October 9, 2007
SFist Finds: Burke-Lewis Apartment Manager Hate
A reader snapped these pictures taken inside of their infamous Burke-Lewis Apartments on Bush Street. It seems that someone in the building printed one of the many negative reviews (this one being almost a year old) of their building and apartment manager, and tacked it up in the laundry room. Then, the apartment manager in question pulled it down, copied it, blew it up, wrote all over it, and taped it by the elevator.
Seems like someone is a little defensive and can't take a little criticism. It also looks like someone doesn't know how to use a computer and post a reply online. (As always, we implore the building manager to post on Rotten Neighbor to complete this two-pronged attack of his tenants.)
Read the review in question here. The chilling breakdown after the jump.
If one doesn't care to follow bldg rules, then expect a bitch--I shouldn't have to be nice when you can't follow rules. They are in writing in your lease. I have very longterm tenants that can follow instructions and I don't want them leaving!! Ask them!
We know who!He's not oblivious. Ask him.
It's my job to take care of bldg, not his!!!
I guarantee he'll put in a stricter mgr.
|
Interestingly, this is not the first time SFist has received materials regarding Jerry. We've had two or three tips in the past, though they were just minor anecdotes; never enough to justify a post. I don't believe I've ever heard a positive word spoken about him.
There are signs all over that Burke-Lewis building, inside and out; and all of them are unfriendly.
I've never seen those sign, but believe it. It's so sad considering how GORGEOUS and excellently-located the building is
I saw some previous posts on other sites that descibed "Honestly, the constant partying, yelling, screaming and random stair running was enough to give me an anneurism", along with description of the manger as being nuts
after sitting through some restraining order sessions, which is mostly neighbors, you really find out it's not just low income places. It goes all the way up Nob Hill, up into Twin peaks, pretty much all over..
except I think when it gets into Pacific Heights the crazies are called 'eccentric' by then
whether it be 6th street or nob hill, building management makes all the difference
It seems like 25-ish units must be threshold for trouble. I live in a 15-ish unit building in that same general neighborhood and there almost seems like no need for a manager. Granted the owner is pretty involved, but there are just so few issues that require any attention.
Same for previous places I've lived. 7 unit building on Larkin: No problems.
80-unit loft-building in SOMA: people acted like animals.
It's a sociological thing, I'm thinkin'
The requirement for an on-site manager used to be in the SF building code I believe. The threshold where a manager was requried was at 15 units and above. So, if you see buildings with 14 units and a basement unit used for storage (as in my building) you will know why.
Believe the rule to be 16 and less (or 17 and above)
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=&hl=en&num=100&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=16+or+more+dwellings&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_rights=&safe=images
On-Site Manager
Apartment houses of 16 or more dwellings or hotels of 12 or more guest rooms must have an onsite manager who can be contacted by the city in case of emergency. The name, unit number and contact information of this individual must be posted at the front entrance to the building.
Did not know that. Seems logical!