Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's because there are a lot o f co-ops in Riverdale and the subway isn't that close by, which makes it less attractive. The closer you are to the amenities, the more you will pay here. On the flip side, the condos here can be pricey because there are fewer of them and they are newer and offer more amemities than most co-ops do. The co-ops offer a good price, but usually come with high maintenance.
A building is a building is a building. A building costs to maintain what a building costs to maintain, regardless of how it's financially structured.
Staff, utilities, materials, etc. are identical in cost for condo buildings and co-op buildings. To generalize that maintenance is "usually higher" in co-ops is inaccurate.
A side-by-side comparison of "common charges" for condos and "maintenance" for co-ops is usually quite lopsided because in a co-op, "maintenance" includes both the cost of maintaining the building AND property taxes. In a condo, they're two separate charges, and based on the structure of the taxes, you often end up paying HIGHER taxes in a condo anyway.
A building is a building is a building. A building costs to maintain what a building costs to maintain, regardless of how it's financially structured.
Staff, utilities, materials, etc. are identical in cost for condo buildings and co-op buildings. To generalize that maintenance is "usually higher" in co-ops is inaccurate.
A side-by-side comparison of "common charges" for condos and "maintenance" for co-ops is usually quite lopsided because in a co-op, "maintenance" includes both the cost of maintaining the building AND property taxes. In a condo, they're two separate charges, and based on the structure of the taxes, you often end up paying HIGHER taxes in a condo anyway.
The maintenance in co-ops also generally includes the underlying mortgage on the building itself. That element can make it higher than a condo, which doesn't include any underlying building mortgage in its monthly charges, since there is no underlying building mortgage in a condo.
Condos usually have lower maintenance fees than co-ops. That is because they have different ownership structures. Co-op owners do not own real property. They own shares in a corporation: the co-op. Apartments thought to be more desirable — larger ones, or those on high floors with better views — have more shares than smaller ones, or those on low floors that face a brick wall. Since individual owners do not own property, the real estate tax bill for the building goes to the corporation, which in turn collects those taxes based on the number of a member’s shares, as part of the maintenance fee.
In addition, co-ops often have an underlying mortgage on the entire building (which is separate from the mortgage that buyers have on an apartment). So the co-op maintenance fee often includes monthly payments on the underlying mortgage as well.
To the critics who say I am living my life irresponsibly, I disagree. I *could* pay higher rent, but it's at the point where it is not financially responsible to do so. I *could* have bought places in past, but those were tiny studios, or borrowing a lot of money (which at the time I was glad I did not, as the 2009 financial crisis did a whammy on my employment stability and dampened earnings for a 5-6 year period). I don't think I made any missteps in the past, and I don't think paying $3,500/month shows I've been needing a financial planner for the past years.
There's been a value to me for living in Manhattan, but $4K for this particular 1BR has crossed the line. I don't think the landlord will get that rent, but what do I know? I do know that landlords don't care, and unless others believe/act like me / start moving out, rents will continue to keep going up. I went on streeteasy and was really surprised that people are paying $4K a month for a 1BR with appliances from 1994, although it only costs the landlord $1K to update them. So it seems like people are content to pay the asking price.
But for me, for the first time ever - and not on my own terms - I'm going to look to settle outside of Manhattan, and maybe even somewhere on the Metro North and save the NYC tax while I'm at it.
My wife has only lived in Manhattan for a year and is a little disappointed. But she works for the city in Downtown manhattan and on her own wouldn't even be able to afford to live in Manhattan (which I find ironic).
As far as I know, most coops do have underlying building mortgages. I don't know if there's a published percentage out there. If you know where to find something like that, I'd be interested in seeing the numbers.
A building is a building is a building. A building costs to maintain what a building costs to maintain, regardless of how it's financially structured.
Staff, utilities, materials, etc. are identical in cost for condo buildings and co-op buildings. To generalize that maintenance is "usually higher" in co-ops is inaccurate.
A side-by-side comparison of "common charges" for condos and "maintenance" for co-ops is usually quite lopsided because in a co-op, "maintenance" includes both the cost of maintaining the building AND property taxes. In a condo, they're two separate charges, and based on the structure of the taxes, you often end up paying HIGHER taxes in a condo anyway.
My comments are not about co-ops in general, but rather co-ops in Riverdale where maintenance tends be higher. There are fewer condos here in comparison to co-ops and they are usually newer, so they tend to hold their value more.
You pay the rent you can afford, and in this city, $3500 is pretty much an entry-level rent into Manhattan.
Most renters are paying just barely what they can afford, and have no money left over for a down payment.
How is that doing something "wrong"?
$3,500 is not entry level for manhattan for a tiny 1 bed. Far from it.
if $3,500 a month rent is not allowing you to save money, then you can't afford it and should find something else. You can get a nice 1 bed in many nice places in NYC for under $2,000. And if you MUST do manhattan then you can still find a 1 bed for under 2500.
Just because you have the money for something doesn't mean you can afford it.
To the critics who say I am living my life irresponsibly, I disagree. I *could* pay higher rent, but it's at the point where it is not financially responsible to do so. I *could* have bought places in past, but those were tiny studios, or borrowing a lot of money (which at the time I was glad I did not, as the 2009 financial crisis did a whammy on my employment stability and dampened earnings for a 5-6 year period). I don't think I made any missteps in the past, and I don't think paying $3,500/month shows I've been needing a financial planner for the past years.
There's been a value to me for living in Manhattan, but $4K for this particular 1BR has crossed the line. I don't think the landlord will get that rent, but what do I know? I do know that landlords don't care, and unless others believe/act like me / start moving out, rents will continue to keep going up. I went on streeteasy and was really surprised that people are paying $4K a month for a 1BR with appliances from 1994, although it only costs the landlord $1K to update them. So it seems like people are content to pay the asking price.
I am glad you don't have any regret with your decision. Most of us go through this process in our mid 20's. We get out of college (21-22 years old), move to Manhattan, and pay outrageous prices while living with roommates in a small place (want to enjoy the best of the city). After a while (2-4 years) you realize it irresponsible to live paycheck to paycheck. You move out to the outer boroughs/suburbs, because you know you need to save up for that nice property if you hope to settle down one day (otherwise you leave the state). By late 20's and early 30's they should be owning a place (hopefully have a life partner who has been doing the same and can help).
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrozenCucumber
But for me, for the first time ever - and not on my own terms - I'm going to look to settle outside of Manhattan, and maybe even somewhere on the Metro North and save the NYC tax while I'm at it.
Unless you are very wealthy (career or support of family), we all have to compromise in some ways. No one is happy about it, but such is life in NYC. The quicker your willing to compromise the easier the future will be as after you settle down, you need to start saving money for raising children.
As people have pointed out there is better alternative for housing, if your willing to compromise location and/or quality of the building.
In addition, if you work in the private sector with a employer who is unwilling to guarantee you a pension. You will need to invest in a 401K or assets that generate revenue/appreciate over time. Most people have all their net worth tied to their property which can lead to trouble if you look to sell the property at the wrong time.
It is difficult to survive, in NYC. I don't mean to be rude by telling you to seek financial planner/advisory. If anything the average person needs one more than ever, with stagnant wages and rising cost there is less room for mistakes.
I am right there with you. Paying around the same prices, same age. I am in process of signing a six month lease at my current place as opposed to renewing for a year, bc I am making plans to leave the area.
I always promised myself I wouldn't be one of those guys commuting an hour and a half each way on the LIRR or NJ transit, and think the overall quality of life here is somewhat terrible. I am actively looking in brickell miami, which is a very nice and modern part of miami. Weather is great, that part of the city is clean and ultra modern, and I enjoy it down there immensely. I know the carolinas and Texas are hot areas for people in similar situations.
I am actively looking in brickell miami, which is a very nice and modern part of miami. Weather is great, that part of the city is clean and ultra modern, and I enjoy it down there immensely. I know the carolinas and Texas are hot areas for people in similar situations.
Brickell (downtown, miami) has been recently developed with a lot of luxury apartments by the waterfront. I would caution against owning an apartment there being as you are the face of any incoming hurricane (every summer you will need to worry, if the hurricane developing in the Atlantic ocean will be aiming for you) and most people commute to the downtown area for work. It feels empty after working hours when everyone leaves. If you seek quality of life you should consider south beach.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
