Quote:
Originally Posted by Emm0011
Saw that. I wonder if that tenant really wants to stay there or was hoping for a humongous buyout. Now he can enjoy a few years of construction.
|
IIRC Extell offered this guy very decent money. He's just one of those RS tenants who believe they own a building and can dictate what happens. His rent isn't very cheap for that busted building, but hey, now he can remain and be happy.
"The tenant, Greg Marshall, a longtime resident in his 40s, is fighting Extell’s attempts to demolish the building, arguing that the developer has not provided sufficient detail on what it plans to build, or proven its ability to pay for the project. The state agency that administers rent regulations in these cases is refusing to allow Extell to decline Mr. Marshall’s rent renewal until those conditions are met. Before his lease expired last year, his rent was $1,852 a month. He did not return requests for comment."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/10/r...velopment.html
Find it scandalous that one or a few eejits can hold up development just because they're in a rent regulated building. Am not saying people should be kicked to curb, but after several decent to good offers are declined a LL should have ability to do what he wants with his property.
Mr. Marshall is in his 40's now, wait ten or twenty years, if the guy is still there bet he'll be kicking himself daily for not taking money and running.
Yeah, he'll be living in an newly upscale area, but in a busted RS walkup apartment that likely won't see much money put into it in coming years. Even if Extell begins renting out vacate units like other LLs where units are largely or mostly below market, they won't but any more money into place other than doing what is required by law.