Rent Control, NYCHA, 80/20 vs. Market Rate (apartments, subsidized, income)

[WithDisp]

This thread primarily deals with 2 bedroom or larger apartments in Manhattan.

Is it just me, or does it appear that the differential between Subsidized apartments and Market Rate is quite ridiculous?

It seems to me you're either paying 100% of what your apartment is worth, or less than 50% and there is little to no in-between.

For 1 Bedrooms and smaller, Rent Stabilization can often make an apt. at 80% or so of what the going rate is, but such programs don't exist in Manhattan for anything larger. (Since it's nearly impossible to find a 2 BR under 2500 that has a building qualified for stabilization).


Is this part of the cause of the great disparity of wealth in the city?

[mathjak107]

not true at all , every apartment is different and it matters if your talking rent control or rent stabilized. there is a big difference between the two .

after 30 plus years we are at about 80% market rents in our stabilized apartment.

[WithDisp]

Originally Posted by mathjak107

not true at all , every apartment is different and it matters if your talking rent control or rent stabilized. there is a big difference between the two .

after 30 plus years we are at about 80% market rents in our stabilized apartment.

The title of the thread does not include rent stabilization, as it can be an exception to the rule in question- although, not in the case as you put it.

30 years ago, that may have been the case.

Today, there are few to no multiple bedroom units in Manhattan under 2500 that are rent stabilized.

[Kefir King]

Is it just me, or does it appear that the differential between Subsidized apartments and Market Rate is quite ridiculous?

It parallels the massive and "ridiculous" income disparity in the City.