Best rental buildings in Manhattan

The Helena

Whichever Cheslsea apartment building weasel boy rents in.

or stevejhx rents in.

I just put a client in the Verdesian (a "green" building in Battery Park City) so I nominate that and its sister green building, the Solaire.)

ali r.
{downtown broker}

I nominate 10 Liberty which I consider better than 2 Gold.

"weasel boy"

There you go again, malraux - unable to win the real estate argument, you resort to insults.

I don't rent in any of those, though I did rent in the Westminster once. It's fine if your not on the firehouse side.

London Terrace is not a rental building; it is a co-op.

Some of those buildings you listed are actually rent-stabilized 80/20 buildings. You rent at an initially higher rent but then your increases are capped for between 10 and 20 years.

At nybits.com you can find no-fee buildings - why pay a fee when it's not necessary?

BTW malraux, I'm at the place I OWN right now. It is possible to do both - whichever is the better deal.

London Terrace is both a rental AND a co-op. The four corner buildings (called London Terrace Towers)form the co-op, and the buildings in the center (called London Terrace Gardens) offer rentals.

ali r.
{downtown broker}

Barclay Tower is great if you like RATS. Seriously, the place is overrun with them.

check out glenwood, related and rudin

in case you weren't sure if Related was overpriced, they let you pay with American Express.

Also, isn't this whole discussion topic kind of like which is the best online college or school to get your associates degree?

related buildings are pretty nice, although a few of them aren't that great. for example, the westport is on west 56 and 10th avenue, which is a really grimy area. definitely overpriced given the location.

56th street and 10th is not a grimy area. Born and raised here. 10 years back I would say so. Midtown west better known as (HELL'S KITCHEN).

i thought that 80/20 building means that 20% of the apartments are rented to low/ middle income candidates at a much lower rent. My friend pays $ 600 for a beautiful 2 bedroom apatment on the 17th floor in Union Square South, and she has for 10 years. All of her friends in the building are in the same program, and It seem that most RELATED buildings offer it.

80/20 indeed means 20% of the apartments are alloted through the lottery system to low/middle income families. i lived in a 'luxury rental' in HK that as it turned out as a 80/20 bldg.

i HATE 80/20 program with a passion. it's a typical liberal program that is hurting NYC. if it wasn't for that, rent would be a lot lower.

AGREED! i am all for affordable housing and all- but i am against the 80-20 program!! shelter is a basic necessity, but not a doorman, and a gym, and all other luxury amenities!!!

NYC's liberal programs are out of control, especially when it comes to housing. It needs to imitate Chicago, which has thoroughly gentrified the city and pushed the really poor people to the far south side. Living in a luxury doorman building is NOT a right!

Well if i lived in a 80/ 20 building i would feel a little bit cheated if i was paying full price...It seem that condo buildings have this lottery system going as well. Another friend was THIS close to be chosen to rent a unit for about $ 600/ mo in the DISTRICT by Amy Sacco building, that obviously is part of the program...Does any of you brokers know if the Chelsea Mercantile is part of this program as well?

there is a link on nyc's housing webiste that shows you the list of all the bldgs that are the part of the 80-20 or such subsidized housing programs. Thats how i found out about my bldg.

Hey rufus, let's just kill the poor and get it over with, okay?

On the 80/20 rentals does anyone know what the income thresholds are to be in the 20% category? Just curious

stevejhx,

i have nothing against poor people. i just don't think they should live in luxury doormen building when everyone else is paying the market rate. Unlike the liberals in this city, I'm a capitalist who believes in the market.

I'm not sure if rufus is doing it intentionally or not, but he's doing a good job of creating a caricature of a reactionary conservative.

The argument that the 80/20 program makes rents more expensive is silly. It's a voluntary program. Developers who choose to join the program get interest-free financing for their building in exchange for setting aside some of the inventory for lower income renters. Presumably, developers decide that this is a better deal for them than building a pure market-rate building. This means that if the program didn't exist, either the developers would not build the building at all (reducing the supply of market-rate apartments) or build the same apartments at a higher cost and charge higher rents.

jordyn,

if the 80/20 program was so efficient, wouldn't every major city have it? from my understanding, NYC is the only U.S. city that has such a massive 80/20 program. Virtually every luxury rental building that has gone up in manhattan in the last five years is 80/20. i think this is a TERRIBLE policy for the city.

Does anybody know if the sponsor is required to disclose if a building is under the 80/20 program? I understand this should ideally be factored into pricing, but as such I think it should follow that buyers should be aware of this fact so they can factor it into their decision making process.

Rufus--you'll note that I didn't mention anything about the efficiency of the program (it's possible that the price of providing cheap financing in prime areas is far more than constructing and operating housing in crappy areas). I pointed out that it wouldn't increase market rents. Apparently you agree, since you seem to have changed your argument. The "other cities don't do it" seems like a pretty weak retort, though, since New York has an unusually large portion of its housing devoted to rental stock and multi-unit buildings, which makes the 80/20 program far more feasible than in places where the housing stock is dominated by single family homes and small rental properties.

In fact, given the generally dismal state of low income housing nationwide, the "no one else is doing it" seems like a commendation rather than a criticism.

So, renting vs. buying.

Take the top rental buildings, how many people are long-term renters? More than 10 years? Probably none, because renting isn't the same as buying. Renting is transitory or for the lower economic ladders.

Grame,

not so sure about that. the rental buildings i mentioned in my original post all have affluent tenants who could afford to buy but have chosen to rent for a variety of reasons. for example, i know a partner at a top private equity firm who lives in 10 barclay because he really likes the building and wants to wait until housing bottoms out before buying.

Which means that it is transitory.

well, i was mainly referring to your assertion that renting is mainly for those in the lower economic ladders. this is probably true in general but for the desirable rental buildings, it certainly isn't.

I gave two buckets that renters could fit into. You gave me an example of someone who fit into one bucket but not into the other. Did you not see the word 'or'?

Are all rental buildings in manhattan under the 80/20 program? i live in one now, and i lived in one before. The relationship between the ones paying market price and the ones who are subsidized at the last 'luxury' building was strained. is there a list of buildings in the city not under the 80/20? at my last building, there were fights and arguments next door, and sometimes their fights would spill into the hallway. Cops were also called at different incidences. i felt cheated because i was paying 4000 for a one-bedroom, while next door was paid 600 for a 2-bedroom.

i love the helena also. It's not a hip building, but the views are amazing.

Jordyn, you are wrong, the builders wouldn't charge higher rates, but the opposite rents would come down, since the supply would be increased of market rentals which would bring the overall price down. you see rental units in the 80/20 program, bring the supply down, if there were no 80/20 the overall rental income for the owner would be up but individual rental income would come down.

goSpartans--the answers to your questions are contained further up in the thread.

However if you think only low/middle income people get in fights or are otherwise inconsiderate of people around them, I think you're in for a rude awakening once you manage to get into your rich-person enclave where you can avoid them.

dldeven--if the owners could make more money without 80/20, they wouldn't join the program. It's a VOLUNTARY program.

rufus, in the 23 months since you posted, a lot has changed in New York. Do you have an updated point of view on the 80/20 program?