Hence why one shouldn't turn their stairway into a bathroom. (Photo: Flickr, frankfarm)

There’s never a shortage of stories about negligent apartment managers and landlords, and the overlords at Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village have proved that they are not the exception. As charming as this 25,000-resident complex in the East Village seems with its brick exteriors and tree-lined paths, everything is not peachy-keen.

A recent FDNY inspection has found that a number of fire code violations exist in the complex’s 110 buildings, according to the Post. Several fire doors don’t close properly, a few hundred apartment doors don’t close or latch on their own, and the stairwells, which serve as emergency exits, have become toxic wastelands.

“[This] presents a very real danger to the lives and safety of the residents of the community,” Al Doyle, the former president of the Tenants Association, wrote in a letter to the FDNY. You think?

A tenant survey conducted in the spring also found that the stairwells have become the preferred bathroom for some tenants, as well as hot spots for alcohol, tobacco and drug use.

The FDNY has set a date for when the Peter Cooper Village/Stuyvesant Town complex must fix the violations, one that Sean Sullivan, the general manager of the complex, told DNAinfo he is not worried about meeting. “We take fire safety very seriously,” he said, adding that “all issues [will be] resolved well before the FDNY’s required timeframe.”

As for the illicit activities taking place in the stairwells, Mr. Sullivan hopes that residents (that is, civilized, reasonably normal residents) will rat the wrongdoers out. Here’s hoping they do.

Why pay wages? Just hold them against their will.

If you thought indentured servants went out of fashion with the Revolutionary War, you’re wrong: apparently the practice is alive and kicking, at least according to Ni Ketut Sulastri, a former employee who worked at Rose and Lawrence Halsey's Water Mill estate in the Hamptons.

According to the New York Post, Ms. Sulastri, who was hired through an Indonesian intermediary, worked for the Halseys from 2005 to 2008 and is now suing the couple for the brutal and unfair treatment she experienced as their servant. For instance, instead of a promised salary of $450 a month and a 9-to-5 workday, Ms. Sulastri alleges that she earned only $350 a month and was forced to work 15 hour days. And that’s only the tip of the iceberg.

Like Harry Potter himself, Ms. Sulastri claims that she was forced to sleep in a closet instead of in a real bedroom, and instead of being fed, well, normal food, she was given only leftovers and hot dogs. When she complained, she said that she was told, “Nothing is free in America," and this certainly explains her frankfurter-heavy diet, which is about as close to free as you can come—according to chacha.com, an 8-pack of Oscar Mayer wieners costs a paltry $3.89.

The lawsuit also claims that the Halseys barred Ms. Sulastri from calling her home in Indonesia, confiscated her passport, and threatened her with a $3,000 fee if she ever left their estate.

Ms. Sulastri's story leaves us with a few unanswered questions, namely how did she manage to end her servitude to the Halseys and why has it taken her four years to sue them? In any event, she is now proving that the Halseys' lesson is true—nothing's free in America, not even labor.

jschiewe@observer.com

The City Council had a laundry list of concerns about NYU's 2031 Expansion plan. (Jess Schiewe)

The City Council's public hearing on New York University's Village expansion plan drew a crowd on Friday that was notable for both its size and its star power— Matthew Broderick offered testimony on the neighborhood's quickly eroding quirkiness—and its eagerness to communicate its distaste for the controversial project.

In fact, the City Hall hearing filled up so fast that eager attendees had to line up outside the door, waiting until someone left the room before they were allowed to enter. The Observer watched as one sign-bearing group debated queuing up in the punishing heat before deciding against it.

“Let’s just come back,” said one of the women. Nodding in agreement, her companions headed back onto the street with their yellow 8” x 10” laminated “Wrong for NYC-Wrong for the Village-Wrong for NYU” posters.

Inside the council chambers, community and council members spoke about the plan's flaws, expressing doubts that the plan—a multifaceted project that calls for the construction of new buildings, open public spaces, and facilities such as student housing and retail stores in the Greenwich Village area totaling more than 2 million square feet on two already-developed superblocks south of Washington Square Park—was as "perfectly balanced" as City Planning Commission chair Amanda Burden claims it is.

“NYU does not have the best track record when it comes to upkeep and maintaining a space,” said Council Member Margaret Chin, who represents the district where NYU's current and proposed home are located. “I strongly believe this plan is unacceptable in its current form.”

“NYU would not be where it is today without the pioneers who built Greenwich Village,” she added, eliciting a flurry of “jazz hands” (instead of applause) from the audience of villagers. Ms. Chin cited a number of concerns about the project, including the loss of public open spaces and the difficulty of maintaining affordable housing. She said that she felt it was important that the community retain some sort of decision-making power. Given Ms. Chin's authority in the neighborhood, such issues are likely to be central to any concessions that the council demands from NYU in exchange for project approval.

Other council members were equally skeptical, if not altogether opposed, to the university’s expansion plan. Council Member Jessica Lappin, leery of NYU’s motives, questioned the inevitability of the argument that the university needed more space. “You have made a choice to have a very large undergraduate population and my question is why you have chosen to grow to such a large number of undergraduates?” she asked members of the university administration.

Council Members Leroy Comrie and Gail Brewer asked questions about the design and aesthetics of the proposed campus, focusing on how the ambiance of the Village would be maintained and how the neighborhood's mix of shadow and light would be affected by the new buildings.

Assembly Member Deborah Glick and State Senator Tom Duane were sharper in their criticisms. Ms. Glick lambasted the institution for its “complete disregard and betrayal of community planning,” while Mr. Duane warned of possible future problems. “Don’t put us in a position of disliking a place that we have lived within in good times and bad times,” he said. “Don’t make it a battle from this point.”

The sentiments expressed during the public comment portion— which consisted of testimony from 200 people, the majority of them neighborhood residents or members of local organizations like Villagers for a Sustainable Neighborhood—were equally opposed to the plan. And David Gruber, a chairman from Community Board 2, pointed out that it isn’t just the community that opposes the development: 34 departments within the university also publicly oppose the plan. “Not 34 professors, but 34 departments,” Mr. Gruber noted. “So we really have to question the validity of this plan.”

Mark Crispin Miller, a professor of media, culture, and communication at NYU, who was also at the hearing, spoke on behalf of other "stalwartly opposed" NYU faculty members. NYU's 2031 Expansion plan, he said in an email to the Observer is "something that has never happened in the history of NYU's expansion in the Village....NYU's finances are a mess—despite John Sexton's vehement claims to the contrary."

NYU President John Sexton defended his plan before the council, saying that the $4 to $5 billion dollar plan was "designed to be as little intrusive as possible” and was necessary for the university to continue too thrive.

“If we become too disparate, the fact that we don’t have a campus, that we don’t do big time athletics, that we don’t have a football stadium, would disable us from attracting students who have as an option going elsewhere where they have those elements,” Mr. Sexton told the Council. The NYU Expansion, he said, would expand the institution’s core and create a more cohesive central campus.

The City Council is scheduled to vote on the NYU’s Village Expansion plan later this summer.

jschiewe@observer.com

Here are our very favorite New York–area summer camps.

You know that people care about something when they're willing to sit in sweltering heat for it. (Jess Schiewe)

Last Friday morning, Felix Guzman woke up early, grabbed his fishing pole, and headed over to the East River for some catch and release fun. For 40 years he has lived in the same building on Academy Street in Inwood and in that time he has “seen a lot.” So when he got back to his apartment around 11 am and saw that his street was teaming with newscasters, elected officials, cameramen, and local community members, he wasn’t surprised. They’d been there before. “It’s always been tough here,” Mr. Guzman said. “I’m glad they’re doing something about it.”

The building in question was 552 Academy Street, a crumbling 72-unit brick building located across the street from Mr. Guzman’s apartment. A year ago he had stood outside and watched as dozens of tenants dragged their belongings onto the sidewalk, confused and frightened and wondering where they would relocate to next.

The building, the city told them, was unsafe, which was why they had to vacate the premises. Although Mr. Guzman had never been inside, he heard rumors that at times the units lacked gas, running water, and electricity. “This is what happens when you get these slumlords and all they care about is the money,” Mr. Guzman said, referring to the building’s landlord, Rachel Arfa, whom the City blames for the hazardous conditions.

With the help of the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, the tenants—31 families in total— were relocated to temporary apartments around the city, in neighborhoods like Hillside, Thayer, and Elmwood.

But on Friday, many of the tenants were back in their old neighborhood, rubbing shoulders with the suits and construction workers who were there to announce the good news: 552 Academy Street would be rehabilitated and open for residency in the next 18 months. As part of Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s New Housing Marketplace Plan, the structure has received $21.1 million in funding that will be used to rebuild, stabilize, and improve the old, defunct building.

“This is a really big step for us,” said Iris Bertoni, a representative of the building's tenant association who had lived in the same apartment on the third floor for 50 years. "We're coming back home."

In addition to improved mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, the building, which was formerly a walk-up, will be redesigned to include an elevator line, a community room, and new kitchens, bathrooms, and laundry room. The renovations, which will modernize the building and bring it up to code, are the result of a lengthy  battle between the City and Arfa for possession of the building. According to the Department of Building's website, Arfa was charged with allowing "structural stability and egress issues" to develop over the last ten years, and has since been removed as the building's owner.

"This building has a history that is unfortunately not as uncommon as we would like," HPD Commissioner Mathew Wambua said,"but one thing that it has in its favor is a support network equal to no other." The rehabilitation of the building, Mr. Wambua said, as well as the selection of a new owner, will be spearheaded by the Community League of the Heights (CLOTH) and Alembic Development Corporation.

Council Member Ydanis Rodriguez, who donated $1 million to the project from his discretionary funds, was at the event on Friday, donning a plastic hardhat and black suit. “I feel great,” he said minutes after plunging a golden shovel into a pile of dirt as part of the symbolic groundbreaking ceremony. Not only was he glad that the tenants would be able to return to their former homes, he said, but he hoped that the event would serve as a warning to inept landlords throughout the city. “We have no tolerance for negligence,” he said. “This is a message to any other landlord who doesn’t reflect what they are supposed to be doing in terms of providing decent living situations for their tenants.”

The new units, which will not only be affordable, but top quality, also excite Mr. Rodriguez who hopes that it will encourage more people to move to the Inwood neighborhood. In the last 10 years, “we have lost 18,000 residents,” he said. “People can’t afford to pay the rents.” The average annual income of residents in the neighborhood is $30,000 a year, he said, adding that he hopes the revamped and reasonably priced 552 Academy Street building will be the start of a new housing trend.

Across the street, wearing a black “I Love Inwood” tee shirt, Mr. Guzman mused about the past, present, and future of his neighborhood. “A lot has changed,” he said, referring to the demographics and socio-economic levels of his community. Inwood has had its ups and downs, he said, and although he still loves it (hence his shirt), the neighborhood is due for a change. Improving the conditions and affordability of the residences is a first step, but Mr. Guzman hopes to see more improvements.

“For one thing,” he said, leaning on his fishing pole, “it would be nice if some of these people hired the people in the neighborhood to do some of the work, like labor and construction. A lot of us are unemployed and it would be nice to be a part of the community.”

Maybe the problem is Jay-Z did not like his eggs?

If Gracie Mansion were our friend, we’d lightly slap her face and tell her to snap out of it. “Put down that compact mirror, girl,” we’d chide. “You don’t need botox or permanent eyeliner tattoos. You look great as is. Don’t go changing yourself for some man.” She’d then probably start crying and wailing, “Why, oh, why doesn’t he love me?” at which point we’d start feeling awkward and might hand her a box of Kleenex to shut her up.

Because the thing is, we don’t know why Mayor Michael Bloomberg doesn’t love you, Gracie. We don’t know why he refuses to live inside your beauteous walls (well, maybe we do), but the thing is, changing how you look won’t help. It won’t bring your man home. You’re wasting your time, squandering your money, and becoming a cliché. And yet, we know you won’t listen to us. We know you’ll do it anyways; we know you’ll have your kitchen remodeled.

And whatdoyouknow? We were right.

For the first time in 27 years, Gracie Mansion will be getting a new kitchen, and a swanky one at that. For $1.4 million, the mazelike walls will be knocked down, refrigerators will be installed, and the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems as a whole will be improved. “It’s about time,” Mitchel London, the chef for Mayor Edward I. Koch told The Times. And he would know. He was there when the kitchen was still new.

Specific details on the new kitchen have not been released, but the renovation will be spearheaded by Studios Architecture, Petretti & Associates Construction Management, and Drake Design Associates. More importantly, the project has been funded entirely, we repeat, entirely, by the Gracie Mansion Conservancy through their fundraising events and other sponsorship opportunities, with not a cent coming from the Mayor himself.

Which begs the question, why renovate? Especially when no one lives there full-time? Well, it turns out that quite a few events are actually held at the mansion each year so having a new, modern kitchen will be quite a treat for the kitchen peons. Finally, no more running outside to the well to retrieve water.

Don't let these pretty lights distract you from the rampant development that's taking place in Tribeca. (Flickr, Garrett Cox)

Historic designations are like monkey traps (yes, these exist): they work in the beginning, but eventually their intended targets learn how to out-smart them. Case in point: development in Tribeca.

For years, the neighborhood’s “historic designation has helped preserve [Tribeca’s] architectural character and low-density environs,” the Wall Street Journal writes, but developers are increasingly finding ways to get around the zoning restrictions.  Spurred in part by buyers’ high demand to live in the low-density, somewhat remote area, brokers and developers have lined up a number of new projects that are set to open in the next 18 to 24 months. While some of these new projects are loft and warehouse conversions, most of them are ground-up construction projects.  And boy are there a lot of them.

VE Equities has two new buildings in the works: an 11-story, 13-unit condo on 290 West Street and an 11-story, 22-unit building on 11 North Moore Street that has a 7,500-square-foot penthouse with a private pool. Of late, VE Equities seems to be driving the bulk of new developments in the area, which includes two earlier condo buildings built at 1 North Moore Street and 471 Washington Street.

Part of the reason why the company has been able to put in so many new developments, according to the New York Post, is because they match the style of the new buildings with nearby landmarks. “For 290 West, we wanted to create something that relates to the industrial landscape of Tribeca,” architect Morris Adjmi of the architectural firm Adjmi and Andreoli told the tab. The new development at 11 North Moore will “be glassy, framed with stone,” and, like other VE Equities properties “will feature gyms, libraries, playrooms, storage and bike rooms.”

Also soon to be built is a 34-unit edifice on 71 Laight Street, featuring loft-style residences and not one, but three penthouses.

Other new developments in Tribeca include a building on 250 West Street and the 84-unit Reade57 apartment, the Journal said. And, like we mentioned earlier, demand for these Tribeca units is colossal. Units at Read57, which started going on sale at the end of 2011, sell for $973,000 to about $3 million and the building has already reached its halfway mark, with closings slated to begin in July.

The Journal also mentioned a slew of non-residential developments that have sprouted up in Tribeca, like the Michelin-starred Tamarind Tribeca and Atera, which goes to prove that development is certainly on the rise.

Or, as Tribeca historian and resident Oliver Allen told the Journal, “When we moved here in 1982 we thought it was the frontier—it sure ain’t the frontier anymore.”

Nope, it sure ain’t.  

It's not easy building green. (Facebook/Friends of Bushwick Inlet Park)

Five-hundred years ago, Council Member Stephen Levin would have rode in on a horse, tooted his trumpet, and read from a really really long scroll. But instead, he held a hearing.

"The community wants to know why it has taken this long to move these open space projects forward," he said in a press release decrying the city's slow action on a slew of promised parks in his district.

One of the open space project is particularly irksome, a 2005 plan by the city to turn a 30-acre site along the waterfront in Williamsburg into an as-yet undeveloped park. "The community deserves to see a plan to build the parks that we were promised," Mr. Levin added.

Others in the Williamsburg/Greenpoint area agree with Mr. Levin. The Friends of Bushwick Inlet Park (the official name for the site) and other supporters rallied on the steps of City Hall yesterday prior to the hearing to voice their desire for the park.

“Every community deserves access to open space and North Brooklyn is no exception,” Senator Daniel Squadron said. “When these promises aren’t kept, it makes it a lot harder for communities to move forward with similar rezoning projects in the future.”

But you have to give the city some credit: the 30-acre site isn't wholly undeveloped. They did built a soccer field. 

Maira Nazarbayev's motto: Admit nothing. Deny everything. (Photo: NY Post, Chad Rachman)

Just when we thought we could count on some titillating, juicy scandals a la The Real Housewives of Kazakhstan, Maira Nazarbayev, the Plaza filcher, has let us down.

According to the Post, Ms. Nazarbayev, the (debatably) ex-wife of Bolat Nazarbayeva, is not, in fact, single. “I consider myself married and in a good relationship with my husband,” she told the tab. “And I’ve never seen a document related to divorce.”

Uh-huh. Mr. Nazarbayev sure is a forgiving guy then if he’s stayed with Ms. Nazarbayev despite the allegations that she and her son conned him out of their $20 million 4,000 square-foot apartment at the Plaza earlier this year.

Not only forgiving, but forgetful, too. "He was surprised to hear that this took place,” Ms. Nazarbayev said, speaking through a translator, about a phone call she had a few weeks ago with Mr. Nazarbayev about the lawsuit. “He was in shock to learn about this lawsuit.”

Really?

Mr. Nazarbayev’s lawyer, John Snyder, declined to comment, but did point the Post in the direction of a past lawsuit that says the couple were divorced in September of 2009. The article also mentioned sources who claim that Mr. Nazarbayev suspects his spouse of using aliases and of having been already married to somebody when the couple got hitched in July of 2001.

Ms. Nazarbayev, however, denies these and other allegations made in the suit such as one that claims that she is wanted in Kazakhstan “for various crimes, including kidnapping, use of threats of physical harm to extract funds from a business associate, and using criminal threats to force another person to transfer real property to the name of a family associate.”

“I had lived and worked as a housewife during my relationship in Kazakhstan with my husband,” she told the Post. “There is no factual basis for this information.”

All of this is to say she is not giving up her apartment.