For Post-Rent Control Real Estate, Leave Brooklyn
It’s hard to feel sorry for folks blessed enough to occupy rent-controlled real estate. But such apartments can be a bit of a curse; who can summon the courage to leave them? Well, the NY Times profiles a woman in “The Hunt” column of the real estate section who wished to break free of her…
It’s hard to feel sorry for folks blessed enough to occupy rent-controlled real estate. But such apartments can be a bit of a curse; who can summon the courage to leave them? Well, the NY Times profiles a woman in “The Hunt” column of the real estate section who wished to break free of her $700, two-bedroom apartment in Midwood. LaVerne Walker is an accountant and frequenter of an investment club, and wanted to own for the tax deductions alone among other considerations. Her budget: $250,000, and, predictably enough, she couldn’t find a two-bedroom for that in Brooklyn. Moral of the story: move to Jersey City, where she got a three-bedroom for $230,000. Maybe she can see Brooklyn from there?
Life After Rent Control [NY Times]
Photo by mudpig.
Jersey City has rent control. This is why the apartments there are so crappy, compared to say Stamford.
Suburbandude, it has always been my contention that the sales prices of apartment buildings with rent regulated apartments should reflect the rent roll. If speculators weren’t so willing to pay incredible multipliers, the balance sheet would look different. Or, investors can stop trying to have it both ways and just admit that they purchased for long-term capital gain.
I agree with PitBullNYC—and Jersey City is also the town of my birth. I know a bunch of people that have restored townhouses there. Brooklyn it ain’t but the bang for the buck is just incredible. My wife to be and I would consider moving there but she’s got a great gig in Brooklyn that she’d rather not leave…
Huh. She could have easily found a co-op for under 250k in Midwood (or Gravesend, or Flatbush, or…) — maybe not a 3-bedroom, but there’s just one of her, yes?
What’s Charlie Rangel’s position on this???
It has always been my contention that if the the government imposes rent control or rent stabilization, than it is the government (a/k/a all the taxpayers) who should pay the landlords the difference between the market rent and the stabilized rent. Of course this will never happen, because the government would be directly subsidizing fat-cat rent stabilized tenants who own houses in East Hampton. So we’re stuck with the current system, which puts the burden, unjustifiably, on the landlords.
aren’t a lot of rent controlled (moreso than rent stabalized places) kinda dingy and dumpy, for obvious reasons i guess? if had that kind of dough (i know to many that seems like not much, but to many, like me that’s a LOT), id rather have a nicer apartment (yes even in jersey city.. i was born in jc!) than a dingy rent-controlled one. perhaps not tho, i dont know.
-rob
Shes not going to be moving anywhere for the tax deduction thats for sure.
At the risk of hijacking this, consider the plight of Ella Taliercio who moved into her Park Slope two-bedroom on Carroll Street in 1958, is paying $148 now and might be evicted by Berkeley Carroll school.
Staunch proponent of rent control that I am, even I can see that maybe she should be paying something more, but otoh can anyone also see there’s something not quite right about evicting her?
http://onlytheblogknowsbrooklyn.typepad.com/only_the_blog_knows_brook/2008/10/correction-to-b.html