I live in a co-op building and we have such a rule. Enforcement is greatly helped by the fact that you cannot go from the front door of the building to anywhere else without using interior stairs in the foyer, multiple sets. Anything with wheels is prohibited so that the carpet is not ruined as well presumably so that people aren't taking things up and down steps that could cause a fall and being a liability. If you are being told no stroller there is a reason and any other spot you are directed to will certainly be easy access, no steps and certainly not worth making a fuss over.
7
As Mr. Roger's would say in this case, ?I don't want to be your neighbor."
5
This column provides an invaluable service -- to the myriad of people who might be considering purchasing a co-op in New York City -- but after reading the airings of these types of disputes regarding life in a co-op (along with some of the comments) - are able to take a step back and consider other options -- such as buying a house in the country - where their strollers (along with pets, musical instruments, etc.) - can roam free...
15
You could give me all the money in the world, and I wouldn't want a co-op. I'd live in NYC with that money, yes, but TPTB in co-ops sound like the ultimate nooges.
11
It's fairly obvious that the person in the elevator thought she was a nanny and wanted her to use the "service" entrance. Asserting herself as the shareholder would easily solve the problem - without resorting to seeking advice from the general public in a NY Times posting
8
What? Nannies have to use the back door? I've never encountered such a thing. Nannies are considered part of a family, not second-class servants. Would children with nannies also have to use the back door? Makes no sense.
6
Just as ignorance of the law is no excuse it seems like the if the rule exists in governing docs then that's the rule. Did the people not read the rules in the govering docs? Really spending probably 100s of thousands of dollars and did not take a few hours (possibly more) to read the docs / reports / finances of the coop???? Probably were more interested in aesthetics. This could be another example of people buying a coop and then not wanting to follow the rules. There probably is some logical rationale for no strollers which the letter writer does not include. For example in my 1901 building the front door is a revolving door and rather small one. It would be near impossble to bring in a stroller or grocery cart or wheel chair (with someone in it) without banging / scratching the door. AND it does not sound like discrimination against people with families. Bet babies are allowed in letter writer's front door if not in a stoller. Repeat I think the letter writer is leaving out important details to bolster her case.
2
Your 1901 building likely had hitching posts out front and manure piles in the street. But that changed.
Between children (all of whom once were babies), older people with grocery carts and the disabled, perhaps your building should get a new attitude, if not a larger door.
Between children (all of whom once were babies), older people with grocery carts and the disabled, perhaps your building should get a new attitude, if not a larger door.
5
Almost 20 years ago, my dear Boston friend (a woman I knew from grad school), had this problem at the Museum of Fine-Arts-Boston. She and her husband were not allowed to take their newborn in a stroller into the Gund Gallery.
Being the tough-but-sweet Bostonian that she is, she debated with security at the gallery entrance. The stroller, she said, was a mobility aid for infants. And certainly,ment. Stroller and family permitted into the Gund to see a Picasso show.
By chance, the family, later in the day, was on the same elevator as the museum's director. She gave him an earful - with her rational reasons.
Strollers are now permitted in all MFA-Boston galleries, and her then-infant is now a budding art historian in her own right, thanks, in part, to her parents' determination to take their child to the museum as often as possible, and that included with stroller in the infant years.
The coop board in question in the letter reeks of age discrimination. Surely the stroller issue, if brought to court, will not hold up for the board, and the family will be the winners - as was my friend, almost 20 years ago.
Being the tough-but-sweet Bostonian that she is, she debated with security at the gallery entrance. The stroller, she said, was a mobility aid for infants. And certainly,ment. Stroller and family permitted into the Gund to see a Picasso show.
By chance, the family, later in the day, was on the same elevator as the museum's director. She gave him an earful - with her rational reasons.
Strollers are now permitted in all MFA-Boston galleries, and her then-infant is now a budding art historian in her own right, thanks, in part, to her parents' determination to take their child to the museum as often as possible, and that included with stroller in the infant years.
The coop board in question in the letter reeks of age discrimination. Surely the stroller issue, if brought to court, will not hold up for the board, and the family will be the winners - as was my friend, almost 20 years ago.
25
So rules are only for other people?
The size of these strollers as they ram into the back of your legs is truly astounding.
The size of these strollers as they ram into the back of your legs is truly astounding.
7
One afternoon my visit to a musuem and everyone else's visit was disturbed by a crying / screeching baby in the galleries and parent too inconsiderate to leave.
3
This sounds like a recently passed House Rule rather than something that will be found in the By Laws or Proprietary Lease. Normally, new rules are distributed to the tenants.
Now there are strollers and there are strollers. The side by side two seaters can be massive affairs. Why museums allow these at all is a mystery to me. In any event, main entrances often have more glass than service entrances. Perhaps there have been problems with breakage. It seems unlikely the rule in question came out of the air---it was likely in response to a problem.
Now there are strollers and there are strollers. The side by side two seaters can be massive affairs. Why museums allow these at all is a mystery to me. In any event, main entrances often have more glass than service entrances. Perhaps there have been problems with breakage. It seems unlikely the rule in question came out of the air---it was likely in response to a problem.
5
Are such glass doors really as fragile that a stroller can break them?
If so, then reroute wheelchairs, too.
If so, then reroute wheelchairs, too.
14
Wheelchairs cannot get up the stairs that are part of the entry way in all older NYC buildings.
3
That does seem discriminatory, sending them to the back door,but I do think if there is more than one elevator available, strollers and dogs in leashes belong in a designated elevator.
1
Why? Why not add folks with canes, in wheelchairs and pushing carts? Sounds like you ought to have an elevator for yourself.
29
Now that's just silly.
12
Great. Make the disabled go farther to access the building so you won't be inconvenienced. I hope you are never mobilioty challenged.
3