Re: Is Jersey City Real Estate in a bubble?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
|
prices the same as the website if it is the oakman.
Quote:
Posted on: 2015/10/22 0:49
|
|||
|
Re: Early Morning Run
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
|
yep, i take one of the earliest path trains and have been almost hit a few times by people speeding through stop signs.
is there anything one can do when you see people speeding through residential neighborhoods?
Posted on: 2015/8/27 15:49
|
|||
|
Re: Fulop to solicit proposals from for-profit companies to replace FOL in running the Loew’s theater
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
|
Quote:
That is incorrect. according to the study, the city collects almost 18 million more. However, the district and the school district get much less. the total amount of PILOT payments in 2014 to Jersey City was $119,230,890. If instead the properties, would pay the full taxes on "assessed value" The total amount of what would have been paid under conventional taxes is $199,810,593 of which: $101,302,949 would be allocated to Jersey City $52,062,566 would be allocated to the school system $46,445,077 would be allocated to the county
Posted on: 2015/8/14 20:48
|
|||
|
Re: Is Jersey City Real Estate in a bubble?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
|
there are some statistics available online, here are some links
Foreign buyers prefer urban/city areas. Last year, 30-40% of the Manhattan market was foreign buyers. I would expect some spillover to JC and places like Princeton (parents buying properties for kids etc). The median Chinese buyer purchase price across the US is ~500k. http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/wh ... p-real-estate-in-the-u-s/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/article ... ve-u-s-foreign-sales-jump http://www.realtor.org/sites/default/ ... e%20Buying%20Activity.pdf
Posted on: 2015/8/14 13:53
|
|||
|
Re: Is Jersey City Real Estate in a bubble?
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
|
to my knowledge, 50 regent is not the first. 18 park did too when they opened up.
Can you tell where you are getting the information about rents in the Morgan? A studio there is going for $2050-2300 and 1 beds for $2635 to 2900. Anyone living in a highrise in downtown has seen rents increase by 3-5% on average the last few years, and the trend seems to be that way. The new buildings coming up are in a "luxury" category and are able to charge higher rents and as a result, even the older buildings are using this as an excuse to charge more. It is true that more supply is coming online, but it also looks like there is a lot of demand. For example, the ONE seems to have been out of studios the day it was open for leasing.
Posted on: 2015/8/9 23:10
|
|||
|
Re: Civic JC - The Cost of Jersey City Abatements: The $80 Million Question
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
|
I am a bit lost on this. Isn't this good for the city? The city got to keep almost 18mio more right under PILOTs than it would have otherwise?
Posted on: 2015/7/28 16:24
|
|||
|
Re: Friendly User Budget
|
||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Newbie
|
the abatements dont show up in the rateable base. however, they do reduce the amount which the city needs to raise through taxes.
If one reads the city budget for 2014, Line item 6 (sheet 3) is the amount the city needs to raise through taxes. This is computed as Total Appropriations (Line item 4) minus Anticipated revenues. Anticipated revenues includes the PILOTs from the abated properties. So although they dont show up in the rateable base (denominator) in the tax calculation, they affect the numerator and reduce the overall tax rate. I am new to the forums and have noticed a general theme against abatements because of what seems like a general assumption that abated properties pay less taxes. However, this does not always hold. On most abated properties in dtjc, the taxes are computed as a percentage of sales price unlike other properties where the taxes are computed using the assessed value. If we take an example, if you have a new property selling for 1mio, the tax on that using say 1.5% of sales price (can be on abated properties) is 15,000. If we take an older non abated equivalent property, it is quite possible that its assessed value is only 200K. The tax rate would have to be 7.5% for it to be comparable in taxes to the abated property. Given the current real estate prices in dtjc and that a reval has not been done in years, it is quite possible that non abated properties are paying less in taxes than comparable abated properties. Again, this is just an example to show that it is not always clear that abatements are bad for taxes etc. I think the bigger concern about these is if it is being done in a transparent manner and there is some one on both sides (the government and the public) who is actually going through the numbers, assumptions and making a rational choice.
Posted on: 2015/7/28 16:13
|
|||
|