la di da di's Profile
Author's Posts
November 5, 2009
Pipe Sizing
I need to replaced galvanized water supply lines in my 5 story building.
Should I go with 1" or 1 1/4". I currently have 3/4" on the cold side and 1" on the hot.
January 9, 2009
Raising Rent, Followup
One the of consequences of having below market rate tenants is that they seem to go out of their way to avoid much conversation with me. They stoop-talk for hours on end with my wife(i guess she's not the landlord in their eyes), but keep it short and trite with me.
Anyway, I just found out from my neighbor, that one of my tenants is pregnant(his wife and my tenant take the Dekalb bus together in the am). So here i am contemplating raising the rent on a couple that's having a baby this summer.
As a parent of 2, i understand how drastically one's budget priorities change once you become a parent. There will never be a good time to increase the rent on a young family. They'll always need to buy more diapers, more formula, more food etc. I love my kids to death, but they're a money pit.
At the end of the day, thats probably the biggest reason why i want to raise the rent. I'm leaving $1800 on the table every month. That's $21.6K a year that could toward the enrichment of my children.
Back to the question at hand. Popular opinion seemed to be that a increase greater than $150 was unreasonable, with 4% being generally accepted by most. Does the fact that my tenant will be having a child this summer change any of this?
January 8, 2009
Raising the Rent
Another year has passed and I still haven’t raised the rent. I have owned a four family, 5-story brownstone in Landmarked Fort Greene since 1995; renting out three floor-thru apartments each approximately 800 sf. I purchased the building fully rented, with rents set at a then market rate $900/month. Two apartments have had active turnover with tenants staying one to three years and then moving on. The third apartment hasn’t changed occupants since I purchased the property.
I typically used the vacancies in these apartments as an opportunity to fix/repair/renovate, re-renting at market rates. Over the span of 9 years, rents went from $900 to $1400 for these apartments. The current tenants in these apartments have not had a rent increase since moving in 5 years ago. The ‘original’ tenant in the third apartment has had her rent increased once, 7 years ago, from $900 to $1050.
For years, I have avoided raising rents, hoping that my tenants would simply move on by choice, allowing me to fix/repair/renovate and charge higher rent without ‘confrontation’. Another year has passed and they still have not moved on. I really don’t blame them, they got it pretty good. Raising the rent has been a source of anxiety for me and I really want to put it behind me.
The units are not subject to stabilization or control and the tenants are currently in month-to-month leases. Market rent for similar apartments are in the $1900 to $2300 range. Taking the lower end of the scale, my units are $500 to $850 below market. I need help devising a fair and coherent strategy for bridging the difference between market rents and my actual rents.
I thought about many different ways of ‘catching up’. Q. “What would the rent have been if I had increased at 4% a year like I was supposed to?” A. $1700 for two apartments (+ $300) and $1290(+ $240) for the other. Q. “What would the rent be if I split the difference between current and market rent.” A. $1650 for two apartments (+ $250) and $1475(+ $425) for the other. Both of these options seem like a hell of increase for a tenant to bear, yet even those options leave me or short of the market rates.
How much is too much? How should discuss this with my tenants? How much time should I give them? Tia
November 2, 2008
Resetting Bluestone
I have a 8x6 piece of bluestone sidewalk at the bottom of my stoop. The soil beneath the bluestone has eroded significantly.
I spoke with a contractor who said that the piece would likely have to be cut in order to reset the stone. I'd really hate to have to cut such a hard to come by of bluestone.
Does anyone have any experience resetting/leveling those big bluestone pavers? Anybody they'd like to recommend?
Author's Comments
Vanburen, no offense, didn't mean to confuse you with a renter.
And after clarification I agree with all 4 of your points. 4% is the conflict threshold. Limiting myself to 4% so i don't produce a conflict doesn't quite do it for me. I realize there's going to be a conflict, i'm just trying to resolve in a way that makes sense.
Sure i've made a mistakes in the past(since not raising the rent is now classified as a mistake), but I am not bound by these past mistakes. I could always douchebags like the nice couple a few doors down from me that bought their $2 million brownstone who booted the old tenants, slapped on some paint and jacked up the rent to cover an exorbitant mortgage.
I'm just trying to make things right.
Posted by: la di da di at January 7, 2009 5:08 PM in response to Raising the Rent
alsawo, most of the responses have had a renter bias. I appreciate your putting aside your bias and giving a different kinda answer.
As i mentioned in the post, for the 10 years or so, i had regular turnover in two of the apartments. I made my adjustments during the vacancy and everything was OK. FG prices didn't start spiking until after 2001. In the beginning of 2001 when the one tenant signed her last lease $1050 was fair market.
But then 9/11 happened, doom and gloom.. How could i raise rent under these conditions(similar to what many are saying now) And so i waited, waited. By the time the good years came around i was programed for inaction.
In the end, most of it has to do with me being too nice. I'm just trying to figure out nice way to resolve this in a nice way so that we can all just kumbaya.
Posted by: la di da di at January 7, 2009 4:42 PM in response to Raising the Rent
IronBalls, it'll be no more difficult than finding tenants post 9/11. 2 tenants were relocated post 9/11 and it took 10 months to replace. Lost rent was offset by increased rental amount.
Bolder, i definitely don't want to jack them up, giving 30 days to pay up our clear. That too much bad kharma and wouldn't want that to come back on me. I do like the idea of semi-annual increases with a sense of transparency.
Vanburen, agree with points 1,3,4. Why should it be limited to 4%? Its not a matter of catching up per say. But my tenants pay significantly less than market rate. Recession or no recession. I'm simply trying to meet some place in the middle.
I totally empathize with those who say raise rent in such turbulent financial times is a bad thing. Yet for all intents and purpose my tenants appear relatively immune financially. Vacationing regularly, buying HDTVs and generally living la vida loco, while i'm tightening my family wallet.(Damn i sound like my grandmother). This is the anxiety i'm trying to do away with, as it is gnawing away at an other positive relationship with my tenants.
Posted by: la di da di at January 7, 2009 4:00 PM in response to Raising the Rent
The restaurants on this stretch of Dekalb have it bad. First they've had to deal with perpetual break-ins by a creative cat burglar. Now they have to deal with the sensationalism of customers getting mugged. Throw in a recession and half these establishments will be out of business by next New Year.
Posted by: la di da di at January 2, 2009 12:01 PM in response to Another Mugging in Fort Greene
These dogs are definitely not Pitbulls. Mastiff or Cane Corso/Mix(Not Pit).
The gentlemen used to regularly take the dogs to the park, late evenings(10-12 pm). He's not part of the doggie possie that hangs out on the main lawn. He usually walked the loop from the tennis park to the hospital, around to the Myrtle side, past the bathroom, down past the benches, to the rock and back to the tennis courts.
While walking my dog, I had a chance to speak with him and he is nice softspoken gentlemen. There is also a younger man who sometimes walks the dogs and he is more out going. According to him, they're cane corso/mastiff mixes.
Anyway, they've got to be at least 6-8 years old and are at the end of the lifespan. Being put down may not be the worst this for this dog.
Posted by: la di da di at December 26, 2008 3:46 PM in response to A Christmas Tale
First of all those aren't Pitbulls, they are Neapolitan Mastiffs. The are generally very well tempered. Nothing like pit bulls.
You say that the dog went straight for the Brittany Spaniel's neck. I guarantee you that if a pit did get a hold of the the dog's neck it wouldn't be walking away. Second, I doubt you would have been able to pry a locked pitbull's hold.
Savage pitbulls on the loose in FG Park makes for a good headline, but is far from the truth. The reality is that dogs get bitten by other dogs in the park all the time. Sorry to here about the in law's dog being bitten, but this type of incident is far more common than you'd imagine.
Do you honestly think it's the police's job to track the perp down? Is that an efficient way of allocating our resources?
Now if a person was bitten it would be a different story.
Posted by: la di da di at December 26, 2008 12:54 PM in response to A Christmas Tale
MP, do you have a preference for Indirect Water Heaters. I'm looking at Weil Mclein 60, Burnham al70sl, and Smart 60.
I have a 250K oil burner with DHW coil. I really like the continuous HOT water that my current setup provides, but also realize the inefficiencies.
My 1 hour max load is a little over 250 gallons and prefer 140 degree to 115.
Posted by: la di da di at December 15, 2008 10:45 AM in response to Using the main boiler for Heating Water or can we add a second stage
The Clermont property was asking $2 million with Location, Location. http://www.3location3.com/open-realty/listingview.php?listingID=599&PHPSESSID=00b082823bc1d72f0f563d46c8fe7091.
Selling @ $333/ sf for 5 stories of brownstone is not bad given the current market.
Posted by: la di da di at October 29, 2008 12:14 PM in response to Last Week's Biggest Sales
Navy Yard, Navy Yard, Navy Yard!!
Posted by: la di da di at September 29, 2008 11:04 AM in response to Curtains for Whole Foods?
Stuymom, it appears neither you nor your peers have much confidence in your neighborhood school, as you send your kids to a charter school and your friend sends theirs to a school in CH.
What happens to parents who aren't as lucky as yourself and don't win a charter school lottery ticket? What happens to parents who can't game the system like your friend and send their kids to school in another district? They are left with miserably failing schools for their kids.
I just wonder whether a 3/4 million dollar house is such a deal when the non-monetary risks far outweigh the financial benefits.
Posted by: la di da di at September 24, 2008 2:58 PM in response to New Bed-Stuy More Like Old Bed-Stuy?
The schools it Bed-Stuy suck. Why would a white family sacrifice their children's future just to save a couple bucks on a home?
Posted by: la di da di at September 24, 2008 1:42 PM in response to New Bed-Stuy More Like Old Bed-Stuy?
Few points,
-If you live in a multi-family home, the stoop and entry doorway are public spaces. Think about the other residents of the building.
-The driveway and the space to the left stoop are definitely private space. If you were drinking in either of those place, then definitely contest the tickets.
-3 beers and 4 people... Where were the beers when the cops came? Who had actual possession?
Posted by: la di da di at September 16, 2008 10:36 AM in response to More Tickets for Stoop Drinkers
Navy Yard! Navy Yard! Navy Yard!
Posted by: la di da di at August 11, 2008 1:06 PM in response to More Delays and Changes at Whole Foods
Not to quibble, but, if the occupants coordinated and took showers in sets of 3. ie. 3 showers at 10 min plus 3 showers at 10 min plus 3 showers at 10 min plus 1 shower at 10, the boiler will run for a maximum of 40 minutes. With the burner consuming 2 gallons a minute, i'd use 1.33 gallons a day instead of 3.33 gallons a day if they were one after another. 1.66 hours of usage vs .66 hours.
Posted by: la di da di at July 29, 2008 6:02 PM in response to Home Heating Help
Master Plumber, thanks for the response. Not trying to put words into your mouth, but are your implying that an oil and gas combination is better for light commercial applications than say Stand-alone Oil or stand-alone Gas?
Posted by: la di da di at July 29, 2008 5:55 PM in response to Home Heating Help
Master plumber,
About point c.,
My coil is capable of heating 8 gallons a minutes. I have 5 bathrooms and 4 kitchens in my multifamily brownstone. I have 10 total occupants in the building.
If the average shower is 10 min per person/day equals 30 gallons per person. Multiple 10 people by 30 gallons equals 300 gallons per day of 'demand'.
As it stands, this system can 'handle' 3 simultaneous users. Once the coil is hot, the water will basically stays hot indefinitely.
I know there are BTU calculators and what not. But i'm looking at things a little differently.
The flame on my burner flows at a rate of 2 gallons per hour. If my 10 occupants took back to back to back showers at 10 min a shower. That equals 100 min or 1.66 hours. @ 2 gallons/hr, I'd consume 3.33 gallons of oil X $4.00 oil= $13.33 a day to heat the water with oil Max. If they take simultaneous showers the price goes down.
I realize the ineffeciencies of this system. But what are the real alternatives. How effectively can hot water heater handle 300 gallons/day of demand? How many simultaneous showers can they handle. How long does the heater have to run to bring the temp back up?
Posted by: la di da di at July 29, 2008 4:09 PM in response to Home Heating Help
Steve, what kind of throughput are you getting with your powerline LAN? I want to put a WHS box in my basement, but running cable through my brownstone would be a real PITA and wireless won't really cut it.
Posted by: la di da di at July 27, 2008 11:39 PM in response to smart home installer
I wish Whole Foods would scrap their Gowanus site and set up shop in the Navy Yard. Surely they could be suckered in subsidizing the buildings.
Posted by: la di da di at July 22, 2008 3:49 PM in response to Public Hearing on Future of Admirals Row Tonight
A couple dozen preservationist vs hundreds if not thousands of low income housing residents. I wonder who wins?
Too bad the low income residents don't have a slick website and college professors to make their case.
Posted by: la di da di at July 22, 2008 10:37 AM in response to Public Hearing on Future of Admirals Row Tonight
Wamu and Wachovia are next! There are plenty of those branches in Brooklyn. If you have more than 100k(250K in IRA) in either of these banks watch out.
Posted by: la di da di at July 15, 2008 11:20 AM in response to IndyMac Fallout in Brooklyn?
Responses to Author's Forum Comments
I never said the landlord was greedy. However, the tenants ARE entitled to spend their income on whatever they choose after they've paid the rent they're currently asked to pay.
The OP said that knowing her tenants have gone on vacation and purchased a TV while she is cutting back is causing her anxiety and ruining her relationship with those tenants. My point is that this is not the tenants' fault. If she hasn't even tried to raise the rent, why shouldn't they buy whatever they want? How is that taking advantage of the landlord?
Should she raise the rent? Well obviously. Especially if the apartment is under market, she is forced to cut back on her own spending, and it is creating anxiety for her.
If she asked and they claimed they couldn't afford more, that might be a different story. But her own fear of asking for more money does not make her tenants greedy, nor does it mean they are taking advantage of her.
Posted by: lemur11215 at January 8, 2009 1:21 PM in response to Raising the Rent
tybur6
"Being displaced from your home because a landlord charges rent based on the "market" instead of how much money they need/want is disgusting. Don't be that person. It's on the dark side of ethical."
This makes no sense - on so many levels - on the most basic level - if the LL charged rent based on what LL "need/want" - who makes the determination of what LL need/want - what if LL felt she needed to always fly 1st class or by private jet. Or what if LL didnt ever replace the boiler or windows - so his costs are so high that he actually needs a really high rent to break even?
and how is charging "market" rent - even slightly unethical (or "on the dark side of ethical" - whatever that means) - it is actually a morally neutral standard (certainly a more objective measure that "want" or "need") - the market is what a group of people think something is worth - that certainly seems moral to me - not effected by the judgment, greed, altruism, or ethics of a single person but rather the buyers.
And then you go on to say:
"*** And as a side note... Folks, stop buying brownstones for $2-1/2 million with a 1-bedroom rental unit. Yeah, you'll have to charge an absurd amt of rent for that unit simply because you paid too much for your house... not because the rental unit is even worth close to that amount."
Again - you make no sense. Do you think people pay 2M for a brownstone because they wanted to spend that much? Should your (silly) lecture actually go to the sellers of Brownstones?? A buyer almost always prefers to pay less - so I am sure buyers would love to be able to pay less - newsflash - they cant.
And what do you mean "the rental isnt even worth close to that amount" - obviously IT IS - or you wont get a tenant. If someone signs a lease a X price then presumably they feel X is a fair price in COMPARISON to other available units (see above comment on fairness of "market rate")
In fact alot of the reason that the Brownstone can sell for $2M is because the rent will presumably cover alot of the mortgage....So.....maybe you should give your (silly) lecture to perspective tenants - as in - "Dont pay absurd rents for an apartment, because that forces up the cost of the building (brownstone) which makes them sell for insane prices, which results in more rent increases"
Posted by: fsrg at January 8, 2009 2:01 PM in response to Raising the Rent
I don't blame the tenants. I don't know why there should be any blame placed on either side since I don't see where any wrong was done. If I was paying 1050 a month in rent I would certainly be vacationing often. By the same token if my landlord said to me "Hey, your paying last century's rent, do you think you could afford a little more?" I would have to comply and would not resent the landlord. I would have been expecting it every year since the time I moved in. I once lived in an amazing apartment on Columbia Heights, 1000 sq ft overlooking the promenade. Somehow I got the deal of a lifetime and was paying WAY below what the place was worth. After 3 years the landlord came and said he wanted to redo the kitchen and bath and he was going to raise the rent substantially. I understood and was grateful that I had gotten the chance to live in a place like that and I moved out. He rented the place for $5400...good for him. Went off on a tangent there, but the point is no one is at fault. It's time to get things back on track for the landlord and the tenants and there is nothing wrong with doing so and it doesn't sound like she will be putting poor people out on the streets as some have suggested. We don't even know how many incomes are in each household..could be 2 or even 3.
Posted by: boofer at January 8, 2009 2:01 PM in response to Raising the Rent
I think giving charity (below mkt rent) to those that dont ask/need is dis-respectful. You really arent a "lord" even though your the Landlord. You are simply entering an (important) business relationship.
Charge market rate rents from the beginning with a written lease that contains articulated escalations so that people can plan for the future.
To me fair, honest and clear terms at prevailing prices is the most ethical way to conduct business.
Posted by: fsrg at January 8, 2009 2:06 PM in response to Raising the Rent
fsrq --
My "silly lecture" is to ALL sides... all sides determine the market. The only party that has a CHOICE is the seller or landlord. The only "choice" the buyer or tenant has is whether or not they are going to play the game... and guess what, of course they do.
The point to my "silly lecture" is that the Market is not what should be informing prices. And I use *should* intentionally... this is because the Market is a sickness and, as we have see, the unsustainable growth in the real estate market came crashing down around our ankles. The rental market is the same unsustainable mess.
If I have a 2-unit brownstone and the 1-bedroom garden apartment is paying 2/3 of my mortgage and expenses... would you say that's OK? Of course it's legally OK. Of course it's OK in all the strict senses... but is it OK in terms of the Social Compact that all of us have lost sight of?
It's just sort of disgusting... if you make $100k, you may live somewhere safe and a reasonable distance from your work. If you make $45k (a good living in most of the country), you have to live in a sketchy neighborhood in East Bushwick and spend 3+ hrs a days getting to and from your work.
I'm not a crazy socialist -- but if a landlord feels compelled to raise his/her rent simply because they are "under market value," this is a sad testimony. If you are making a profit of your property, you are happy, you're tenants are happy... why does this landlord have to play the game and reinforce the ABSURD numbers floating around in the marketplace?
I, for one, am sickened when I hear some got a "great deal" if they are paying less than $1800 for a 1-fucking-bedroom apartment.
Posted by: tybur6 at January 8, 2009 2:46 PM in response to Raising the Rent
If you are a couple making $45k each and are spending less than $1800 a month for a one bedroom then you are spending one weeks pay OR LESS on your rent, which I was always taught was what you should budget yourself. (Why landlords require tenants make 40x the monthly rent) Many people I know in New York City spend more than that fraction because this is NEW YORK CITY. Millions of people want to live here! So if you are living somewhere where you only have to pay a quarter of your income on housing, I find it difficult to see what is disgusting about that.
Posted by: boofer at January 8, 2009 3:06 PM in response to Raising the Rent
As a renter for most of my adult life (but not all!) I'd say that a single person can likely handle an increase of 50-100 per month. If you want to increase more I would hope you would at least offer a one-year lease. Moving is a hassle and expensive, so most renters are inclined to stay put. On the other hand, if you have nice tenants who pay the rent on time and are responsible, you are taking a chance that your new renters won't work out as well.
Posted by: Carol Gardens at January 8, 2009 3:07 PM in response to Raising the Rent
Whenever I've been a tenant, the rent was always raised when the lease came up for renewal. The spot where the rent is typed in always had a higher amount than the year before. The covering letter usually explained that the rent was increasing in line with the rental market in the neighborhood. I never complained, this is business. I actually prefer the use of the terms lessor and lessee rather than landlord and tenant. Lessor and lessee, to me at least, indicate that the parties are equals in the contract, each has rights and duties that can and will be enforced in law.
I reiterate, when the lease is due to expire, send a new lease with the proposed increase in rent, with a polite, business like letter indicating that the rent is increasing in line with market changes.
Posted by: bohuma at January 8, 2009 3:17 PM in response to Raising the Rent
tybur6, you're not making any sense. the market *protects* tenants from greed. what do you think keeps landlords from charging $10,000 for a 1BR? it's not altruism. it's the fact that there are cheaper, comparable properties to be had -- i.e., a MARKET. landlords compete for tenants, particularly good and creditworthy tenants, so they can't ask for more rent that their competitors are seeking. and there are so many properties/landlords that collusion to fix prices is impossible.
the reason rents in NYC are high isn't that landlords demand them; it's because there are so many people who are willing and able to pay them.
think about this another way: if market rents fell by 20%, yet your landlord asked you to stay put and pay the same rent because s/he needed the money, would you just shrug and say "ok"? i highly doubt it. you'd request a reduction in rent (maybe a "split the difference" approach like la di da di is considering), or you'd move. and that's ok.
Posted by: z at January 8, 2009 3:18 PM in response to Raising the Rent
Boofer.... who said a couple? And who said each?
Posted by: tybur6 at January 8, 2009 3:19 PM in response to Raising the Rent
Ed, I'm definitely doing copper.
Brooklyn Plumber, according to the WFSU tables, I have 50 WFSUs in the entire building. I have 2 risers. One services 3 bathrooms @ 16.5 wfsu. Another riser services 4 kitchens(1 with dishwasher) and a half bath.. 11 wfsu.
Should i size to the entire building(1 1/4") or to the risers themselves(1").
Posted by: la di da di at November 5, 2009 5:23 PM in response to Pipe Sizing