Monday, December 8, 2014

Don't fence me in!

From the NY Post:

First there was the Poor Door. Now there’s the Poor Porch.

A Queens luxury tower that was bailed out by the city is blocking the large terraces of a few affordable units so tenants above with tiny balconies don’t get jealous, one resident claims.

Erin McFadzen chose her middle-income — and rent-stabilized — corner apartment at Long Island City’s new Q41 building because of its wrap-around terrace.

But when she moved in, half of it was fenced off by what she calls a “Jurassic Park”-style barricade.

The ugly 6-foot-high wire barrier also interferes with views from every window of her sixth-floor, $2,186-a-month pad.

Meanwhile, a market-rate, 16th-floor apartment with a large terrace that goes for $3,692 a month has no wire barricade.

The couple was assured multiple times by the building that they would have use of the entire balcony. In March, when they looked at the pad, there was no fence. On moving day in July, there was.

Queensboro Development, Q41’s developer, claimed the barrier is necessary to set up a staging area for window washers. Asked why the space couldn’t be used on days windows were being washed, officials said it wasn’t feasible.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why dont I feel sympathetic for these gentrifiers?

Anonymous said...

Do you think management would complain if she hung her laundry out to dry on the wires?

Anonymous said...

(1) wah give me stuff for free

(2) your lease should have stated exactly what the bounds of your unit was, including terrace space, and had a listed SqFt. If you didnt get it in writing, then your are fucked. too bad.

Anonymous said...

If it's not in the lease, it's not enforceable.

Anonymous said...

Once again an attack on the middle class. In addition, doesn't this VIOLATE their lease? I think these tenants have a very good case for removing the fence or REDUCING their rent or both.

Anonymous said...

Do these bozo's think they hit the lottery? If they want a bigger terrace, PAY FOR IT!!!. Similar apartments in that building pay $18,000 more for the priviledge. They get the same size terrace as everyone else. Tough luck hipsters!

Anonymous said...

Caveat Emptor.

ron s said...

Regardless of what you feel about the "hipsters", the case still illustrates:
1) Developers say whatever they need to get permission to build, and then do whatever they want.
2) Developers see "poor doors" and related structures as their obligation to the rich pricks that they are really catering to. The "affordable" units are merely bullshit to use as PR
3) When did 2186/month become "affordable"?

Anonymous said...

Developers are forced to have 'affordable' units by politicians. If they couldn't fill this building it should have been allowed to go into bankruptcy and been reorganized. Having our tax dollars bail them out and guarantee 'affordable' access is a politician stunt.

Anonymous said...

Two working young people can't afford $2186? Go live in the projects.

Anonymous said...

The whole NY Post article from yesterday had more information. It quoted the former super saying 'Show me the lease or rider that states you have access' or something similar.

JQ said...

even when faced with economic discrimination these two still look smug.but it's not their fault if building management didn't specify anything,these two did get screwed.

although if I was faced with this,I would start eating more air dried chicken>>>

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eoHFOtah1lg/VHvONrBTVQI/AAAAAAAA4jY/R89ZKBs6yhQ/s1600/1507864_10203905115961048_3991418056134998134_n.jpg


this opens a big window into the burgeoning scam that is the mayor big slow's affordable housing plan and the bastards that are going to build them.apparently you're considered part of the rabble when you split the rent on a 2 grand rental.but you won't see any action because the voters checked for cuomo and his lackeys in REBNY.


Kevin Walsh said...

What's hilarious is the the Post thinks $2185 is "low-rent"

Kevin Walsh said...

What's also insane is that they build terraces, and then block renters from using the terrace.

If you don't want the "low-rent" jabronies to have a terrace, don't build a terrace for the "low-rent" units, or remove the terrace. The fence is ridiculous.

Kevin Walsh said...

>>>Two working young people can't afford $2186? Go live in the projects.

Lookie here, Donald Trump reads Queens Crap!

Anonymous said...

I think rather than force your middle income tenants to wear a mark of shame that identifies them to the 23 year old douchebags in finance with whom they share an elevator, the management company could have picked the affordable housing units in advance.I would have reserved all the back facing units with a smaller or no terrace for those paying less. That's reasonable. But don't tell people that they will have access to all that space and then publicly humiliate them by fencing them in like they're zoo animals. That's just mean-spirited. Anything that the building does which violates their privacy or exposes them to market rate tenants is just plain ugly. Liek I said, give them apartments of lesser value. Reserve the beautiful views and large patios for people paying market rate. Just don't treat people like second-class citizens by forcing them to use a separate entrance or giving them different color doors. It's unnecessary

zee zeem said...

Mean spirited to do that to them!