CatDog wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
This legislation was introduced by Osborne, I spoke against it, yet this shows how this administration is using fees or create higher fees while stating taxes are not going up. It is only a matter of time before this city starts taxing people for regular rentals.

Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
They are not receiving the same service as a hotel such as maid service or breakfast bar. This is just a tax that the small homeowner must eat.

you've got to be f**king kidding me. It's a tax on sales you're generating. The customer pays it. There is just no pleasing you.

Though I do hope that it will limit the frequency or something. I would be really upset if my downstairs neighbors had a constant flux of strangers in and out of the building.

Yvonne wrote:
They are not receiving the same service as a hotel such as maid service or breakfast bar. This is just a tax that the small homeowner must eat.

Yvonne wrote:
The real question is - does this property come with parking? The house next to his has parking, is that part of his property? Or will he rent a garage on Mountain Road? The mayor has been eliminating parking for regular folks all over JC.

I think they *know* there is a dearth of condo options in DTJC and hoping to capitalize on that.

kencares wrote:
Yes. Now is the time to sell, not buy.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

K-Lo wrote:
Does this elevator go all the way down to the platform? Cannot figure out the logistics.

I don't see how this elevator can make it to the platform from where it is being built. As far as I can tell, the platform is running under Christopher Columbus Drive in that area. I say this based on a mental projection of the two stairwell entry points over by Grove and Columbus (from the North entrance you have to travel to the South to the reach the second set of stairs, and from the South entrance you travel North to reach the same set of stairs) so I am missing something. Unless, of course, they are building two elevators, and the ride from street surface to platform will involve a transfer.

jerseymom wrote:
You can show up and say, yes, I parked, I'm so sorry, but it's an extreme hardship to pay $50 (dress for court and be respectful). If you do show up and they find you guilty, I believe you end up with your ticket costs PLUS court costs.

They can read BS excuses from a mile away so avoid those - and I've seen some judges tear people up when the BS gets thick. You can always make a payment plan and just pay the $50 in increments.

Make sure you get a receipt and proof of payment of the ticket. KEEP THIS - for a while. These things sometimes don't get recorded in the municipal computers correctly.

heights wrote:
$1800 seems kind of high for "affordable" the average rent in Jersey City is hovering over a grand if not less. I would think $800 would be the better number. Perhaps it is the market value for the neighborhood income.

hadenough wrote:
I would like some input from folks on jclist if you have time.

If you knew that a real estate agent was held in an ethics violation for dishonesty, and was then PROMOTED by the real estate agency, would you trust that agency going forward?

Thank you for taking the time to respond to this question.

JGJDNYCJC wrote:
Quote:

third_street_hats wrote:
re: JC compared to Hoboken

You're comparing what are literally order of magnitude differences in city size (1.3sqm / 15sqm). I'm sure a more accurate comparison worthy of assessment would be all of downtown to Hoboken.

Exactly. Bad journalism strikes again.

Hoboken is really just one neighborhood like a Harlem or a Tribeca, even though it's, legally speaking, a city.

My DTJC home is up almost 60% in value since I bought it 3 years ago.

erstrecs wrote:
How did we get 14 posts in without anyone mentioning the great Taqueria Downtown?

Monroe wrote:
I don't differ often from Bodipooh, as I don't think the Shop Rite on Marin is bad at all. And while some would say that a WF going into Newark shows it can be done, it's just not going to happen here.

Maise wrote:
I did. They are the absolute worst. I knew going in that they had a bad reputation and returned the apartment in pristine condition. I also documented the apartment very thoroughly upon taking possession.

They ended up charging me $600 for the most ridiculous things (to the point where I didn't have any pictures of the items from when I moved in).

-$200 for a tiny, tiny chip on one of the kitchen tiles.
-$200 for a tiny chip on the bath tub enamal
-$200 for a tiny scratch on the washing machine.

I am fairly certain all of the items they charged me for were present when I moved in, but I did not note the items on my move-in inspection (as I likely didn't notice them) and didn't take any pictures of the tiny chips / scratches as I didn't think twice about them. They were all comically small. They also tried to charge me for not having the carpet cleaned before moving out. I knew this was something they focused on and was luckily able to show them the receipt from the carpet cleaning person I hired and they reversed the charges. The worst part is I am pretty certain they didn't end up fixing any of the items they charged me for and will likely ding the next person for them.

I don't like calling people out, but property manager Erin is not a nice person and does not treat her tenants fairly. She has a bad reputation among most people I know that live there (as well as some of the employees if you ask them).

I would say that unless they are trying to get more than $800 out of you, its likely easier to just give in to them and get the rest of your deposit back. You can try to take them to small claims court and will likely win if you have a case, but its just not worth the time, money and risk that you will lose and have to pay them even more.

As you can see from their online reviews, they clearly don't care about having this reputation. I heard from someone I know still living there that they are asking for current residents to put up more money in the security deposit upon renewing leases. They are the worst!

I enjoyed living there, but would seriously think twice about recommending the building after how they handled my move out and security deposit.

Yvonne wrote:
The city never wanted to address the issue of parking, this is unfortunate. When land was available, I urged the city government to build municipal garages. I knew people who left JC due to parking, between work, school, and doctor's appointments, they could not live in JC, even though their roots go back over 100 years.

Monroe wrote:
At first I thought they were objecting to moving up the time for the conferences, but found out talking tonight to a teacher that the district wanted to add another 1/2 hour to the workday.

A change like that has to be negotiated in a contract. The teachers, in this instance, didn't behave badly.

nylucy wrote:
I believe the original post asked for "any real insight on PS 16". I think that if you do not have any personal experience with the school you should keep your own (uninformed) thoughts to yourself. I do have a child at this school and we have been very happy with our experience there. I love the diverse, neighborhood feel of it. The principal and CPA are wonderful and super-involved. I think this school will just keep getting better as parents continue to become more and more involved in the community.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

JC_rider wrote:
Quote:

equ wrote:
My understanding was that the landowner (owner of the liquor store-like place next door) pushed Rustique out (who built the oven in the first place) and hired his employee... This, and their copying but not matching Rustique pizza was the reason I hardly ever frequented PH (even though it's an easy location for me).

From my POV, this is either karma coming to bite back the landlord/liquor/fake-pizza guy or he decided he can hire better people do sth else more profitable with the space. Not a fan of this guy at all...

I remember that the owner jacked up the rent and pushed out the Rustique owner. I tried Rustique pizza after they relocated and the pizza was not the same most likely due to the oven.

I wonder if the owner is pulling the same trick of raising the rent again.

I don't think you understand the history of what happened. The owner that pushed out Rustique is the guy running PHBOP. He IS the owner of both the wine/liquor store AND the pizzeria space. So, unless you think the guy is bipolar and raising the rent on himself, your statement makes ZERO sense.

While I found the whole episode distasteful, there was plenty of blame to go around. The Rustique owners were just plain dumb in terms of business acumen. They decided to have a custom made oven built into the space. Actually built INTO the space. It can't be moved, or taken out. They decided to do THAT right towards the end of their lease agreement. Any savvy business owner that doesn't own its space would have negotiated a lease extension/renewal AHEAD of such an investment. They didn't. When it came time to negotiate a new lease agreement, the wine/liquor store owner negotiated (in bad faith, by most accounts) by raising their rent and pushing them out. I used to patronize the wine shop from time to time when I would pick up wine to take to Satis if I had forgotten to bring my own. Alas, Satis is no longer BYOB, so my needs for wine in the area have ceased. But, truth be told, the whole Rustique debacle was a big turn off and I really stopped patronizing either store. Too bad for me, as I really thought the PHBOP pizza was good.

Poncho11 wrote:
With the current rise in rents, many places will be closing.Business's who own their own place are set, but then again, who owns their own property ? Stella's, Helen's,
Torico's,LaConguita, Unless they have a good , long lease their under a threat of someone else taking over. Retailers, such as, Morlees, Village liquors, Postnet , Downtown Hardware will stick around. Other then Village Liquors the other three have been around a long time.

CdeCoincy wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Bubble_Tea wrote:
Quote:

fat-ass-bike wrote:
Lets not kid ourselves, many of these new high rises are being built by the same developers and investors and will often use the same realtors as other developers to rent out these properties.
It wouldn't surprise me that there is a simple formula used to maintain a certain price - Not for one minute would there be any price war or lowering of prices and realtors would push tenants into developer owned rentals then privately own rentals.

A simple formula?? This isn't voodoo. Rental prices are determined on the market, on the basis of supply and demand.

Dude, don't bother. Conspiracy theorists are impervious to logic. He is convinced there is a fix, and not enough is being done to keep DTJC poor or lower middle class. That's his main concern right now. The rental market in DTJC is RED HOT. This is not some sort of conspiracy theory. Lots of people are flocking to DTJC and the prices reflect that. Every building coming on the market is leased up within a month or two, at pretty much asking price. The best "deal" you will score is a free month's rent with little room for negotiating. If you don't want it, someone else will. I see no slowing down any time soon. The way buildings are coming onto the market, there is little competition between them: as one rents out, the next opens up for leasing. Warren at York was 90% leased in a month, and so was The Art House.

agree - the more people who move here, the more people move here. When colleague move here and tell their co-workers about the commute, the restos, etc. more people check out dtjc and maybe other 'hoods as well. As far as a price fixing conspiracy among landlords, remember: there is no honor among thieves.

vrug wrote:
For lovers of this place, check out rustique in the hamilton park/harismus cove area. Just don't order delivery (according to the reviews).

Also worth a crack is Krispy Pizza.