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.
The only thing I agree with is with this statement:
“Maybe this is a false assumption, but given the current state of lower-income housing in New York, why should I trust that the city will maintain its 100% affordable rental buildings over time?”
This is why I think that 100% affordable is not really that good of a good deal, but that instead an 80/20 is.
The article also mentions some guy from France, "Pierre" (out of all names) who complains that he spends part of his time in France and that he can't sublet. This isn't 100% true. Some affordable housing landlords allow you to sublet.
The only thing I agree with is with this statement:
“Maybe this is a false assumption, but given the current state of lower-income housing in New York, why should I trust that the city will maintain its 100% affordable rental buildings over time?”
This is why I think that 100% affordable is not really that good of a good deal, but that instead an 80/20 is.
The article also mentions some guy from France, "Pierre" (out of all names) who complains that he spends part of his time in France and that he can't sublet. This isn't 100% true. Some affordable housing landlords allow you to sublet.
I'm not French so it definitely isn't me. I've never applied to such lotteries. I think I have too much pride. I either pay market rate rent and plan to do so until I'm ready to own. I'm not really a fan of these housing lotteries and I'm not a fan of taxpayers subsidizing such programs.
The only thing I agree with is with this statement:
“Maybe this is a false assumption, but given the current state of lower-income housing in New York, why should I trust that the city will maintain its 100% affordable rental buildings over time?”
Agreed.
The real issue is rents in the *middle* aren't that *affordable* to begin with. (My co-worker currently pays $1,875 a month for a market-rate unit. An affordable unit in his income range is $2,200) On top of that, the income bands are so narrow, more often than not you'll make *too much* for most, and then *not enough* for the rest. And then to add insult to injury, you're vying for like 3 applicable units against 100,000+ other people.
In short, not enough competitive offerings, so people would just go market rate than deal with the hoops and hurdles.
And then, middle incomers are not paying the $5, they're paying $10.
It really comes down to "how much do I want a brand new apartment?"
As in all such decisions, it depend on what you have now.
For some people, getting a lottery apartment that's rent-stabilized has value if you're renting a place with no tenant protections.
Also, I don't understand this passage from the article;
Upkeep and Access to Building Amenities
In addition to concerns about potentially higher rents, excessive paperwork, and inability to sublet, both of the couples interviewed for this article expressed doubts that the buildings for which they had been selected would, in fact, be kept up over time. As Catherine said, “Maybe this is a false assumption, but given the current state of lower-income housing in New York, why should I trust that the city will maintain its 100% affordable rental buildings over time?
Why should the city maintain these buildings? They are privately owned. They're not NYCHA.
Last edited by macnyc2003; 04-16-2018 at 04:15 PM..
As in all such decisions, it depend on what you have now.
For some people, getting a lottery apartment that's rent-stabilized has value if you're renting a place with no tenant protections.
Also, I don't understand this passage from the article;
Upkeep and Access to Building Amenities
In addition to concerns about potentially higher rents, excessive paperwork, and inability to sublet, both of the couples interviewed for this article expressed doubts that the buildings for which they had been selected would, in fact, be kept up over time. As Catherine said, “Maybe this is a false assumption, but given the current state of lower-income housing in New York, why should I trust that the city will maintain its 100% affordable rental buildings over time?
Why should the city maintain these buildings? They are privately owned. They're not NYCHA.
Why shouldn't they? Let developers built MARKET RATE and let the market dictate prices! All of subsidizing crap going on. It doesn't work.
As in all such decisions, it depend on what you have now.
For some people, getting a lottery apartment that's rent-stabilized has value if you're renting a place with no tenant protections.
Also, I don't understand this passage from the article;
Upkeep and Access to Building Amenities
In addition to concerns about potentially higher rents, excessive paperwork, and inability to sublet, both of the couples interviewed for this article expressed doubts that the buildings for which they had been selected would, in fact, be kept up over time. As Catherine said, “Maybe this is a false assumption, but given the current state of lower-income housing in New York, why should I trust that the city will maintain its 100% affordable rental buildings over time?
Why should the city maintain these buildings? They are privately owned. They're not NYCHA.
I think because developers are getting tax breaks and with those breaks they are able to upkeep these, “projects.”
A family of 6 bringing in $182k annually is NOT "middle income". That is 30k per adult. Even factoring in 2 working adults and 4 under-age kids it's not enough. Do they even have 4 bedroom units???
They must have some STRONG Cheeba in Gracie Mansion.
That woman in the article wasn't to sure what she was talking about with regard to upkeep and amenities. If someone in the building is paying 10K for a 2 bedroom, I doubt the building would deliberately keep the place run down while charging someone 10K. Being in whatever building she got called for would be the epitome of living life in a hotel. Except maybe that lottery she got called for in Brooklyn.
If the unit is rent stabilized, so are all the other units, so she really has no clue what she was talking about. For a teacher, I was surprised she has such limited insight on the matter. I was a bit shocked by her salary. If we could all be so lucky to marry a man that we also consider a checking account with a high balance. We could all have 2 kids, live in NYC, and make 35K. She has the life!
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.
