Sure that is the right photo? Looks like the Coney low-income housing project.

Posted by: Suburbandude at November 3, 2009 10:08 AM in response to $21 Million Grant for Coney Affordable Housing

Just auction off the condos to the highest bidders, for goodness sakes. Keep the city out of it.

Posted by: Suburbandude at October 29, 2009 10:07 AM in response to Thursday Links

And to think, Robert Moses wanted to ram the Prospect Expressway all the way down to the Belt Parkway.

Posted by: Suburbandude at October 28, 2009 11:29 AM in response to Makeover of Ocean Parkway Mall

There is a ghastly split-level house directly across the street. I assume it replaced a house that burned down. Would not want to look at it everyday as I walked out of this house.

Posted by: Suburbandude at October 22, 2009 1:21 PM in response to House of the Day: 177 Rugby Road

If we never had rent stabilization laws, we could assume the following about Vandaveer Gardens:

1) Market rents would be lower because tens of thousands of rental building would not have been converted to coops, tens of thousands of rental buildings would not have been torched or abandoned, and tens of thousands of additional rental units that would have been built were not built. Higher supply = lower market rents.

2) The buildings would never have deteriorated because with a higher supply and higher turnover, the owners would have had to keep the building in good shape to attract tenants. Since rent stabilized tenants never leave, why bother?

3) Chances are the buildings would be owned by a responsible owner, rather than the current scumbags who either break the law or come within inches of breaking the law to clear out and harass below-market rent tenants.

Posted by: Suburbandude at October 15, 2009 10:26 AM in response to Tenants Claim Negligence at Flatbush Gardens

Not to my taste, but the typical buyer here would laugh at those who drop $2 million plus for an attached 18-foot brownstone that requires a tenant to help pay the mortgage and a half-hour search for a parking space. And yes, nicer and certainly more interesting than most of the crap going up in Brooklyn and Manhattan.

Posted by: Suburbandude at October 2, 2009 1:15 PM in response to The Venetian Unveiled

Joe the bummer - go to the head of the class. You get a grade of A++.

Posted by: Suburbandude at September 15, 2009 10:37 AM in response to Brownsville Affordable Project Gets State Funding

Rent regulation has been a failure for 60 years. And these whore politicians who genuflect to these tenant groups know it.

Posted by: Suburbandude at June 17, 2009 11:06 AM in response to Wednesday Links

At best we are at the bottom and we will flat line for the next five years. At worst we have another 20% to go. Horrible, horrible article.

Posted by: Suburbandude at June 8, 2009 11:49 AM in response to Manhattan's Bounce Detectable in Brooklyn?

Zillow and Trulia are completely useless in Brownstone Brooklyn. Do you think a computer understands that a 20-foot brownstone is worth a hell of a lot more than a 16-foot brownstone?

They do a good job in places like suburban Dallas.

Posted by: Suburbandude at June 8, 2009 11:46 AM in response to Help with crazy appraisals

Ironballs - You are so right. Life's losers are the 60 and 70 somethings hunkered down in their rent stabilized apartments on the Upper West Side, when they could have bought a Classic 6 in the late 70's for, I'm guessing, less than $100,000.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 19, 2009 2:02 PM in response to Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords

bxgrl - and Andrew Stein was just another political whore who knew that for each landlord there was 50 tenants. What kind of results would you expect from a political whore?

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 19, 2009 12:21 PM in response to Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords

Bxgrl - In 1947 developers of new rental buildings were told that there buildings would be market rentals. In the 1960's and 1970's they were told they would no longer be market rentals. In 1968, would you have built a rental building knowing that the City Counsel was clamoring for rent stabilization? Would you have opened a pizza parlor if the City Counsel was clamoring for pizza price controls?

Just the discussion of and threat of rent stabilization brought all rental housing construction to a halt. Certainly it could not have been the rapidly rising rents and the 1.5% vacancy rate (you did learn about supply and demand, didn't you?)

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 19, 2009 12:19 PM in response to Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords

bxgrl - I am not justifying it. It was horrible. But the owners couldn't get a mortgage to replace a boiler or a roof because they had minimal cash flow and the banks would not lend them money. So the buildings were torched or abandoned. Had they not had draconian rent control that began during WWII, they would have been able to maintain thier buildings. And that is a fact.

As for selling to convertors, they sold them for more than they were worth as a rent-regulated building, but a hell of a lot less if they could have gotten market rents. They did not make a windfall. They just quit. And many of these owners built under the assumption that they would never be regulated. So they were screwed.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 19, 2009 11:54 AM in response to Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords

bxgrl - that reminds me. Do you know how many apartment building owners in NYC and the suburbs quit the business and sold them to coop convertors because they couldn't make a decent profit? Or torched them in the South Bronx and East New York? Had there never been rent control and rent stabilization there would be hundreds and hundreds of thousands of more rental units on the market. One-bedrooms in Manhattan would be $1,500 not $3,000.

And rent control nearly destroyed NYC in the 1970's. Lessons are never learned.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 19, 2009 10:53 AM in response to Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords

bkhabitant - the problem is you have lots of undeserving people who are paying below market rents. Because the building is devalued, its property assessment is lowered, and the property taxes are reduced. Therefore, everybody else is paying for this tenant's low rent. Plus, because rent stabilized tenants never move, it keeps vacancies down and market rates artificially high. That's just two of dozens of reasons why rent stabilization has been a 75-year disaster in NYC.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 19, 2009 10:04 AM in response to Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords

The solution to the problem is easy:
1) 100% vacancy decontrol.
2) If you make over $150,000 a year you are decontrolled, irrespective of the current rent.
3) If you have liquid assets over $250,000 (or some number) you are decontrolled.
4) If you own any other property you are decontrolled.
5) You can not pass an apartment to a relative when you die.

In 10 to 20 years we will have a 95% market rate rental market.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 19, 2009 9:52 AM in response to Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords

Because the Upper East Side is so uncool and so unhip, that is exactly where I would choose to live in Manhattan.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 11, 2009 1:14 PM in response to Brooklynites Jumping Ship to Manhattan?

I love this notion that streetcars were eliminated in the 1950's because of a conspiracy with the oil companies and the car companies. Baloney! Go back to 1950 and try to find one person who was not happy to replace streetcars with buses.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 8, 2009 11:05 AM in response to Could Streetcars Return to Brooklyn?

Toronto is the last North American city that kept most of its streetcar network. It works great, especially if you like autos backed up behind them wasting gas and spewing pollution.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 8, 2009 10:28 AM in response to Could Streetcars Return to Brooklyn?

The 45' lot depth is a total deal breaker. The 16.67' width does not help. Ridiculously overpriced.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 7, 2009 4:41 PM in response to House of the Day: 100 St. Mark's Avenue

Lechacal - houses tend to be much larger in the northern suburbs. Until recently developers were popping up 5,000-square-foot monsters that have now lost a ton of their value. They are just flat-out stupidly too big for a family of four that rarely entertains, and too expensive to heat, maintain and furnish. Most houses in Larchmont Manor are less than 3,000 square feet. And its only one mile or less to the train station, the grocery store, restaurants and your kid's friend's house, not ten miles. You only need one car, and you don't need an SUV to get around in the winter.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 7, 2009 12:00 PM in response to Pam Liebman: Brooklyn Doing Better Than the Rest

Etson - drive around Larchmont Manor (the area between the Boston Post Road and Long Island Sound). It cannot get any nicer. Train is 30 minutes to Grand Central.

And people have not forgotten $4.50 gas and $5.00 heating oil. The big house in the Northern Westchester boonies is dead, dead, dead.

Posted by: Suburbandude at May 7, 2009 11:40 AM in response to Pam Liebman: Brooklyn Doing Better Than the Rest

My honey locust is blooming. Not a good sign.

Posted by: Suburbandude at April 29, 2009 4:54 PM in response to Closing Bell: Evidence of Damaged Trees by the Waterfalls

There are plenty of people who are "in the arts," who, rather than thinking they are entitled to a handout or subsidy, have Monday to Friday jobs that pay the rent.

If you want to be a full-time artist and can't afford the rent, move to Buffalo or Oklahoma City or a hundred other places, where a nice share will run you $300 a month, and you can probably rent studio space for a couple of bucks a square foot.

Posted by: Suburbandude at April 27, 2009 10:31 AM in response to Lots of Love for the Schermerhorn House

Brownstoner - please stop commenting on the color and/or the quality of the appliances. Nobody cares, and nobody will make a buy or not buy decision based on this. You are doing yourself a disservice.

Posted by: Suburbandude at April 20, 2009 1:03 PM in response to Co-op of the Day: 39 Remsen Street, #1E

She's right - in 2015.

Posted by: Suburbandude at April 13, 2009 11:52 AM in response to Babs: 'Don't Ever Underestimate' New York

"limitations of their school district" equals code words for lots of minorities. Guess these formerly wealthy white Upper West Side liberals thought that only working-class white kids from Yonkers had to go to schools with lots of minorities.

Posted by: Suburbandude at April 7, 2009 9:36 AM in response to The Shifting School Equation

The angus mushroom swiss burger for 4 bucks at McDonalds tastes great and is a steal. It is like Smith and Wollensky's compared to the so-called "roast beef" at Arby's.

Posted by: Suburbandude at March 12, 2009 9:54 AM in response to Confirmed: Arby's Planning to Take Gage & Tollner Space

Great if you love over-cooked, over-salted, tasteless roast beef sandwiches. Classic Jersey Turnpike food.

Posted by: Suburbandude at March 12, 2009 9:23 AM in response to Confirmed: Arby's Planning to Take Gage & Tollner Space

Dave - Too bad we don't have a president that can communicate this good news that is happening in California. The best way out of this mess is for NO MORTGAGE BAILOUTS. Prices will reach their appropriate levels, new and well qualified buyers will get good deals and will never be foreclosed on, and a good real estate cycle will begin. Moving companies, painters, landscapers, real estate attorneys, appraisers, etc. will get a ton of work.

But this goes against our gloom and doomer in the White House, who will say anything to get his socialist fantasies going. I am proud to say he did not get my vote.

Posted by: Suburbandude at March 6, 2009 2:10 PM in response to Open House Picks: Six Months Later

The proposed tax increases on those making over 250K will suck more money from NYC to Washington, but have zero impact on places like Arkansas. And everyone of our dumbass Democratic Congressmen will be voting to suck the money out of NYC.

Posted by: Suburbandude at February 26, 2009 9:43 AM in response to Home Sales Falling, Condo & Foreclosure Auctions Rising

Owner of 10 Oak Street: Put 20% down, drives an old clunker, rarely eats out, "vacations" at Coney Island, puts money in a 529 Plan, makes every mortgage payment. This guy gets nothing.

Owner of 12 Oak Street: Put 0% down, leases a BMW, blows money in Vegas, cannot make mortgage payments. This guy gets a bailout.

Think about it.

Posted by: Suburbandude at February 13, 2009 10:25 AM in response to Housing Rescue Plan: For Some or For All?

C'mon people. Quinn is protecting the interests of hardworking working-class families by proposing to raise the income ceiling for rent-stabilized apartment from $175,000 to $240,000. Thank you for looking out for the little guy, Ms. Quinn.

Posted by: Suburbandude at February 12, 2009 10:09 AM in response to Speaker Quinn Bears Bad News for Real Estate Crowd

I'm sure 60 years of rent control and rent stabilization took its toll on the owner(s) of this fine building.

Posted by: Suburbandude at February 11, 2009 11:39 AM in response to 566 Hancock Street's Seen Better Days

Doesn't mean that much unless you know how many listings Corcoran has in Manhattan and in Brooklyn, does it?

Posted by: Suburbandude at February 3, 2009 10:35 AM in response to Corcoran's Most Viewed? All Brooklyn, Baby

The What - the reason the Bronx burned in the 1970's is because landlords, thanks to rent control (most buildings were built before 1947 and were subject to onerous rent regulations), had negative cash flow! There was no money for a new boiler, new roof or new windows. No bank would lend to them. So the buildings were abandoned and/or torched. You really have no idea what you're talking about.

If NYC wants rent stabilization, then landlords should be reimbursed by the city for a large percentage of the difference between market rents and stabilized rents. The burden of subsidies should not be on the landlords.

Posted by: Suburbandude at February 3, 2009 10:04 AM in response to Democratic Assembly Passes Pro-Tenant Legislation

I believe they want to raise the cap from $175,000 to $250,000, and the deregulated rent from $2,000 to $2,750. So how does this help working-class New Yorkers who make 50K and pay $1,000 rents?

60 years of disasterous rent control and rent stabilization, and these morons still haven't learned anything.

Posted by: Suburbandude at February 3, 2009 9:20 AM in response to Democratic Assembly Passes Pro-Tenant Legislation

Home sales are soaring in California. Properties that sold for $500,000 in 2005 are now selling for 50% to 60% less. Today's buyers are making down payments (zero down is so yesterday) and have good credit scores. The chances of them being foreclosed on, or the chance of the bank taking large baths on foreclosures, are next to nothing.

Bottom line - the government should do absolutely nothing to stop foreclosures. Yes it is terrible for people to lose their homes. But long term this is the best approach to the problem.

Posted by: Suburbandude at January 26, 2009 1:27 PM in response to Blinder: 'Fiddling on Foreclosures'

They should have spent more money on the kitchens and a lot less on the bathrooms (where do you spend most of your time?). Yes, those cabinets are a BIG mistake.

Posted by: Suburbandude at January 20, 2009 1:28 PM in response to Condos of the Day: 4 South Portland Avenue

All these upstate cities (Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Albany) have very vibrant and cool neighborhoods and are dirt cheap. The Times recently profiled a couple from NYC who bought an old Victorian in a great Buffalo neighborhood for 279K. Same house in in Brooklyn? Easy over 1M. And for 100K, you can get a reasonable house in a very safe neighborhood.

As for the cold, get a sweater. The weather today in NYC is probably a typical Buffalo winter day. And despite the fake panic by the local TV weathermen to jack up the ratings, I think today is gorgeous.

Posted by: Suburbandude at January 16, 2009 12:03 PM in response to Is It Bottom-Feeding Time Yet?

$25,000 in Buffalo (fully detached). Lots of artists there.

Posted by: Suburbandude at January 16, 2009 11:35 AM in response to Is It Bottom-Feeding Time Yet?

Yes, it's let's use the mean price instead of the median price trick. Works all the time.

Posted by: Suburbandude at January 16, 2009 9:22 AM in response to 155 Warren Sells; Highest Price Ever in Cobble Hill?

Having outrageously high rents in Brooklyn in is good news?

Posted by: Suburbandude at January 15, 2009 10:28 AM in response to Brooklyn Rental Market More Stable Than Manhattan

I believe there was a full page ad in last week's New York Times magazine section by a company was that was selling very attractive and well built sliding walls (or whatever you call them). Don't know what they cost, but it will be a lot less aggravating than what you are planning to do. Screw the coop board.

Posted by: Suburbandude at January 12, 2009 5:41 PM in response to Building a 2nd room (frm a jr-4)

The boarded-up house two doors to the right should help seal the deal.

Posted by: Suburbandude at December 29, 2008 1:19 PM in response to House of the Day: 433 Waverly Avenue

"I disagree" - these sales DO NOT reflect current market conditions. The sellers could just have said no to any renegotiation. The buyers could walk away, but lose the 10% deposit. Does not happen too often.

I want to see contracts that were signed after November 1 to get a true reading of the market. Then we will know if the market is slightly declining or tumbling.

Posted by: Suburbandude at December 16, 2008 1:40 PM in response to Last Week's Biggest Sales

Zillow is pretty worthless unless your valuing a new cookie-cutter subdivision house outside Phoenix. Zillow does not know the condition of your home, condition of the comps, or if there is a crackhouse across the street.

Posted by: Suburbandude at December 5, 2008 4:00 PM in response to Low Interest Rates Are Teasing Me

Hoyt Street is a 13-footer. Give lots of credit to the photographer.

Posted by: Suburbandude at December 5, 2008 1:39 PM in response to Open House Picks

Lechatel @ 10:44 who wants to "eradicate" all pit bulls, you are an ignoramus who knows nothing about dogs and nothing about pit bulls. But once an ignoramus always an ignoramus, so I won't waste my time explaining why you are an ignoramus.

Posted by: Suburbandude at December 5, 2008 1:30 PM in response to Good Times in The Slope