede supply and demand. A court ruling does not grant powers to a landlord to command prices they could not otherwise command.

In a crappy RE market like this one, why would you think that your hypothetical neighbor's rent could so easily be raised?

Why do you think the RS laws now give TS the right to raise the rent on this apartment at a rate faster than on all other RS apartments? After all, we are all supposedly protected by those rules now. Aren't we?

Once again, I have to say that I think the accomplishments made here are being lost in a flurry of petty, ancillary complaints.

Which is why I fear that ultimately, Roberts will prove to be a hollow victory. The economic balance has already been upset too badly by the process of the sale.

I think it's worth something. If nothing else, it has made it VERY difficult for TS to get concessions from it's lenders.

It also means that the value of the property is substantially diminished.

THAT means that we have some time to fight and possibly win some additional control over our destiny here.

Not a permanent solution. I frankly don't think there is one--unless the property is sold to the tenants. And don't get me started on that!

My sense is that this development, because of its age and size, will become an increasingly large sinkhole for cash and will ultimately do in whomever owns it--TS, tenants or someone else. I just don't think you can run a place like this in NYC without ultimately having to pass on exorbitant costs to residents or owners.

We are probably best off as renters here. If the RGB dictates how much the owners can charge and costs go through the roof (paid for by an MCI, of course...), we reap an economic benefit. The longer that goes on, the better.

Saying you moved here because you could divide up the larger rooms isn't likely to win you any friends with the original RS tenants for reasons that have been discussed at length here on other threads and on the old TA board--fire hazard, too many adults in an apartment designed for two, extra wear and tear, etc. But here are some other things to consider. You may have gotten a couple of free months rent and may not have had to leave a security deposit. I'm pretty sure the landlord put in your air conditioner and includes the cost of running it in your rent, right? RS tenants have to buy their own air conditioners (more than $1,000 for a PCV living room model) and we pay per air conditioner per month (about $30 per AC). I don't think anyone has talked about how MR leases may be adjusted regarding the AC issue, as well as security deposits. I don't know if MR tenants will have to get new, RS leases with the same terms as the others--that's another thing the lawyers will be working out, I'm sure.

Looks like this issue may be coming up at the meeting on Wednesday, 11/18. See http://www.nyc.gov/html/mancb6/downloads/Committee%20Agenda/November-Cmte.pdf. It's the first item on the agenda. The meeting is at 7 p.m. at NYU Medical Center, 550 First Avenue, Classroom B.

That calendar is a bit confusing to read. It looks to me like the Transportation Committee met on Monday, Nov. 2nd and the agenda (that's listed below the announcement for tonights full board meeting) was for that 11/2 meeting.

Maybe I'm wrong...

In fact, it's not market rate tenants that draw the ire, but rather the tenants in the exact circumstance that you describe who are the ones that diminish the community.

These apartments aren't designed or intended to be used as dorm rooms. When you overcrowd them, it changes the living space dynamic and creates problems for all the surrounding units. It's not your fault that TS corralled you and a bunch of others into your tiny living spaces, but it shouldn't have been done in the first place. Corporate greed caused it.

If it's any consolation, I would like to see ST/PCV returned to it's original intent, as affordable middle class housing. The only way that could ever happen is if voters demanded that we change the law which allow "improvements" to be charged in perpetuity. A system needs to be devised where those investments are paid back gradually to the owner, but after that point, a reasonable rent increase would be assessed. This arbitrary 1/40th of the improvement cost (forever) is simply extortion.

You would then see the rent on these renovated apartments drop substantially after the improvements were paid off.

In fact, I don't think DHCR intended for the above scenario to even occur, thinking that all the improvements would push the units into luxury decontrol and the 1/40th issue would eventually become moot. Little did those idiots realize that eventually someone would get caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

But it's not going to happen unless the voters DEMAND change.

GreenGirl, you may be unaware, but when you walk into the leasing office, TS's sales pitch is designed to divide the rooms up for 3-4 people. They give you layouts, lists of walls makers and riders in the lease addressing this very arrangement. You may be fortunate to never have ridden the NYC rent roller-coaster but most apartments in the city are packed with more people than it should allow. Direct your frustration to the Landlord who allowed this to happen not to the people just looking for more space to live.

Also, we moved in October 2008 so no we did not receive free rent.

Anonymous, you understand my point exactly on all levels. I would LOVE to live in PCV with just my wife and be able to afford it! Our situation includes my brother because we all needed the affordable housing and TS made this attractive with their layouts etc. Most importantly, TS offered it and they never mentioned that there would be accelerated wear and tear and a heavier footprint so RS tenants will hate you.

You also hit it right on head with the improvement issue. The perpetual 1/40th charge is absolutely extortion. Affordable housing statutes are a joke if a giant corporate landlord can come in and bust through the 2K RS ceiling with massive improvements. Take my wine fridge TS. We just use it as an f-ing bottled water cooler.

Wine fridge = "renovated" apartment?

I moved into an apartment in the spring, and the fridge has an ice maker. Was the ol' 1/40th pulled on this unit too? My appliances are not stainless steel, unlike the kind that can be seen in photos in the leasing office.

Interstate8, It's exactly that heavier footprint that is despised by both market rate and rent stabilized alike. Again, these are APARTMENTS, not DORMS. Rooms are meant for certain things, living, eating, sleeping etc. When they subdivide the apartments, bedrooms become defacto living room/dining room/office/band practice room etc. It's disruptive to your neighbors no matter what their status. There's no schism between RS and MR tenants, only between those who respect the community and quality of life, and those who don't.

So true DCF. My wife and I lived in a small 1 bedroom (500 sq. ft.) on 25th St. and 3rd Ave for $2600. The following year the rent was to spike to $3200 as with much of the one bedrooms in the city. Sure we can move to Queens/Jersey City etc. but then the commute would be over 2 hours round trip on top of an already stacked day at work where the pay doesn't spike up like the rental market. If anything most of us are trying to stay in the shadows while the layoff spot light searches for its next victim.

When my brother needed a place to live and we could partition a PCV 1 bed into a decent living space it was a better option than most city apartments. Sorry to the RS tenants who feel our footprint is too much for them but I think you would understand if you were pushed around by landlords for the last 5 years.

Just curious, does the limit to the number of people who should ideally occupy a PCVST apartment include children? Interstate8 says that he has his wife and brother occupy a 1-bedroom with a wall. I know parents who have done the same thing, i.e. put up a wall in a 1-bedroom to accommodate children--is this just as "wrong?" And if not, then I'd have to say that anyone bashing adults subdividing apartments is discriminatory.

Anonymous, sure I can understand that. Not all partitioned apartments are used for "band practice" though and many people are just looking to fit another bedroom in so they can afford it. Affordability is a common thing between most MR and RS tenants. It was just executed differently and spearheaded by the landlords. Must be nice to have 1 bedroom that fits two people.

I am a RS tenant who moved into PCV 30 years ago when I was in my mid 20s. At that time, very few young people moved into PCV and a fair number of my older tenants viewed me with suspicion until I demonstrated that I was a quiet, considerate neighbor. Therefore , I reject the classification of any new young tenant as, ipso facto,a troublemaker. Quite the opposite, I enjoy seeing young couples and their children move into PCV. It is the natural course of events.
Having said that ,these days a number of the younger tenants are trouble. They play loud music at all hours, they leave garbage all over the place. In recent years I have experienced something I never experienced before apartments were deregulated and that is being woken up in the middle of the night by bellowing young people presumably coming home after clubbing or bar hopping.
Before the complex began to be regulated, Metlife looked into each person on the wait list before agreeing to lease an apartment. Since TS took over the project they were willing to rent to any live person whose checks didn't bounce , including multiple students and non family young adults who treat our homes like dorms. Those people do not belong in STPCV and their actions, unfortunately, have caused many RS tenants to look askance at MR tenants.

When Met Life was truly running the place, they would not allow a single person to rent anything other than a one-bedroom apartment. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have rented a one-bedroom to more than two people. I'm equally sure they had similar rules for the larger apartments. They did not encourage people to subdivide their rooms, although some people did to give children of different sexes their own bedrooms. Met Life built this place to be a certain kind of community that was "engineered" to work--which it pretty much did for decades. It's true that some families ended up crammed into apartments that could have used another bedroom, but you didn't get the situation of three adults clomping overhead or a family with two children in a subdivided one-bedroom apartment.

"I play my Surround sound a bit too loud from time to time, but it's on the weekends."

So what if it's on the weekends? I don't think your lease contains a rider permitting disruptive noise on Saturday or Sunday.

But you're right, it's not always twentynothings and the college aged making all the noise -- just 90% of it, indoors and out.

I have to agree with you. My husband and I are market rate tenants and have lived in ST for five years now. We are very quiet and quite respectful of our neighbors, but yet are constantly subjected to nasty looks and general unfriendliness from older, RS tenants. Just a couple weeks ago we were sitting on the benches at the oval, and an older woman comes and sits down next to us and says "So, are you market rate tenants?" What kind of a greeting is that? In our experience, the older RS tenants in our building are much louder, messy, etc than anyone else. Our neighbors are constantly making noise at all hours - upstairs, next door, and elsewhere on our floor. We even had someone upstairs who was throwing plastic bags of what we thought was garbage out of their window daily, like clock work. After this happening for at least a month, probably longer, we inquired with security and made a complaint. Turns out the bags that were being thrown out the window were filled with human feces. No lie.

Just curious...how did you verify the contents of the bags were from humans?

Cupcake, don't feel too bad. A lot of people are clueless. I've been living here for 22 years but look young for my age. A few months ago an older tenant, apparently assuming I was new because I look young--and probably because her eyes must be failing a bit ;-) welcomed me to the building. I replied that she was about 22 years too late!

my husband and i did not personally verify and inspect the bags ourselves. however, i was told this by security who informed us that it had been an ongoing issue with this particular tenant. i assume he gave us accurate information, as i don't see any reason to lie about something like that...

"Yes i do play my music a bit too loud from time to time. " kon knok read the sentence i said a "bit" meaning small amount. Then i wrote from "time to time" which means not all the time.
You live in the NYC not in the middle of Iowa so relax. Did you know that or are you too bitter to comprehend?
Disruptive noise is everywhere. You should go tell Engine 5,not to run there sirens, and all the ambulances that too. Maybe you can include that in your lease.
WHAAAA!!!, it's soooooo disruptive. You live in an apartment complex not a house, the walls in all the units are paper thin.
All i was trying to get across is that i'm not perfect. But i think we have found MR. perfect aka KonKnok. who hates all the 20 something's and is a church mouse in his apartment.

"golf clap"

Idiot.

There's a difference between the outside noise that fades from your consciousness and the noise that comes from people clomping on bare floors or dragging the furniture overhead, blasting music underneath you that makes your floor and furniture vibrate, barking dogs at all hours whose owners scream louder than the dogs bark.

Yes, indeed.

My neighbor's TV is really loud from time to time but I don't care. If he's watching a movie he tends to turn the volume up. Unless it's 3AM it's really no big deal, at least to me.

Perhaps it is for the blacked out screen in the lobby next to the elevator that used to promote the 'Ovil Conseeurge.'

It's disgusting.

Seriously, it's for the cameras they set up in the lobbies to track the images of tenants coming and going that they sync up with our card swipes. They were hoping to use it to build residency cases against RS tenants.

I got this MCI notice today too.

Here's the info from the previous MCI: http://www.stpcvta.org/st_repaving_mci.htm.

This is the text, adapted for this MCI:
1. Make 2 copies of the notice.
2. On the back of one copy, write: I request a 60-day extension. Sign it and write the date you are mailing it. Also include the docket number that appears on the fourth line at the upper right hand corner of the notice (it will have two letters, a space, six numbers, another space, and two more letters).
3. Mail the form to: State of New York, Div. of Housing & Community Renewal, MCI Unit, 92-31 Union Hall St., Jamaica, NY 11433.
4. Mail or fax a copy of the form to: TV Security System/Video Command Center MCI, ST/PCV-TA, P.O. Box 1202, New York, NY 10009-1202. Fax: 866-290-9036.
5. Keep the other copy for yourself. You will need it again in a month or two for filing a Petition for Administrative Review (PAR). Don't worry about that now. We'll send you full instructions for filing when the time comes.

Every resident who sends in the extension request will be helping the TA to mount an effective challenge of a $4.08 per room per month rent increase we had no idea was coming--and whose legitimacy we will seriously question.

Not in the TA letter: encourage your neighbors to do the same. I'm curious to know if any previously MR tenants get this letter. If their rent is going to be rolled back, they might be eligible to be hit with this MCI.

It sounds to me like this elderly person was out there on her own, or at least some of the time. Forgive them, if not help them if possible.

No, this is not the norm. No one will find one reference in all our rantings that this is the norm.

What is the Norm here is that your neighbors wouldn't think to look in on you unless inconvenienced from a stench.

Meanwhile, out of viral/malware hell (crossing self) I think. Now PC is slower than molasses in January.

RE: your computer problems, don't know if you've tried these but I have used them all with good success. All free from download.com:

ccleaner - cleans up extraneous crap on your hard drive and helps fix registry errors

spybot s&d - good at getting rid of spyware and for passive protection (immunization feature)

zonealarm - great, free firewall. don't know if you are using one but you should if you are not already.

Thanks, Green Girl

It's rumored Rob Speyer has a thing for goats...heavy emphasis on rumored ;)

Call the main number 212 420 5000 and wait for option concerning apartment leases and ask them