jcwalkingman wrote:
That's also true.

GS has a tenant (I forget which bank) taking up a substantial portion of its current JC office tower, and it took a huge incentive from the state of New Jersey to get that tenant in place (gotta love how NJ basically passes tax payer money directly to landlords through these Grow NJ EDA incentives...).

hero69 wrote:
so now i see that hilary clinton is in favor of letting msi-managed puerto rico file for chapter 9 which is only available to municipalities. if illinois can not file for chapter 9, why should puerto rico be able to while it also gets benefit of being able to offer lower rates on its debt since interest on pr debt is triple tax free (another subsidy).

one would have thought democrats would have learned something. most of pr's economy is underground and the pr government needs to find a way to tax this.

anyway, if democrats keep up with nonsense of letting pr file bankruptcy, they will be even more in the minority come 2016.

tommyc_37 wrote:
Yet most of the new buildings going up are rentals. When will we see a large influx of condos onto the market? The housing prices are inflated.

baxtyre wrote:
I'm not even sure they want to rent out the apartment if I were to leave, since the two below me have been empty since they bought the building in April. I'm guessing they just want me out to renovate it and increase the rent even higher than 2k--as has happened to several other brownstones on my block--or even just sell the building itself.

I also should have mentioned in my original post that I received this letter of an increase yesterday, and they are stating they need a decision by June 30. Not sure if that makes a difference, the fact that they are only giving me 2 weeks.

jerseymom wrote: Quote:

user1111 wrote: If its not under rent control then you either agree to pay it or move.

No, that's not the case at all. A rental increase of 50% could reasonably be considered by the courts to be "unconscionable." You have every right to fight this in court, and do not suggest a number yourself if you are amenable to an increase. Let the judge decide what is a "reasonable" amount to raise the rent - if at all. And shame on Dixon for rent gouging like this. They are counting on folks not understanding the laws and just moving away. I would absolutely fight this. Read Below: Unconscionable rent increases (Excerpt) Under the Anti-Eviction Act, a landlord cannot make you pay an increase in rent that is so large that it is unconscionable, meaning that it is extremely harsh or so un- reasonable as to be shocking. Unconscionability is not important to tenants if the apartment, house, or mobile home is covered by a rent control ordinance adopted by the city or township. In that situation, rent control limits the amount of the rent in- crease. Also, if you live in subsidized housing, or receive Section 8, federal law will determine how much your rent can be increased. In all other cases, the only protection you have is that the statute states that the rent increase cannot be unconsciona- ble. Cite: N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1(f). Whether an increase is unconscionable depends on the facts of each case. The eviction law does not state what makes an increase unconscionable. In deciding disputes between tenants and their landlords over rent increases, judges have not de- fined how large an increase must be in dollars or percentages to be unconscionable. It is clear that some rent increases are unconscionable because the increase is much larger than the prior rent, or because the landlord has asked for many small increases in a short period of time that all add up to a large increase. For example, an increase of over 20 percent, if made by the landlord without a very good reason, could be un- conscionable. Even a five percent increase could be unconscionable if the conditions in the building are very bad and the landlord has failed to make needed repairs. If you believe that the rent increase your landlord is asking for may be unconscio- nable, you can refuse to pay the increase. Your landlord can then take you to court to try to evict you for nonpayment of the rent increase. If the notice ending your lease and increasing your rent is proper, then you can defend against the increase in court by arguing that the increase is unconscionable.

Yvonne wrote:
A parking garage is not a misuse of land. Your car is your second most valuable piece of property a person's own after their home.

Yvonne wrote:
Municipal parking lots in the area, plus another garage being built between 23rd and 24th streets make the spot an ideal place for residents to stroll, dine and shop, Davis said.

http://www.nj.com/jjournal-news/index ... ne_mayo.html#incart_river

neverleft wrote:
The PANYNJ link has ridership by station month/hour data for 2012 to 2015. Interesting.

Traffic & Volume Information

http://www.panynj.gov/path/statistics.html

bodhipooh wrote:

As for property rights and rates of ownership in Europe, I think you are again misinformed. For most Europeans, home ownership is very, very hard. And, often time, not even desirable. It's complicated, but in some countries (Germany, for example) renting is actually encouraged by governmental policies. And, in many other countries, ability to borrow money for a mortgage is very hard. Many European acquaintances of mine marvel at the ease with which you can borrow money in the US for a mortgage. In most cases, in their home countries, you have to be able to put down HUGE down payments that make home ownership a very distant possibility for most young people. I have heard that in some countries you must have on hand at least 50% of the total worth of the property. Compare that with our "traditional" 20% which is now lowered to anywhere from 3% to 20%.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Conformist wrote:
The no-tall-buildings rule seems to have been taken as gospel without any evidence by a certain school of urban planning. The article is mostly right, but they've imbued their thinking with the short-building mysticism that has no basis in reality.

I am not well versed on where this whole "only short buildings" philosophy comes from, but I would guess it is heavily influenced by those who look to past architecture as their guiding principle. I totally get that old European architecture can be beautiful (it is no coincidence that almost everyone that visits old European cities is always impressed by the architecture) but to limit ourselves to those types of buildings of that height seems impractical on the face of increasing density and practicality. Again, I definitely believe that a proliferation of buildings with 50+ stories would be impractical and undesirable, but I think 10-20 story buildings are fine and manageable.

Yvonne wrote:
I usually watch the Catholic network EWTN, and a program came on about same sex attraction. It was 5 men and 2 woman. All seven decided to lead a chaste life, although many mentioned they are still attracted to the same sex. The men said an older male had sex with them at 13 or 14 years of age and the women said they were afraid of the abuse they saw in domestic violence with men and started dating women. If there was a link to the show I would post it.
The bottom line is, Catholics do not pray away gayness.
Also, I picked up I believe People's Magazine awhile back waiting in a doctor's office many years ago. It quoted the former partner of Anthony Perkins, apparently, Anthony was getting some flack from the gay community for going for treatment for his "gayness." His former partner told the community to leave Anthony alone because he was unhappy as a gay male. Anthony Perkins was still alive when this article came out. Do I think children should be subjected to this? No, but adults, like Anthony Perkins should have that choice. I understand the Archdiocese of Newark runs that program on living a chaste lifestyle called Courage.

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

tommyc_37 wrote:
Does anybody know if a lot of the high-rise developments in Brooklyn and Queens have as much parking as Jersey City's buildings have typically been including?

This has been a major issue with creating new housing in Brooklyn in Queens -- antiquated parking requirements, especially on smaller buildings -- lead to higher costs for construction and often oddly designed buildings with parking at street level.

Binky wrote:
There is no source listed for this story. It's third hand and doesn't even include the name of the town so that it could be fact-checked through the police.
In other words, it's been made up from whole cloth to get people worked up into a lather.
I hope you realized that when you posted it.

jmiz wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
In 1980, I started to work for a Catholic School in NYC. My principal paid taxes to NJ not NY. The following year, I had to pay NY state and NYC taxes. You are required to pay taxes to NY not NJ if you work in NY. My principal made the corrections when NYS came after me.

Hopefully you've changed your ways.

NJ residents do NOT pay NYC Local taxes. That's for residents of NYC only. If you do pay NYC Local as an NJ resident, you should get every last penny of that back.


Long story short: You will only get a NJ W-2 if your employer takes out NJ state taxes. If they don't, you'll receive just a Fed and NY State tax form. You'll still have to pay taxes to both states, but you'll get a credit for most of what you owe on the NJ side.

brewster wrote:
Your 4 unit prospect will only fall under NJ anti-eviction law. This guarantees lease renewal and restricts raises to something that would not be considered "unconscionable" by a judge. You will also get 5 year "green card" inspections by the state. You would not need to issue rental statements like you describe.

MDM, are you sure about the commercial being considered a unit for RC? When I looked into it years ago while viewing properties, I was told it did not. This makes sense, it's not a "residential housing unit". The big downside to those properties is they are commercial, requiring commercial mortgages with large downpayments and higher rates.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Conformist wrote:
... they don't plan to stay in New Jersey thereafter, especially since they were never able to convince the top brass to move to New Jersey.

I would be very surprised if this is true. The Goldman Sachs move to JC is not an isolated case. More and more law firms, hedge funds and other financial firms are moving a LOT of their back room operations to locations outside of NYC. With networking technologies that allow for offices over disparate locations to work and collaborate as if they were literally one door over, many firms have come to realize that paying premium rates on office space in NYC (what's the current rate per sq ft in Midtown and/or Downtown!?) is not worth it when you can buy space elsewhere (a client of mine just moved ALL of their support and backroom operations to Florida) for a fraction of the cost. Over the past year or two, many of my clients in Wall Street have leased and/or announced plans to move their staff to JC, keeping a small footprint in NY to use for upper management, some conference rooms and working offices, and for the NYC corporate address.

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
They give out millions and millions of dollars in bonuses every year to partners, but they can't fix their own building? And Fulop as an ex-employee has no juice to get this eyesore fixed?

I thought the rumor was they were moving out of this building. If true, it explains why they don't want to pay to maintain it.

i thought i read somewhere that gs was looking to build another building in jc,which was surprising given office vacancies in north jersey

dtjcview wrote:
As far as I know - this is an issue with every single high-rise building, period. Ice sheets form on sides of buildings, then it slips off and falls when it starts to melt. Ever seen the yellow tape around the WFC?

You could just as easily die from falling ice from a 5-story building.

Vigilante wrote:
Anyone who has seen the newer construction in downtown JC could tell you how cheap and flimsy the materials are that are used. The only building I would move into is the Hamilton Place building and that's because it was built on the bones of the old St. Francis Hospital.

dtjcview wrote:
Looks like LHS. I'd say f%%k that and f%%k LSC. I'd rather have LHS over LSC.

jerseymom wrote:
Quote:

Conformist wrote:
Wasn't there a huge fire at Avalon Edgewater during construction about ten years ago as well? I seem to remember an enormous fire that nearly spread to the nearby oil tanks.

By James Kleimann | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
Email the author | Follow on Twitter
on January 21, 2015 at 8:30 PM, updated January 22, 2015 at 12:42 AM

It's not the first time a massive inferno has engulfed the Avalon apartment complex ?? the 408-unit building overlooking the Palisades Cliffs was under construction on Aug. 30, 2000 when a fast-moving fire ripped through the property and destroyed a dozen surrounding homes before eventually fizzling out.

Though no deaths or serious injuries were recorded, the speed and ferocity of the blaze made it one of the most memorable in the history of Bergen County.

More - NJ.com

Voyeur wrote:
Quote:

JGJDNYCJC wrote:

Developer/builder is the N.Am. sub of China State Construction Engineering.

http://www.chinaconstruction.us/Overview.jsp?id=2

The units will go to whomever is willing to pay. Given economic and wealth trends in China, there is a strong possibility that many buyers will emanate from China.

Perhaps - we'll have to wait and see.

It's worth mentioning that in addition to the unpleasant maintenance and property taxes that any foreign buyer would face, non-US citizens have 10% of the total sale price withheld at the time of sale as taxable income under FIRPTA if the sale is for more than $300,000 and the property has appreciated since purchase.

This is a tax that most Americans - understandably - are not aware of, but it is a big disincentive for upper-middle class Europeans considering a holiday home in Florida. Many opt to buy somewhere in the Med instead to avoid FIRPTA.

asny10011 wrote:
Perhaps they may offer it as a EB5 visa program so investors can loan some money to build it and get citizenship at the same time. US immigration program is pretty cheap at 500K. It is relatively cheap compared to other countries who offer their citizenship for sale.