Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
38 user(s) are online (21 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 38

more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (bodhipooh)




Re: Jersey City to JFK and LGA
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

tictaktoe wrote:
bumping the thread..

Anyone has experience going to JFK from DT JC. Train (which I usually free) is not an option because we are family of three including an infant (and luggage) so would love to know what have worked out the best for you, and the $$ - Uber all the way, some shuttle that goes from DTJC(?), pre booked taxi, cab, etc?

We are planning to fly on Sunday evening and not really for reaching the fastest so anyway we can save $ would work. I heard from a friend that his Uber to DTJC from JFK was around $150 the last time he took it (including tolls)!


If your goal is to save money, but avoid many transfers, consider taking the PATH to WTC and then hop on a cab. The ride to JFK is a flat rate of $52, plus applicable tolls, if any. There's also super shuttle, but for two adults it will likely be more expensive. There are the PABT airport buses, but you will save very little compared to the cab, since you would have to take the subway to get to the terminal, and that means two transfers, some walking and more hassle.


Posted on: Today 1:59
Top


Re: Roberto Clemente Field Just Sold?
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
It would be very expensive but appropriate in this case. Underground parking as a condition of approval.


Who in their right mind would park underground in DTJC? It's not safe from flood on half the streets!!


I was thinking the same thing... People have short memories, or prefer to live in a world of fantasies. Given that so much of DTJC is a flood zone, underground parking is a risky proposition. Certainly it would necessitate site-specific considerations, and the insurance for such a space may be prohibitively expensive.

Posted on: 1/19 15:28
Top


Re: What legally constitutes a bedroom?
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
is there something that stipulates or deals with the implications of "bedrooms" that must be traversed to reach another area or room?


I think it depends on who you're asking. NJDCA grandfathers in railroads, but I don't think you could build one today. Same for the city CoO. Section 8 is fine with calling railroads multibedrooms too. But advertising is different, and I guess like the window thing, YMMV.


That makes sense. Thanks for the reply/follow-up.

About new construction, as evidenced by the previous Modera Lofts, I do think they have been playing fast and loose with the definition of bedroom for a long time now. I wonder how they got COs for all those units and if any current resident has ever pushed back on what is being leased to them. Perhaps the long, storied tradition of stuffed envelopes may still be alive in JC.

Posted on: 1/18 21:05
Top


Re: What legally constitutes a bedroom?
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
Bedrooms are required to have windows. Modera lofts could get themselves into hot water by calling those bedrooms. They are dens.


I always thought so, and yet they are doing brisk business. I wonder what the deal is, really.


I had thought realtors & other pros were held to higher standards than mom & pop. The last time I let a realtor list a unit of mine (again unsuccessfully) he called a 6 room railroad with windows in every room a 1 Bedroom, since there was only 1 room that didn't require you to walk through another.


Actually, your post has reminded of a question I once had. Out of curiosity, is there something that stipulates or deals with the implications of "bedrooms" that must be traversed to reach another area or room? I ask because I once visited a property that was being advertised as a two bedroom, but one of them had to be walked through to reach the other. I thought it was odd to call it a bedroom, since it would prevent any sort of privacy if both rooms are occupied and figured it was real estate gimmicks. At best, I would think of the room that MUST be traversed as an anteroom, or perhaps as a very nicely lit walk-in closet. Now, of course I understand the complications of the layout of a typical railroad apartment, but does it make sense that a bedroom must be traversed to reach another one?

Posted on: 1/18 13:25
Top


Re: What legally constitutes a bedroom?
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

jc_dweller wrote:
Bedrooms are required to have windows. Modera lofts could get themselves into hot water by calling those bedrooms. They are dens.


I always thought so, and yet they are doing brisk business. I wonder what the deal is, really.

Posted on: 1/18 11:54
Top


Re: Legal Definition of a Bedroom
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

07310 wrote:
I'm not sure if this applies to JC.
"(a) Level I bedroom requirements are as follows:

"1. Each bedroom occupied by anyone in the resource family shall have two independent means of exit, at least one of which is an operable window or door suitable for emergency escape or rescue leading directly outside."

http://www.state.nj.us/dcf/policy_man ... 0-122C-4.2_issuance.shtml


That definition you quoted is from the Department of Children and Families. It might be accurate, but I wouldn't just assume that *their* definition of a bedroom matches that of the Buildings Department, or whatever state agency is in charge of such regulations.

Posted on: 1/18 11:53
Top


Re: Vogue Cafe - new French cafe on York & Marin
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JadedJC wrote:
If I recall correctly, exorbitant pricing was what did in Made With Love (used to be in the space where Choc-O-Pain now resides). They, too, had quality organic ingredients and delectable treats. Unfortunately, they greatly overestimated what people were willing to pay for a croissant.


Don't forget or underestimate another factor that precipitated the Made with Love demise: the owner engendered a lot of ill will when, right after Sandy, she decided to charge people $1 to be able to charge their devices. I get that electricity can be expensive, but charging customers to "allow" them to plug in devices, right after what was a catastrophic storm that had a major impact in the area, was a really uncool move.

Also, I would add that while Made in Love was very good, the stuff at Vogue is head and shoulders over ANYTHING I ever tried there. They are not even comparable, really.

Posted on: 1/18 0:12
Top


Re: Vogue Cafe - new French cafe on York & Marin
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


Stopped by yesterday for what is my third visit. As usual, excellent pastries. It is definitely expensive but, if you can get past the sticker shock, their stuff is definitely worth every penny.

Pain au chocolat: $5 (really, really good)
Mille-feuille: $7.25 (impossibly flaky, with an excellent custard cream that was both subtle and sweet)

It was my second visit with a close French friend, and she claims theirs are the best French pastries she has had in the US. I just know I have enjoyed everything I have tried there, and will continue to patronize them.

Posted on: 1/17 14:58
Top


Re: The Kitchen Step
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


11 months late, inexplicably, but we finally made it to The Kitchen Step.

The food was spot on, and there was quite a bit of it. Two appetizers, two entrees, two glasses of wine, no desserts. The kale salad was very nicely done and the combination of flavors and texture were spot on. The second appetizer was the zucchini fries, which were OK, but nothing to be excited about, particularly compared to the rest of the meal. The (free) bread was very good (awesome chewy texture, thick hard crust, paired with really good butter) and the entrees (miso-glazed portobello mushrooms, and moroccan braised chicken) were both excellent. I wish my chicken had had a bit more salt, but that is a forgivable slip, given that all the other flavors were really good.

The service was also good: attentive without being annoying, or overbearing. The General Manager (Kenneth) came around twice and he was also very friendly and very eager to discuss the restaurant, the food, the changes they made to the space, and overall a very pleasant dude. We talked about the wine I was drinking, and the changes in the space since the 30 Acres days.

Definitely will go back. We got lucky and got a good table despite not having a reservation, but I think that was partly due to the crappy weather outside on Saturday. It was otherwise packed, with only one other table available.

Posted on: 1/17 14:47
Top


Re: Legal Definition of a Bedroom
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

07310 wrote:
I always thought bedrooms were rquired to have a window, I guess not.

Modera Lofts is renting 2 Br units where in many of the units there is no window in the 2nd bedroom.

http://www.moderalofts.com/jersey-city-nj-apartments/modera-lofts/




Yup...! Previously discussed here in JCLIST:
http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=398077

I am not sure if there is an official definition of what constitutes a bedroom in JC... It certainly can't be "must include a window" because otherwise those Modera Lofts 2-bd units are very, very suspect. Two (out of four) plans listed on their site for 2-bd units include bedrooms without any windows.

Posted on: 1/17 13:52
Top


Re: Our modern world
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Luddites have always existed, and will continue to exist. The rest of the world adapts, accepts change, and enjoys the perks of progress.


We already have a tendency to embrace technology as a means to its own end, often in the name of progress, so we have plenty of reason to be cautious without being luddites. The most obvious hazard of increasingly pervasive digital information technology is probably not that we will be sabotaged by others (although we will), but by inundating ourselves with more noise, we will continue to sabotage ourselves. All the data security in the world won’t put a dent in that problem.


Nice strawman... I do agree with you that too much technology is likely not good for the human soul, but that was not what was being discussed.

The OP recounted the content of an interview in which the interviewee essentially stated we should roll back interconnectedness so we can regain security in some systems. We could also do away with cars and avoid horrific highway accidents, or maybe we just scrap cellular networks, and the telephone, and go back to telegraphs?

People in the late 70's and early 80's thought that modems were inherently dangerous because there was no way to safeguard systems connected to them. With time, we learned to implement security measures, such as passwords. For today's always connected systems, we now have firewalls, packet sniffing, real-time traffic inspections, etc. We don't roll back technological advances because they can be potentially abused or exploited, we just learn to make them more secure.

Posted on: 1/17 13:44
Top


Re: Our modern world
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


In the 19th century, people would destroy train tracks because they thought progress was evil and dangerous.

Luddites have always existed, and will continue to exist. The rest of the world adapts, accepts change, and enjoys the perks of progress.

The idea that we should avoid interconnectedness because some miscreant will want to exploit a weakness is asinine. We don't get rid of banks because someone could rob one, nor did we do away with airplanes because someone could shoot one down easily.

Information security can be achieved. Anyone that tells you otherwise is simply misinformed, or fear mongering. Some companies fail to implement the necessary measures and they suffer the consequences.

Posted on: 1/15 10:40
Top


Re: Your Cashless Society
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Also, for a working, functional example of an almost cashless society look no further than Scandinavia, particularly Norway and Sweden. Of course, cash currency is still in use, but most transactions are done via apps, electronic devices and credit cards. Very few people rely on cash as a primary payment method, and you are simply unable to use cash for certain things, like the metro, buses, trams, etc. In fact, in Sweden, a vendor is legally allowed to refuse coins and bank notes.


Posted on: 1/13 11:47
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

tern wrote:
I understand taxes are going to go up a lot on many downtown properties, but there is a big difference between 1.7% and 2% (or 2.2% as I believe Bodipooh speculated in some of his earlier missives).

The fact is we just don't know what the rate we will be, the only thing we can say is that if the appraisals are done correctly a $1 million house downtown should end up paying 4 times as much as a $250,000 place in the heights. Now if the heights house is actually valued at $500,000 (extended over the whole heights), it 'reduces' the downtown home's tax to only twice what the heights house is paying.

If you have been watching the market in the past two years it is not just downtown prices that are on the boil.

Robin.


I know most people have trouble with numbers, so I will try to explain: three years ago, when the reval was first cancelled, the estimated effective tax rate was about ~2.2%. That is the reason why that number was bandied about back then. Then the effective rate was closer to 2, and now we are looking at about 1.8%. That doesn't mean the numbers were inaccurate. It just means that for the market conditions in 2014, that 2.2% was correct, but it has since changed. A similar analogy would be to look at unemployment rates from years ago, and compare the number to present day and exclaim "well, those numbers were obviously wrong." Market conditions change. It just so happens that real estate market conditions in JC have improved tremendously over the past two years, with year-over-year valuation going up over 15%, while the city budget has grown very little, so the total tax rate needed to cover government costs has continued to drop.


Posted on: 1/13 11:26
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
How did you arrive at the total tax levy of $448.7 million?

See page 2 http://www.cityofjerseycity.com/uploa ... tion/CY2016_USF_Intro.pdf

Another tidbit from that doc, the properties that Yvonne is always howling about getting a free ride paid $129m in 2015 PILOTS, vs $212m they would have paid in tax. But compared to the legacy properties paying 50% or less of their market based tax, these developments at 60% are actually paying a higher rate than Yvonne did for her fabulous brownstone on VVP!


Thank you for the link! I was trying to locate this info and was coming up empty.

For 2015, the effective rate was 2.07%, but for 2016 it drops quite a bit, down to 1.79%.

I came up with those numbers by using the EV totals for 2015 and 2016 from the state links I posted and dividing the tax levies for 2015 and 2016 from the user friendly budget for which Brewster provided a link (again, thanks!)

I guess we will need to wait and see what is the total EV calculated for JC after the reval. Even if the rate stays at 1.8%, you would see lots of homeowners with massive increases (those currently paying effective rates of under 1%) but that rate is definitely magnitudes better than the bandied about 2.2% rate that most people seem to assume will be the final one.

Posted on: 1/12 0:02
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

stateaidguy wrote:
Jersey City's taxes will definitely be below 2% post-reval, but this has nothing to do with the reval so much as it does the increase in Jersey City's Equalized Valuation.

JC's EV is now $24 billion and will be even higher after the reval is completed.

JC's all-in tax levy is now $448.7 million. That rate will increase too, but not in proportion to the increase in the Equalized Valuation.

$448.7 million / $24 billion = 1.87%.

The tax rate will fall farther once the new EV is computed.





SAG, Thank you! I'm so tried of the complete and utter BS from the fearmongers and the ignorant. I saw a news report the other day saying it's a double edged sword because the reval will hurt people, but will also generate more money for the city.


Well, an ignorant reporter is just that... ignorant.

BUT, the values provided by the state are very different from what you present in your post.

The State of NJ puts the total JC EV at $21,643,490,206 (21.6 B) for 2015, and 25,679,882,705 (25.7 B) for 2016. The effective tax rate (as calculated by the state) is 2.216% for 2015.

Source for the above:
EV 2016: http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxat ... df/lptval/2016/Hudson.pdf
EV 2015: http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxat ... df/lptval/2015/hudson.pdf
Effective Tax Rate 2015: http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/pdf/lpt/gtrhud15.pdf

How did you arrive at the total tax levy of $448.7 million? Do you have a source for that figure? Also, are you sure you are not using the valuation from valuation from 2016 and applying the effective tax rate for 2015? I ask because the figures are wildly different than what is on the State of NJ website. Thanks!

Posted on: 1/11 21:37
Top


Re: Maternity ward at JCMC
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

richieveal wrote:
They gave us our own room but I guess if it gets busy then yes they could double up.

As for the car seat, that pissed me off too. I lived across across from JCMC and they made me get a car and bring it. I was supper pissed. They don't care if you don't have a car or not they need to see you leave with a car seat in a car. You can't walk home.



Exact same experience. I wonder if that policy is still in place. My daughter was born 15 years ago, so I have no idea about recent policy changes in that regard. But, it definitely seems arbitrary to require a carseat when some people don't actually own a car.

Posted on: 1/11 21:23
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

ProdigalSon wrote:
From my understanding of the reassessment, the city will provide a fair market value for the home, if it sells at 1.8 it's a pretty good indication that 1.8 is the FMV. If the taxes go to 2.0%(seems low but humor me) that would make the taxes 36k annually, or 3k a month. That represents an increase of $2,117 in monthly overhead, which corresponds to about $580k in mortgage at 3.625%, I wouldn't touch downtown JC until after this is over.


Exactly my take, and the main reason I am sitting out the market for another two years. If I was to plunk down 1.5 MM for a property, I want to know I am not going to get creamed in real estate property taxes for little to no benefit. At that price point, BK (and, NYC in general) starts to look very, very enticing. People point out that in NYC you would be on the hook for the city income tax, but even after factoring in the NYC income tax, the total tax burden (NYC income tax + property tax) would be lower than just the local property tax bill. Also, I really can't imagine the bump in DTJC property taxes not having some sort of effect on the real estate values.


Add to that is the fact that many Democrats across the state are getting behind 'fairness in school funding', which will likely end up with JC funding more than 17% of its school costs. Abbott won't go away soon, but expect some changes down the pike.


An excellent, and scary, observation. For all the bitching and moaning about property taxes in JC, if we end up with a tax rate below 2% after the reval, it is probably safe to assume that other NJ municipalities and counties will push to have JC shoulder more of the BOE budget. At 17%, we are getting a great deal and, given all the budget issues across the state, I am sure there will be a renewed effort to push JC (and, other Abbott districts that have seen an increase in the affluence of its residents) to pay a larger share of their school budgets.

Posted on: 1/11 14:15
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

hero69 wrote:
i don't dispute that taxes will and should rise, but $36K seems high. doesn't hoboken regularly conduct revals and their taxes are high compared to nyc, but not so amazing compared to other towns.

am i missing something?


Sigh... yes, you are missing the very basic premise of property taxes. A property tax rate is determined and that rate is applied to each property against its fair market value.

In JC, it is assumed that the tax rate will be about 2.2%. If a property is determined to be worth 1.8 MM, then its annual tax levy will be 39.6 K, assuming the rate determined by the reval ends up at 2.2%. I am starting to think that the rate will come out to be about 2%, which is why I calculated the future taxes of the brownstone in question to be 36K.

Posted on: 1/11 14:11
Top


Re: Maternity ward at JCMC
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


I can second what richieveal said about Hackensack: the absolute best. My daughter was born there, and it couldn't have been a better experience. Great nurses, caring staff, everything was smooth. As mentioned, the food was great, and the recovery room was excellent. I believe it was a shared room (can't remember exactly) but I don't recall anyone else being there.

And, while his comment about feeling like someone is always watching you seems weird, I can also corroborate that. Babies are (or, used to be) outfitted with a special wristband that would set off alarms if it crosses the thresholds of the neonatal wing / floor. Apparently, there is a constant fear (if well founded, or not, I have no idea) that babies can be stolen by someone. It seems borderline crazy/paranoid, but I think hospitals are forced into these measures by insurance companies. Other than that, the whole experience in Hackensack was awesome.

One last thing: at the time my daughter was born, it was required that in order to leave the hospital with your baby, you had to bring along a car seat. No carseat, no baby released to the parents. We used to live down the street from the hospital (literally a half mile walk, or less) and my plan was to just carry the baby home, and that plan had to be scrapped in favor of a car pickup because of the car seat requirement. Not sure if those rules are still in place, or if they are/were unique to Hackensack, but I have heard similar stories from other people at other hospitals.

Posted on: 1/11 14:04
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

ProdigalSon wrote:
From my understanding of the reassessment, the city will provide a fair market value for the home, if it sells at 1.8 it's a pretty good indication that 1.8 is the FMV. If the taxes go to 2.0%(seems low but humor me) that would make the taxes 36k annually, or 3k a month. That represents an increase of $2,117 in monthly overhead, which corresponds to about $580k in mortgage at 3.625%, I wouldn't touch downtown JC until after this is over.


Exactly my take, and the main reason I am sitting out the market for another two years. If I was to plunk down 1.5 MM for a property, I want to know I am not going to get creamed in real estate property taxes for little to no benefit. At that price point, BK (and, NYC in general) starts to look very, very enticing. People point out that in NYC you would be on the hook for the city income tax, but even after factoring in the NYC income tax, the total tax burden (NYC income tax + property tax) would be lower than just the local property tax bill. Also, I really can't imagine the bump in DTJC property taxes not having some sort of effect on the real estate values.

Posted on: 1/11 12:02
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
now, what would carrying costs be for such a house in brooklyn? and, no, i don't consider bed-stuy as a comp for any part of dtjc


You can't make that comparison without factoring in all the other variables like NYC income tax. NYC non-commercial property taxes are subsidized by the city and are absurdly low. JC's are comparable with all the towns surrounding NYC.
i did a quick and dirty comparison to a house in carrol gardens, and this house would still be less than bklyn one even with higher taxes.

Principal and taxes on carrol gardens house is $13.7K per month, while jc house is $6.9K and even if taxes on jc house rose to $2K per month, the jc house would still be cheaper.

expert analysts, please weigh in....http://www.realtor.com/realestateandh ... lyn_NY_11231_M31624-66645


You are comparing a 3.2 MM home against one valued at half that. Of course the numbers are different! I am not sure what point you are trying to make with this comparison. Also, no one would consider DTJC equivalent to Carroll Gardens.

Now, let's say you found a comparable home at the same value (in a different neighborhood that is more similar to JC) you would end up with MUCH LOWER costs per month due to the fact that property taxes in NYC are super low, and that is the issue. A 1.8 MM home in JC will be paying 36K in taxes annually, while in NYC it will be under 1.5K. That's a 34K difference, for worse schools, worse infrastructure and worse neighborhood amenities. In a mortgage at current rates, that's the equivalent of about 650K. So, you could buy a property almost 2.5 MM and have the same monthly expense, but end up with better schools, infrastructure and amenities.

Lastly, the taxes after the reval for this property will be about 3K per month, not 2K.


My point is that a brownstone almost anywhere in brooklyn is gonna costs substantially more than something in dtjc.


Yes the best areas of BK are more expensive than DTJC, but DTJC is definitely more expensive than many BK areas. Take a look in Zillow and you will see this is true.

Quote:

on top of that, it seems that mortgage rates on things for things in brooklyn are higher than jersey city.


The differences are almost negligible. Less than .1% in the APR.

Quote:

also, i think property taxes on a 4 family in nyc are substantially higher than those on 1,2 or three family house.


Yes, this is true. A 4-unit (or, higher) residential property pays ~50% more in taxes. And, guess what!? It doesn't matter. The rate is still paltry at about 1.5%. The property you mentioned is paying just under 1% (it's a theee-family).

Posted on: 1/11 0:20
Top


Re: NJ Democrats for Governor
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
Bodipooh,

You're putting words and suppositions into my post.

Rich.


You are right. I was misconstrued what you wrote to mean something others have stated in the past. My apologies for the confusion.

Posted on: 1/11 0:03
Top


Re: NJ Democrats for Governor
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
The next governor will be forced into recognizing that the legalization of marijuana will help New Jersey with its crushing debt situation.

I think Murphy has already endorsed the idea. We know that legislators led by Sweeney have intentions of getting it before the state in 2018.

Why not?


Legalizing marijuana will not be the solution to budget problems. You are projecting a rosy scenario based on the assumption of a static scenario. If NJ legalizes marijuana in 2017, you can be almost assured that NYS will do the same shortly thereafter. There is already a lot of pressure in Albany to take up the idea after the voters in MA voted in favor of legalization. There is no way NYS will sit back and allow MA and NJ to reap all the benefits of increased tax revenues from such a move. So, yes, NJ would see some increase in revenue from the taxation of marijuana legalization, but that gravy train will not last long amid competition from other states in the area.

Posted on: 1/10 21:28
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

hero69 wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
now, what would carrying costs be for such a house in brooklyn? and, no, i don't consider bed-stuy as a comp for any part of dtjc


You can't make that comparison without factoring in all the other variables like NYC income tax. NYC non-commercial property taxes are subsidized by the city and are absurdly low. JC's are comparable with all the towns surrounding NYC.
i did a quick and dirty comparison to a house in carrol gardens, and this house would still be less than bklyn one even with higher taxes.

Principal and taxes on carrol gardens house is $13.7K per month, while jc house is $6.9K and even if taxes on jc house rose to $2K per month, the jc house would still be cheaper.

expert analysts, please weigh in....http://www.realtor.com/realestateandh ... lyn_NY_11231_M31624-66645


You are comparing a 3.2 MM home against one valued at half that. Of course the numbers are different! I am not sure what point you are trying to make with this comparison. Also, no one would consider DTJC equivalent to Carroll Gardens.

Now, let's say you found a comparable home at the same value (in a different neighborhood that is more similar to JC) you would end up with MUCH LOWER costs per month due to the fact that property taxes in NYC are super low, and that is the issue. A 1.8 MM home in JC will be paying 36K in taxes annually, while in NYC it will be under 1.5K. That's a 34K difference, for worse schools, worse infrastructure and worse neighborhood amenities. In a mortgage at current rates, that's the equivalent of about 650K. So, you could buy a property almost 2.5 MM and have the same monthly expense, but end up with better schools, infrastructure and amenities.

Lastly, the taxes after the reval for this property will be about 3K per month, not 2K.

Posted on: 1/10 21:25
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Yet another example of another DTJC property paying a ridiculously low tax property levy...

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/243 ... y-NJ-07302/38888495_zpid/

Zillow estimate value: 1.6 MM
Asking price: 1.8 MM

Property Tax: 10.6 K
Effective tax rate paid: 0.6% of asking price, 0.66% of estimated value

Even if we end up with a 2% property tax rate after the reval, that property is looking at a 3x increase in its tax levy, minimum.

Posted on: 1/10 16:05
Top


Re: Jersey City mayor-elect orders end to citywide reval
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

landshark wrote:
What are the odds the new values are sent to taxpayers by Nov. 13, 2017 as planned? In the original timeline inspections were supposed to start in Sept 2016 so already 4.5 months delayed.


Good question. One minor quibble, though: the reval is (as of right now) delayed 3.5 months, as inspections were supposed to start on September 29, 2016.

I think the timeline is now VERY tight, given the amount of properties that need to be evaluated. Not sure it can be done properly, unless you hire a small army of property evaluators. At least 100, I would think.

Posted on: 1/10 16:00
Top


Re: Uber, Lyft, and traffic
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

greenville wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

greenville wrote:
Well looks like Uber is screwing itself too.
Yes, you’re reading this right: Uber is projected to lose $3 billion in 2016


Nah... Uber is playing the long game. They can afford to operate at a loss because of their very deep pockets that have benefitted from massive capital backing. They will continue to push into the autonomous car segment pushing research and innovation, while also battling Lyft and other competitors. Amazon ran major deficits for well over a decade, almost 20 years really, and it has done just fine.


That's Amazon, but Uber will go bankrupt. The investors will get screwed but the people who run the company won't as they are setting this to happen so that the company goes under, eliminates its debts, then they buy back the stock at a low price, and Uber is then bought by another company and moves into driveless cars. Oh thanks to all you who tip, since you will get 5 stars from the drivers it's always faster for you to get a ride due to your customer rating.


Oh, yeah... I forgot you are the former Uber driver with an axe to grind.

Nice (conspiracy) theory you got there, buddy. Despite the fantasy you are selling here, the story behind Uber and its cash reserves is well documented. With over $15 billion cash on hand, they can continue to lose 3 - 4 billion a year and make it past 2020 without problems.

NY Times article on their cash reserves and future plans: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/21/bus ... eps-raising-billions.html

Posted on: 1/8 18:33
Top


Re: NJ Democrats for Governor
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

RichMauro wrote:
Is it true that Wisniewski initiated the traffic cameras?


And he was supported $ by the red light camera companies. He also tried to introduce the 'you get a ticket if you're caught holding a coffee cup/soda' in your hand while driving.


Typical nanny state mentality and policies...

Somehow our parents and their parents managed to get through life and build up this country while sipping their coffee, and holding up maps to navigate their way, while driving.

But, that law was not an outlier... sadly, we find ourselves in the midst of unprecedented government intrusion into our lives, with silly laws that restrict or dictate everyday stuff that is suddenly considered illegal or worthy of regulations, even silly things like kids not being allowed to set up a lemonade stand (to make some money selling lemonade) without a permit.

Posted on: 1/8 13:29
Top


Re: Uber, Lyft, and traffic
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

greenville wrote:
Well looks like Uber is screwing itself too.
Yes, you’re reading this right: Uber is projected to lose $3 billion in 2016


Nah... Uber is playing the long game. They can afford to operate at a loss because of their very deep pockets that have benefitted from massive capital backing. They will continue to push into the autonomous car segment pushing research and innovation, while also battling Lyft and other competitors. Amazon ran major deficits for well over a decade, almost 20 years really, and it has done just fine.

Posted on: 1/8 11:27
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 96 »






Login
Username:

Password:

remember me

Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017