Where do the happiest people in the world live? Well, according to Andrew Arrigo and Steve Clair of Serhant, it’s either Finland or their new 8th-floor listing at 145 Lexington Ave.

While guaranteed happiness from this $2.2 million Rose Hill condo (situated where NoMad, Gramercy, Murray Hill, and Kips Bay all converge) is promised, it’s pretty clear that living here is gonna mean mo’ money mo’ problems.

For example, do you eat breakfast at your granite countertops overlooking your Miele and Sub Zero appliances in your chef’s kitchen? Or do you take your bowl of Wheaties (if you’re living in this home, of course you’re eating the Breakfast of Champions) to the sunlit den to take in the city sights? And don’t forget the endless internal dispute of when during a conversation you can casually drop that your home has its own private keyed elevator.

With natural light reaching all of the home, Unit 8 is comprised of two large bedrooms, two full bathrooms, a living room, dining area, kitchen, family room/den space, in-unit laundry, and plenty of closet space (a struggle to find in Manhattan).

Additionally, the primary bedroom benefits from an ensuite bathroom, a walk-in closet, and views of the Empire State Building, allowing for plenty of privacy and an Empire State of mind.

Residents of Gramercy 145, the building that houses the million-dollar listing, also benefit from a 24-hour virtual concierge/doorman service and a landscaped roof deck with an outdoor grill, kitchen, and bar. In the basement, there is space to house your bike, as well as a private storage cage.

Not sure if you can picture yourself there? The Millennial Broker team has done a good job at giving you a look into the space and what it might look like to live there.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by SERHANT. (@serhant)

 145 Lexington Avenue #8 is listed by Andrew Arrigo and Steve Clair of Serhant.

The post Rose Hill Condo for “Happiest People in the World” lists for $2.2M by Serhant TMB Team appeared first on CitySignal.

What Is A 15-minute City?

What makes a city liveable? For many, it comes down to choice. We want to be surrounded by options without having to stray too far to reach any of them. Making choices accessible is the goal, but getting there is harder than just building a new megastore.

Developed in 2010, the 15-minute city has urban planners rethinking their technique. The basic premise is that all amenities should lie within a 15-minute walk or transit ride from home. This decentralized urban planning model ensures each local neighborhood meets the basic social functions for residents to live and thrive. 

This has yet to be tried in the Big Apple, but that’s about to change. Recently approved plans show New York City will begin constructing its own version in 2023. This has created a small stir amongst conspiracy theorists. 

The concept was first developed by Parisian urbanist and scientist Carlos Moreno. The premise is simple: everyday destinations should be close to home and easy to get to. By developing neighborhoods with schools, stores, and offices only a short walk, bike, or bus ride away, communities and individuals can experience a higher quality of life while saving time usually spent commuting to dedicate to what they actually want to be doing.

15-Minute Cities Around The World

Influenced by European cities like Paris, this method of city planning maximizes convenience and quality of life while minimizing pollution and traffic. The model echoes back to a hundred years ago when cities were established and expanded around a central area containing all needed amenities. In today’s version, we have the added advantage of being digitally connected. 

“A 15-minute city neighborhood offers convenience and quality of life, but not isolation,” describes the C40 website, “Physical and digital connectivity must be at the heart of any 15-minute city strategy, prioritizing equitable access to social and economic opportunities.”

Existing examples include Portland’s Complete Neighborhoods, Melbourne’s 20 Minute Neighborhoods, Bogota’s Barrios Vitales, and, of course, Paris’s original 15-Minute City. 

Some cities are going large in their transition. Portland specifically has committed to refashioning its land use so that 80% of residents will live in complete neighborhoods by 2035. As of now, less than half of Portlanders are in a complete neighborhood.

Calling Paris a 15-minute city feels tongue in cheek to some; Paris has always had greater accessibility to amenities than most cities. Many consider Paris a “5-minute city” with daily conveniences less than a five-minute walk for the average Parisian. One survey tallied 1,180 bakeries and 516 butcher shops within the 40 square miles of Paris’s 20 neighborhoods.  

Transitioning toward complete neighborhoods takes a lot of planning on behalf of local and government officials. While the idea was slow to take hold in 2010, the 2020 pandemic provided a major driving force for cities to take action. 

COVID-19 Impact on 15-Minute Cities

During the rise of Covid-19, an organization of globally networked mayors, called C40, united in action against climate change. This group of city leaders established the Global Mayors COVID-19 Recovery Task Force. Active participants of C40 include nearly 100 major cities: Madrid, Amsterdam, Berlin, Austin, Houston, New Orleans, Seattle, Los Angeles, and many others around the globe.

Amongst the actions these mayors committed to taking: Supporting essential workers, creating green jobs, providing fundamental public services, building with nature, and evolving to create 15-minute cities. 

“[We] committed to providing the swiftest and strongest possible rebound for their citizens and reaffirmed commitment to the principles of the Global Green New Deal,” says the C40 project website, “to protect our environment, strengthen economies and build a more equitable future – [we] reached out to other cities, youth, unions, business, and civil society to join in this effort.”

By reimagining streets and public spaces to best benefit local people of all abilities, backgrounds, and ages, the city offers itself in a more equitable and inclusive manner. Communities thrive when pedestrians “live locally” and are able to spend more time on foot, bike, or transit. 

15-minute Cities Reduction of Environmental Impact

Upsides to the 15-minute city were initially environmental. Reclaiming and reformatting space is a means to decrease car use, reducing carbon emissions. A decrease in traffic and car dependency equates to more free time for residents. Access to walking routes, parks and other outdoor conveniences mobilizes people to spend more time outdoors, boosting both physical and mental health.

“It puts people and the environment at the centre of urban planning,” said The Conversation, “Key elements are: the proximity of necessities; local participation and decision-making; community solidarity and connection; and green and sustainable urban living.”

A manifesto published in 2020 from Barcelona, backed by 300 architects and 160 academics, iterated four key elements to city organization: reorganization of mobility, renaturalization of the city, de-growth, and de-commodification of housing. So how would this translate in the hustle and bustle of New York City? 

Innovation QNS, NYC’s 15-Minute City

In 2022 the NYC Council approved a 15-minute city masterplan for the Queens’ Astoria neighborhood. The plan, called Innovation QNS, was brought forth by ODA Architecture and includes a number of major perks.

Built between 35th and 36th Avenues, the neighborhood will repurpose large surface parking lots, vacant spaces, and underutilized industrial and commercial buildings to shape an area that meets residents’ needs in a more concrete way.

“Innovation QNS will expand the adjacent Kaufman Arts District and build on Astoria’s rich cultural fabric including its existing cultural assets,” details the ODA Urban Plan website.

The 5-block plan will include over 2,800 units of mixed-income housing, of which 700 are permanently coded for affordable housing. Beyond that, 200,000 square feet will be dedicated to neighborhood retail and 250,000 square feet dedicated to creative industry and small business. Two acres have been set aside for intentional open space, community health and wellness facilities, arts and culture hubs, not to mention a multiplex cinema and grocery store.

Despite difficult negotiations, the project was finally approved in late 2022, with construction slated to begin in 2025. The $2 billion dollar development nearly came to a halt as the opposition called for even more affordable housing to be woven into the plan. Developers and housing officials finally agreed to double the affordable units to 45% of the project, equating to 1,400 units.

“This is exactly the kind of historic work we must do to tackle the housing shortage at the root of our affordable housing crisis,” said Democratic Mayor Eric Adams about regarding the negotiations.

Pressure continues to mount as officials fail to meet an urgently growing housing shortage crisis. Council members advocating on behalf of affordable housing were relieved the project has expanded to include more units.

“From Day 1, I have stood with my community in demanding deeper affordability from this development,” said Ms. Won of the Council’s progressive caucus, “There [were] more parking spots being offered than affordable units.”

 Supported by Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, council members continue to pressure developers to meet the needs of local communities first and foremost. 

But while the common thread of 15-minute cities carry the sentiment of community-first principles, that hasn’t stopped conspiracy theorists from demonizing the concept, creating major backlash. 

Conspiracy Theories of 15-Minute Cities

Starting in 2023, Mr. Moreno’s 15-minute city began to attract the wrong kind of attention. QAnon conspiracy theorists and climate change deniers quickly labeled 15-minute cities as “Prison camps” and “Climate change lockdowns,” stoking fears that proximity was a form of entrapment. 

Misinterpretations of the concept ran rampant, and conservatives vilified the idea as a government takeover, accusing supporters of advocating repression and government surveillance. The oppositional narrative is dystopic at best. Opponents paint pictures of a fictional future where gated communities keep residents locked in, and limited access to vehicles prohibits people from moving freely. 

Mr. Moreno was attacked both digitally and physically. Harassment and threats through email and online forums mounted, with some calling Moreno a criminal and a dictator. Soon the death threats began to pour in, terrifying both him and his family. 

“I wasn’t a researcher anymore, I was Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler,” Mr. Moreno told the New York Times, “I am not a politician, I am not a candidate for anything — as a researcher, my duty is to explore and deepen my ideas with scientific methodology. It is totally unbelievable that we could receive a death threat just for working as scientists.”

So far, none of this doomsday foreshadowing has proven true. In fact, local communities have flourished under newly completed neighborhoods, with small businesses gaining more traction than before. Advocates of 15-minute cities are quick to dismiss any rumors, ensuring the concept is not driven by any sort of restrictive mobility or monitoring.  

As New York constructs its own version of a complete neighborhood, we will soon experience firsthand what the model has to offer. Coming from the midst of both an economic and housing crisis, this movement toward the 15-minute city may help New York emerge from the pandemic even stronger than before.

The post What Is A 15-Minute City and How It’s Coming to NYC appeared first on CitySignal.

The Sale of the Flatiron Building

Placed for public auction on March 22nd, 2023, the lead-up to the sale of the Flatiron Building was filled with drama and continues to cause controversy. Initially, the sale was pitched as a semi-forced business move by multiple stakeholders of the building.

GFP Real Estate, Newmark, ABS Real Estate Partners, and Sorgente Group, four renowned real estate groups, owned a 75% stake in the business, while a fifth solo partner, Nathan Silverstein, owned 25%. The two parties, as in the collective real estate companies and Silverstein, sued and countersued one another back in 2021 over disagreements over the building.

The real estate groups argued that Silverstein’s actions were keeping the building empty following MacMillian Publishers’ departure in 2019. On the other hand, Silverstein argued that the other party was allegedly attempting to lease out the building’s space for less than the market price.

Silverstein’s ideal solution was to split up the building and rent on a floor-by-floor basis to which the remaining stakeholders were against, favoring renting the entire building to one tenant. While the four real estate stakeholders expressed interest in potentially winning the bid and continuing to own the Flatiron Building, there was a twist of events.

How the Flatiron Sale Fell Apart

In the end, Jacob Garlick would place the winning bid for the building at $190 million. However, Garlick failed to submit the necessary deposit for the space – $19 million. This failure to pay comes after an already granted extension.

With nonexplanation on why Garlick could not make payment, it is reported that Jeff Gural, the owner of Newmark (one of the current owners), is expected to be offered purchasing rights at a slightly discounted rate – $189.5 million. Newsweek, among other sources, assumes that Gural is likely to decline any offer of the purchase at this time, ultimately waiting until the property goes up for auction once more to make a more tame bid.

This is due in large part to the need for improvements inside and out. While the building has undergone numerous rounds of renovation, the building is still said to need additional work totaling over $100 million. That makes any purchaser’s decision an investment in the end. It’s also why Gural was surprised with Garlick’s initial high bid.

Inside the Flatiron Building 

Flatiron Building Construction

Before there was the Flatiron Building, there was just a piece of land located in the heart of NYC – a triangle piece of land, to be specific. When the Fuller Company was looking for a place to call home in New York, they decided to commission a new building, the Fuller Building.

The Fuller company would hire Chicago architect Daniel Burnham to design the building. Maximizing on the triangle-shaped land parcel between 5th Ave, Broadway, 22nd, and 23rd Street, he conceptualized the triangle-shaped building.

The city was hesitant to approve building schematics as initial plans failed to include basic safety measures like fire escapes and metal framed windows. There were also concerns over the building’s ability to face high winds, given its height and shape. 

The Board of Building Commissioners would eventually dismiss some requirements allowing construction to continue, and prompting complaints of favoritism. Construction was completed at an exceptional pace in 1902, averaging a floor a week, adding to concern over safety. 

Flatiron Building Architecture & Design Features

The Flatiron building has faced more than its fair amount of criticism over the years. And while it may be viewed as just quirky nowadays, the building, in all its glory, was once labeled a monstrosity upon completion.

At 22 stories, many feared the structural integrity of the building and argued it would blow down once the wind was strong enough. Some also dubbed what was assumed to be an eventual failure known as Burnham’s Folly.

Beyond the shape of the 285-foot building, there is plenty to admire here. Complete in 1902, the Flatiron building dared to utilize a steel skeleton rather than the New York City norm of masonry up until then.

At its narrowest point, the building is just 6.5 feet wide. Initial construction was done in three horizontal sections that resembled the processes of Greek columns. The base of the building incorporates building materials like limestone, while the upper levels feature glazed terracotta.

The triangle shape of the building affected more than just the visual. It would also bring a unique experience to the city, including an introduction to the 23 skidoo.

The quirky term was coined when it was discovered that the building caused wind patterns that could result in the wind ruffling a girl’s skirt who might be obliviously walking down the street. Because of this, police would shoo away people who lined the streets in anticipation of using the term 23 skidoo in the process.

Flatiron Building Interior

Inside, you’ll also find echoes of the time when the building was crafted, most notably in the bathroom situation. Because the building was originally crafted for a construction company in a time when women were not anticipated to be in the building, there were no women’s bathrooms.

Instead, every bathroom on every floor was reserved for men. Since then, some bathrooms have been converted so that the options alternate from floor to floor. Men can use the restrooms on the odd floors, while women can use even-floor bathrooms. 

History of Tenants of the Flatiron Building

The Fuller Company, a Chicago-based contracting business, initially occupied the 19th story of the building and invited surrounding businesses to help fill out the remaining floors. Some early tenants included the Equitable Life Assurance Society, which occupied the third floor, the Imperial Russian Consulate, which occupied three floors, and the New York State Athletic Commission.

Once the Fuller Company decided to open up other floors of the building to additional tenants, the Flatiron Building’s history grew a little murkier. Sure, there were relatively wholesome tenants with complex ties to NYC history, like the French Restaurant, Taverne Louis, and Macmillan Publishing, but other tenants were questionable, including Murder, Inc, an organized crime collection part of the larger National Crime Syndicate, most notably including a number of mobs in New York.

The Naming of the Flatiron Building

The Flatiron building’s name is said to come from the shape resembling the common household appliance, but it wasn’t always intended to be coined that. The building was originally set to be named after the commissioner – George A. Fuller, and the Chicago-based contracting firm he’d created. Before construction was complete, George A. Fuller would ultimately pass away. While Fuller Company officials were still committed to naming the building after the last name and business moniker, but would not ultimately happen.

Locals and those working on the building had already labeled the building as the Flatiron for a number of reasons, including appearance. After years of trying to establish Fuller as the name of the building, Flatiron Building would win, and the Fuller name would be transferred up to a skyscraper on Madison. 

Flatiron Building Legacy

There are a number of attributes the Flatiron building gets to claim: the strangest building shape, one of New York’s first skyscrapers, the first skyscraper above 14th Street, the first to use steel skeletons – just to name a few. Because of these unique attributes, New York eventually deemed the Flatiron building a protected New York landmark.

Influential in New York’s history, the surrounding area also became known as the Flatiron District, or simply Flatiron. From origins as a ferociously outcast building among New York City’s ever-growing landscape, the Flatiron Building is a New York City jewel. While the sale has grown into something more complicated, many are hoping for a swift conclusion that allows for this building to continue shining.  

The post The Flatiron Building For Sale and the Legacy of a Notable Building appeared first on CitySignal.

Browsing through New York’s most expensive home listings, it is clear the range of lifestyles that can coexist within one area code. Super-prime and ultra-prime listings include homes worth over $10 million or $25 million; in 2022, New York had 244 super-prime and 43 ultra-prime sales.

For the ultra-wealthy, skyscraper penthouses and Michelin-starred restaurants for residents only are just a normal part of everyday life. The handful of homes and condos featured below are some of the most expensive listings in both New York City and the world. From Manhattan to upstate, many unsuspecting buildings open up to palaces inside. Let’s take a look at some of the best this city has to offer.

Most Expensive Apartment in New York City

Currently up for grabs is the Central Park Tower penthouse at 217 W 57th St., also known as the world’s highest apartment. Soaring 1,416 feet above Central Park and overlooking much of Manhattan, the penthouse is listed for a cool $250 million by Ryan Serhant, making it one of Manhattan’s most expensive listings.

The Central Park Tower penthouse occupies the top three floors with seven bedrooms spread across a staggering 17,545 square foot layout. It is said the tenants can see the curvature of the horizon while standing on the terrace. Other notable features include a 1,500-square-foot grand salon, media room, library, staff bedrooms, observatory, gaming lounge, private gym, catering kitchen, storage spaces, and private reception gallery.

“Its unrivaled pair of baronial rooms–a 1,500 square foot grand salon and a nearly 2,000 square foot private ballroom–are truly empyrean,” details the Serhant listing “featuring glass curtain walls with the entire City as a backdrop and soaring 27-ft ceilings.”

Located on Billionaire’s Row along the south end of Central Park, residents of this penthouse are only 38 feet below the Empire State Building. Central Park Tower has 131 floors and is 1,550 feet tall. Central Park Tower is the second tallest only to New York’s famed One World Trade Center. Billionaire’s Row is known as home to the rich and famous, a neighborhood with some of the most expensive residences in the world.  

One major perk of living in the Central Park Tower is access to the Central Park Club, a three-floor hotel-style service with a 60-foot-long swimming pool, private park, gym, screening room, and Grand Ballroom. This might be one of the few buildings in New York City that truly has it all.

Most Expensive Real Estate in New York City

220 Central Park South’s Extravagant Listings

One specific residence, 220 Central Park South, is home to a number of rich and extravagant properties. Located on Billionaire’s Row, the most expensive area in NYC, and designed by former Yale School of Architecture Dean and architect Robert A.M. Stern, the limestone pre-war building is 70 stories tall with an 18-story section called “the Villa” that overlooks Central Park. Of the 118 units, most are duplexes, with three penthouses at the top of the building.

“220 Central Park South boasts a motor court with a porte-cochere – where residents and their guests can leave their vehicles – a wine cellar, an 82-foot-long saltwater swimming pool,” details the RealtyHop building profile, “a basketball court, an athletic club, a juice bar, a library, a golf simulator, a children’s play area, private dining rooms, and a 54-seat restaurant at the second floor that serves only residents.” Not mentioned is the private Jean-Georges Vongerichten restaurant that operates for residents only.

A four-bedroom penthouse was purchased in 2019 for $93 million, bought by hedge fund founder and billionaire Daniel Och, then later sold in 2022 for a staggering $190 million. Other famous residents of the building include Sting and numerous other hedge fund billionaires.

In 2021, Brooklyn Nets owner and Ali Baba founder Joseph Tsai paid $157 million for two units in 220 Central Park South. Purchased anonymously at the time, the units are located on the 60th and 61st floors, along with an 18th-floor studio for staff quarters.

The Most Expensive Home Sale

On record for the most expensive home sale in America goes to buyer Ken Griffin, founder of Citadel and the “richest man in Illinois.” In 2019 Griffin paid $238 million for the top-floor penthouse of 220 Central Park South, now called the Griffin Unit. The residence is 24,000 square feet inside. As if that wasn’t enough, Griffin returned months later and bought another two units in the building for $3.95 million. Neighbors in the building include Sting and heiress Renata de Camargo Nascimento.

220 Central Park South is nearly 100% sold out and continues to deliver some of the wildest real estate deals in both the country and the world. Even during the height of the pandemic, in 2020, the building processed $1.52 billion in cumulative sales across 46 separate units. 

Ultra-Prime Residences of the Ritz Carlton

The Ritz Carlton is another building known for its extremely lavish residences. A number of large real estate deals come from the Ritz Carlton building exclusively. Located at 50 Central Park South, this 14-unit condo building in midtown was originally conceived and built by architect Emery Roth in the 1970s. In 2002 the newly renovated Ritz Carlton Midtown West Residences were opened within the Ritz-Carlton, composed of eleven private residences occupying the top twelve floors.

50 Central Park S #PH23 for $34,000,000

This residence occupies the entire 23rd floor with 9,500 square feet in five bedrooms plus a 2,500 square foot primary suite. Other highlights include a formal dining room, park-facing library, media rooms, and multiple Central Park-facing terraces.

Residents enjoy access to the Ritz-Carlton Health Club, including a Movement Studio, La Prairie Spa, a Club Lounge, a Contour gastro lounge, and a hotel business center.

50 Central Park S #3031 for $90,000,000

Delisted in December of 2022, this three-bedroom and 10,875 square-foot condo, made up of the 30th and 31st floors of the building, has raised ceilings and a ballroom as its living room. With marble staircases, dressing rooms, massage rooms, and numerous ensuite baths, the residence is spacious and provided for.

The Sotheby’s listing detailed a “majestic room is lined with ten colossally-scaled arched windows, five of which overlook Central Park and the residence’s largest Terrace, which stretches almost 45 feet along the length of the façade.” 

Whether or not this unit will come back on the market is yet to be determined.

Mansions For Sale in New York

We’ve spent a lot of time looking within Manhattan’s luxury scene. What about the rest of New York? While much of New York’s wealth is concentrated around the Big Apple, there is still a lot to gawk over, Upstate and beyond. A home in Granite Springs listed for $100 million was quick to catch the eye of many.

At 142-203 Mahopac Ave in Westchester County is Stonewall Farm, a sprawling 8-bedroom mansion with 24,000 square feet on a 740-acre lot. Built in 2004, the residence includes a wine cellar, tasting room, game room, and pub, along with sprawling staircases, atriums, and horse stables. Beautiful features abound, giving the property a heavy rural charm. A wisteria colonnade connects the 60-foot heated pool to a 4,000-square-foot pavilion where residents can enjoy the fireplace, Jacuzzi, gym, sauna, and changing rooms. A private guesthouse is located behind the main house, near freshly trimmed hedges and walkways. 

At one time, this farm was known as the highest listing in New York at $100,000,000.

A beautiful home in Water Mill, New York, listed for $47 million dollars in 2022. Situated on a 2.6-acre oceanfront lot, the beach house at 381 Dune Road has a heated gunite pool, a separate guest house, and 250 feet of dune width. The guesthouse has a bonus loft, media room, and outdoor entertainment areas.

Houses near Scott Cameron and Dune Beach are highly sought after. The rolling ocean, warm sands, and multiple beaches to explore offer an enticing getaway for many city dwellers. This home was purchased in 2006 for $14 million, then listed in April 2022 for $47 million before being removed from the market in early June.

On the other hand, current active luxury listings in Water Mill look like 2040 Meadow Lane, priced at $24 million.

Luxury Sales Will Continue to Increase

While some of these listings have yet to sell, their existence speaks to the wealth and class embedded in New York City. Although interest rates have damped spending for some, the luxury market continues to soar as inflation pushes the dollar even higher.

“Despite rising economic headwinds and growing uncertainty, the world’s wealthy have been committing to luxury residential property,” said Liam Bailey, global head of research at Knight Frank, “with London and New York the standout cities in demand for ultra-prime sales.”

In Manhattan, real estate sales fell 38% in the first quarter, but luxury deals rose to a record high of over 11%. Wealthy buyers are there no matter what. Now if only they’d give an open house.

The post Luxury Listings: New York’s Most Expensive Homes appeared first on CitySignal.

Unfortunately, the freedom and safety of riders is contingent on proper city planning, designated bike lanes, and personal precautions. In a city like New York, where cars rule the road, this is not always the case. As of 2020, New York boasted over 1,375 lane-miles of bike infrastructure, but only 545 were protected. This discrepancy in designated bike lanes, which exist to keep riders and pedestrians safe, brings to light several issues in NYC. Most concerning is the human toll: in 2021, the Department of Transportation reported 4,949 cyclist injuries and 19 fatalities. 

As New York becomes more and more of a cycle city, how will the streets – and the residents – adapt? 

Bike Lanes in NYC 

In November 2022, the NYC DOT announced major plans to expand bike lanes and public spaces in 2023. As part of the city’s effort to make the largest bike network in the US, the expansion includes adding a one-way protected bike lane on 10th Avenue between W 14th Street and W 52nd Street and improving bicycle and pedestrian access between Manhattan and the Bronx on the Washington Bridge. With an eye toward creating protected bike lanes with “high ridership, a history of vehicle non-compliance and/or lanes adjacent to heavy vehicle corridor,” other projects include protected bike lanes on Westchester Avenue (Bronx), Berry Street (Brooklyn), Ashland/Navy/Hanson (Brooklyn), and adding a two-way protected bike boulevard on Broadway between Madison Square and Herald Square. 

Essentially sidewalks for bikes, and protected bike lanes use some kind of physical delineator – planters, plastic bollards, parked cars, curbs – to keep a rider safe. Though a good step, these basic barriers don’t always do the trick; a plastic bollard is often not enough to deter a car from blocking the bike lane, which can lead to accidents, injuries, and fatalities. To combat this, the DOT plans to replace half of the “protected bike lanes” with Jersey barriers (fortified cement blocks weighing four tons each) by the end of 2023. 

In September 2022, a second rider-centric solution was introduced: a proposed “lane blocking bill.” If passed, the bill would allow citizens to “submit a photo of a blocked bike lane to the Department of Transportation (DOT). After an investigation and subsequent ticketing, the submitter could receive 25% of the ticket value—which is expected to be $175.” Modeled after the Citizens Air Complaint program, which encourages civilians to submit photos of idling trucks and cars in exchange for 25% of the resulting ticket, the lane-blocking bill has the potential to engage citizens and make the city safer for cyclists.  

How Bike-Friendly Is NYC Compared To Other U.S. Cities?

In September 2022, Anytime Estimate came out with a ranking of the most bike-friendly cities in the U.S. The ranking analyzed data from “the U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. National Centers for Environmental Information, Walk Score, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy, Vision Zero Network, Google Trends, and Yelp.” Though New York made it into the top 15, it didn’t break the top 10, and for a city itching to build the largest bike network in the U.S., it means that there is much more work to do. 

New York was outranked by ten major cities, including Portland, San Francisco, Boston, Washington DC, and Minneapolis. 

Based on data by Anytime Estimate

Hopefully, the aforementioned infrastructure projects and a more cyclist-centric community will continue to move up New York’s ranking. There is, however, one larger roadblock: traffic laws and practices. In their 2022 Bike Friendly States survey, the League of Bike Activists gave New York an “F” rating, mostly due to failings in the state’s legislature. As of spring 2022, the state had not passed any items on the “livable streets wish list,” a collection of potentially life-saving bills and laws compiled by the cyclist advocacy group Transportation Alternatives. These items include allowing New York City to set its own speed limits or running enforcement cameras 24-7. 

But it’s not the end of the battle. Just this month, Transportation Alternatives unveiled their new platform aimed at addressing the legal failings affecting cyclists and pedestrians. This agenda includes the SAFE Streets Act, a package of life-saving bills intended to curb speeding, champion safe street redesign, and offer support to those impacted by crashes. Submitted to Governor Kathy Hochul and New York State Legislature, advocates urged urgent action if the state hopes to meet “the critical goals of its own multimodal transportation agenda by 2030.”

The Current State of Cycling in NYC

In addition to legal and structural hurdles, there is another major pain point affecting cyclists in New York: access. In 2017, the DOT completed a study identifying the 10 districts with the highest cyclist severely killed or injured (KSI) data. The neighborhoods – seven in Brooklyn and three in Queens – were severely underserved by the DOT, with high ridership but few dedicated bicycle facilities. In an effort to make cycling safer, the agency has prioritized those areas for bicycle network expansion. A review of the projects announced and completed in recent years indicates the DOT is working to stay true to their word. Some notable ones include safety improvements on Flatbush Avenue between Grand Army Plaza and Empire Blvd (Brooklyn), greenway connections in Jamaica Bay (Queens), and an extensive bike network plan for Flushing, Queens. 

Furthermore, in August 2022, Mayor Eric Adams announced that the city would be “targeting areas with a lack of good transportation and jobs for an expansion of the city’s greenway network, using $7.25 million in federal infrastructure funding to plan for the new bike paths.” Though the funding only covers planning and study, the hope is that the proposal – expected to be released in 2024 – would pave the way for potential new greenway sections including an “extension of Brooklyn’s Eastern Parkway into Brownsville, the Jamaica Bay Greenway into southeast Queens, along the Harlem River in the Bronx, and Staten Island’s North Shore.” 

Citi Bike – the official bike-sharing system for New York – is crucial for both expansion and adoption of cycling in the city, especially in underserved neighborhoods. The massively popular program has continued to increase its presence and popularity throughout the five boroughs since launching in May 2013. Despite the roll-out, however, it has not been without issues. In 2019 a report from New York Communities for Change found that “more than 75 percent of neighborhoods that experience extreme poverty lie outside Citi Bike’s service area, and only 16.5 percent of people of color have access to any of the city’s bike sharing services.” 

Though privately owned, Citi Bike is contracted by the city, and works with NYCDOT to plan its service areas. As New York works toward transportation equity, ensuring not only designated bike lanes but also access to bike stations (by way of Citi Bike) is crucial. 

Since 2019, Citi Bike has shown marked improvement in its service areas. As of December 2022, Citi Bike (now owned by Lyft) had 30,000 bikes with plans to reach 40,000 by the end of 2024 — expanding to underserved neighborhoods in the Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn. Hopefully, this is only the beginning. Clearly the demand is there: on September 8th, 2022, 138,372 [Citi Bike] rides were taken, a new daily record. 

Where to Bike in NYC

For the eager cyclist ready to hop on a bike and get pedaling, the NY Department of Transportation releases a yearly bike map with updated routes and paths. 

It’s not a perfect system, but as the network of bike lanes continues to improve and expand, it only makes commuting through the city via cycle more enticing. And it’s not just the city – the Hudson River Greenway, for example, stretches all the way from Battery Park in Manhattan up to Whitehall in Washington County. 

A ride across the Brooklyn Bridge offers bikers a particularly spectacular view of either Manhattan or Brooklyn, depending on the direction. For tourists, it’s a great way to get to know the city. For commuters, it’s an easy – albeit physically taxing – method of getting to work. 

One can only dream of what the New York City bike network will look like in five years. If the city continues to put its money where its mouth is, hopefully it’ll be a sprawling, interconnected system of protected bike lanes that safely co-exist amongst pedestrians and cars, reaching from the depths of Brooklyn to the tip of the Bronx. 

The post Gears to Grind: The State of Biking in NYC appeared first on CitySignal.

Overview of NYC’s New Short-Term Rental Registration Law

On January 9th, 2022, New York City adopted Local Law 18, also known as the Short-Term Rental Registration Law. The law is now going into effect and requires STR hosts to register with the Mayor’s Office of Special Enforcement (OSE) before posting their rentals on booking service platforms such as Airbnb, VRBO, and Booking.com. 

These booking platforms will be unable to process transactions for unregistered vacation rentals. Registration will open up 30 days after the final rules are published, allowing applicants to submit their information on the OSE website.

It’s expected that applications will go live towards the end of February with a $145 non-refundable application fee. Enforcement of registration requirements won’t begin until July of 2023.

Breaking Down Specifics of Local Law 18

Local Law 18 limits registration to a person who is a permanent occupant of the unit being rented. It prohibits registration for certain kinds of units, such as rent-regulated and New York City Housing Authority units. 

The new law also prohibits registration of units housed within buildings on the prohibited buildings list, which will be created by owners notifying the OSE that short-term rentals are not allowed in their buildings. 

Registration applicants will be required to confirm that they will comply with laws governing housing in NYC and commit to only hosting legal short-term rentals, specifically stays for no more than two guests hosted in the unit the host currently lives in. 

It’s important to note that the new law does not change which short-term rentals are legal or illegal, it simply strengthens current regulations for short-term rental laws in NYC. 

“Class B” multiple dwellings which have a stamp of approval from the City of New York for legal short-term occupancies are exempt from the new registration requirement. The same exemption applies for rentals of 30 consecutive days, or more. 

What is the Purpose of Local Law 18?

Despite existing regulations, New York’s short-term rental industry is anything but regulated. Illegal rentals are so common that the City doesn’t have the capacity to regulate them all, making enforcement of existing laws challenging, to say the least. 

State and city laws are clear in that rentals of 30 days or less are not permitted unless the permanent resident is living within the same space. However, that’s not necessarily clear to the millions of people looking for a short-term rental on Airbnb and other booking platforms. 

Tenants and owners listing their rentals for less than 30 days know they are breaking the law, however, they also know their chances of being caught are minimal given the vast number of illegal Airbnbs throughout the City. 

What Illegal Airbnbs Look Like in Practice

In NYC, most visitors have no way of knowing their stays are illegal. It’s also not something they are responsible for in the eyes of the law. This makes for an ideal situation where tenants with great credit scores and a healthy savings account apply to apartments, get approved, and instead of moving in, immediately list their rentals on Airbnb. 

Many of these buildings do not allow for short-term rentals. The reason being that short-term rentals usually come with increased foot traffic. This poses an inconvenience to both the owner of the unit and the unit’s neighbors, given that the space is being overused and frequented by multiple people throughout the year. 

The City and Airbnb have differed on the issue since Airbnb came into existence. Tourists who stay in Airbnb homes certainly bring activity to the local economy, but often at the expense of current residents. City officials prefer tourists to stay in hotels, as opposed to apartments, due to the tight housing supply and rising rents in NYC.

How does the Short-Term Rental Registration Law Differ from Current Regulations?

The main difference between existing regulations and the new Short-Term Rental Regulation law is that hosts will now be required to register their rentals with the OSE. Booking platforms will be prohibited from posting listings or processing payments for unregistered short-term rentals. A registration number will be given to those approved and displayed on the rental’s listing.

Executive Director of the Mayor’s Office of Special Enforcement, Christian Klossner, told the New York Post that this new law will “clarify short-term rental laws and lay out a straightforward process for hosts to obtain a registration for their legal rentals.” 

Existing Regulations Remain

The first thing to note is that Local Law 18 does not change or override previous regulations. Short-term rentals for less than 30 days are only allowed if the tenant/owner actively resides within the unit. In other words, you can only share your space with up to two guests at a time, you can’t completely give up your space to them during their stay. 

Listing an “entire place” on Airbnb for less than 30 days in NYC is illegal. However, that’s the most common type of Airbnb you’ll find on the platform. 

The new Short-Term Rental Regulation Law is aimed at changing that by implementing a registration system and banning short-term listings in certain buildings. The law also applies to one-and two-family houses.

List of Buildings Prohibited from Hosting in NYC

Local Law 18 is also meant to empower building owners by allowing them to submit their properties to an official list of buildings prohibiting short-term rentals. 

This allows the OSE to reject registration requests from tenants trying to host behind their landlords’ backs. Condo owners and co-op boards will have the same opportunity to put their buildings on the prohibited list. 

When a host submits a short-term rental application, the OSE will notify the building owner and allow them to confirm or block the request. 

What Should I Do if I Want to Host in NYC?

Hosting in the city is already a bit complicated. It’s expected that increased regulations will dissuade future Airbnb hosts from renting out their space. As part of the new law, hosts will need to do all of the following:

• Confirm they are the owner/tenant through bank statements and/or utility bills.
• Validate they are offering a short-term rental that is not in violation of the lease, laws governing housing, or zoning regulations.
• Provide plenty of information about themselves and the unit such as:
  • Identify
  • Address
  • Full names of everyone living within the unit
  • A diagram of the property showing which rooms will be rented out on a short-term basis and emergency exits

Failure to provide the information listed above will result in their Airbnb credentials being removed, prohibiting the platform from processing payments to these hosts. 

If hosts get caught renting out a unit without properly registering it with the OSE, they could face penalties of up to $5,000. Both hosts and booking platform sites that fail to comply can be penalized. However, penalties won’t be enforced until May 9th, 2023.

Airbnb’s Response and Resources for NYC Hosts

As you can imagine, Airbnb is up-in-arms about these new regulations which they argue will promote a “draconian and unworkable registration system that will prevent lawful and responsible hosts from listing their homes,” per their latest statement on Local Law 18. 

Regardless of how they feel about the new measures, they are obliged to comply, or risk losing their ability to operate throughout the City. Airbnb, along with other booking platforms will have to report on the specifics of hosts’ rental in order to corroborate the information provided to the City via registration applications. 

30+ Night Stays are Exempt from Disclosing Home Details Data Sharing

The amount of information that needs to be shared in order to legally list a short-term rental is extensive, which might put off some would-be hosts. Hosts should know that if they are considering hosting in NYC, but don’t want to share detailed information about their living space, there’s a way around that. 

By switching to 30+ night stays, hosts are exempt from data sharing requirements that disclose home details. This means that hosts can post their short-term rentals on Airbnb and other booking platforms without having to submit the information mentioned in the bullets above. 

Although hosting for 30 days or less is enticing and can often reap greater financial rewards, there are some benefits to hosting 30 days, or more. In addition to not having to share information about their home’s layout, long-term hosts will be reducing guest turnover, which could lead to lower maintenance and operating costs. 

They can also secure rental income over a longer period of time, making their rental income more stable. Stays that are 30 days or longer will likely attract a new demographic, such as remote workers and ‘slowmads,’ digital nomads choosing to stay in cities for extended periods of time. 

Is Hosting in the NYC Worth it?

According to the independent watchdog group Inside Airbnb, there are currently 40,000 Airbnb listings throughout the city. Once these new regulations go into effect, this number is expected to decrease by a fourth. 

Naturally, hosts will be dissuaded from hosting their space, given that they are facing rental income loss and privacy concerns. However, New York is still a competitive market, so some hosts will remain. 

Whether or not hosting at a time like this is worth it will depend on hosts’ financial goals, ability to keep up with new regulations, and the type of rental being hosted. RentHop recently published a study revealing that one-bedroom units were more profitable as long-term rentals in 96% of cities. New York ranked as one of the cities with the highest long-term return for a one-bedroom rental.

If you think 30+ day stays fit your financial goals and lifestyle as a host, then hosting in NYC may still be a viable opportunity for you. However, if your main concern is capitalizing on peak seasons where stays in the City are highly profitable, you may not think hosting in NYC is worth the trouble given the new restrictions. 

The post Everything You Need to Know About Airbnb Rental Regulations in NYC appeared first on CitySignal.

But what exactly is eminent domain? How does it work? And should New Yorkers be worried?

In this article, we’ll explore the roots of property and land seizure by condemnation, its application in the Big Apple, and what it implies for the rights of homeowners.

What Is Eminent Domain?

Eminent domain is a power of government that allows it to take private property for public use, usually through condemnation laws that vary from state to state. Government agencies may exercise this power to condemn any property or land parcel in order to build roads, schools, and other public projects. In some cases, it can be used to acquire land for commercial purposes such as urban redevelopment or to fight economic stagnation in certain areas.

When framed as a public-interest endeavor, eminent domain rings altruistic, especially when blighted areas are suddenly transformed with fresh housing and retail, providing jobs and other economic opportunities for the area’s citizens. But eminent domain is one of the most controversial powers of government, with some opponents viewing it as a medieval undertaking in modern times. Picture it: Government officials (or “lords”) show up at the property, declare that it’s needed for the public good (or maybe the “king” just wants it for a topiary garden), and take the land away from its owners. Never mind the livelihoods that are lost in the process, the countless memories of a place where one once built a life.

Of course, this is a rather dramatic way of looking at eminent domain. But rightly so. It illustrates the profound power and authority the U.S. government can exercise when it comes to real property and land acquisition. One day you may own a charming pink-and-white Victorian in New London, Connecticut, and the next day it could be bulldozed to make room for a Pfizer pharmaceutical plant.

This happened, by the way, in 2005, when the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Kelo vs. City of New London that eminent domain was constitutional, even for private commercial use. Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, alongside New London officials, envisioned a large-scale urban development project that included a hotel, a conference center, and new condominiums. To fulfill their vision, 15 property owners in the area were forced to sell and move out, including Suzette Kelo, who owned the pink-and-white house. However, the defendant’s argument that eminent domain was being abused was rejected by the Supreme Court. The little pink house was eventually relocated, but the case lived on in notoriety.

The little pink house at its new location in New London, CT.

Where Did Eminent Domain Come From?

The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment states that “no person shall be … deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.”

By using such language, the framers of the Bill of Rights recognized eminent domain as a necessary government power. It’s okay to seize property, they said, just don’t rip off homeowners. Instead, justly compensate them, which today means paying the fair market value of a home to seize it, whether the homeowner likes it or not.

Although the power of eminent domain was established in the Bill of Rights, the term itself has been around for centuries. It derives from the Latin Eminenes Dominium, meaning “supreme lordship,” which, again, conjures up images of serfs and lords.

But are there moments when eminent domain is essential to create the kind of much-needed change that comes from urban renewal and redevelopment? It’s hard to argue “no” exclusively. An abandoned factory in Detroit, for instance, may be better served by a medical center or a community garden. The same goes for a long-neglected lot in Brooklyn that could be transformed into an affordable housing complex.

These public projects may enhance the lives of community members who, for some reason or another, have been underserved over time. They’re good things, whether or not they rise from the rubble of eminent domain.

It’s the abuse of this practice for private financial gain, however, that’s often too hard to swallow.

Does Eminent Domain Abuse Exist in New York City?

New York City is no stranger to eminent domain abuse.

One example is the Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, which was later renamed “Pacific Park,” though YIMBYs might argue that the verdict is still out on this particular development because it hasn’t been fully completed.

The project, which came about in the early aughts and is slated for completion by 2035, involved the eminent domain acquisition of 22 acres in Brooklyn’s Prospect Park neighborhood, specifically the area around Atlantic Avenue and Flatbush Avenue. Developer Forest City Ratner proposed plans for 17 high-rises, with some commercial and residential buildings among them, plus a 19,000-seat, multi-purpose venue that would become the home of the Brooklyn Nets and play host to major music acts the world over.

Part of the overall result is Barclays Center, a mega-arena with undulating steel panels in copper. It rose through eminent domain. This was despite formidable opposition from Brooklynites who had no plans to sell their homes but were forced to anyway to make room for the project.

In 2016, Reason Magazine published an op-ed piece calling Barclays Center an “eminent domain-created failure.” This article was based on a report by journalist Norman Oder, who argued that the venue had lost an estimated $9 million by its third year of operation. If the point of eminent domain is to benefit the public by stimulating the local economy, then this report was damning evidence that it hadn’t.

On the other hand, YIMBYs (or “Yes In My Back Yard”-ers) who advocate for new construction projects might argue that the jury is still out on this issue. Pacific Park is slated for completion in 2035, so it needs to be given time to grow and develop before determining its success.

Other Ways Eminent Domain Has Impacted New York City

The precedent set by the Supreme Court in the Kelo vs. City of New London case carried ripples into the Pacific Park project. But to understand how Forest City Ratner was able to use eminent domain to its advantage, we need to look at an important precedent established closer to home: Yonkers Community Development Agency vs. Morris.

The city of Yonkers sits just a few miles north of New York City’s Bronx borough. It was there, in 1975, that the Appellate Court of the State of New York handed down its decision to allow the Otis Elevator Company — the largest of its kind in the U.S. — to expand its industrial facilities by taking “substandard” land from the City of Yonkers. The defendants argued that eminent domain had been abused because the new land was not for a “public use” or “public benefit,” but rather to expand a private business. The court, however, ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

When the Pacific Park issue arose roughly 30 years after the Yonkers decision, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) pointed to the Yonkers case as a precedent in a 2009 column, inferring that eminent domain could be abused to serve private interests as well as the public good. In its decision, the Appellate Court argued that the government’s right to property and/or land seizure was not limited to “slum clearance,” which was a term often used in the past to describe blighted areas that were ripe for eminent domain:

“As the complexities of urban conditions became better understood, it has become clear the areas eligible for such renewal are not limited to ‘slums’ as the term was formerly applied, and that, among other things, economic underdevelopment and stagnation are also threats to the public sufficient to make their removal cognizable as a public purpose.”

The above quote from the Yonkers decision is an eerie foreboding that charming pink-and-white Victorians like Suzanne Kelo’s home in New London, CT, and other properties that are in good condition in non-blighted areas are subject to demolition as much as neglected and dilapidated structures in disreputable parts of town.

This was partly the reason why Ratner’s project prevailed in Goldstein vs. Urban Dev. Corp, a case that challenged eminent domain in New York State. In this 2009 decision, the court applied similar logic to that of the Yonkers case, the result of which has changed Brooklyn’s landscape forever.

Eminent Domain in NYC: Will It Ever Change?

In the Kelo vs. City of New London case, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in the majority opinion that the Fifth Amendment did not require “‘literal’ public use,” but the “broader and more natural interpretation of public use as ‘public purpose.'” This was an important distinction that was also part of the Yonkers decision and has expanded eminent domain to include private development projects.

But shortly after voicing the majority opinion, Justice Stephens emphasized that states and local governments had the power to create more restrictive eminent domain laws. This prompted 44 states to pass reforms since the Kelo ruling. New York State, however, has yet to do so, leaving eminent domain and its abuse in the hands of legislators. This has caused concern among critics who fear that NYC’s real estate industry will continue to use eminent domain as a means of acquiring land to develop luxury housing and marginalize low-income families who can’t afford to live in the area.

It remains to be seen, then, if New York City’s legal system will take action to better protect citizens from eminent domain abuse. As we move forward, New Yorkers should remain informed and stay attuned to any eminent domain issues that may potentially affect their respective properties, pink-and-white Victorians included.

The post What Is Eminent Domain and How Has It Impacted NYC’s Landscape? appeared first on CitySignal.

We are living in the throes of a seller’s market, where affordable rent is hard to find and even harder to obtain. For those wanting in on the action, timing is everything. Real estate agents advise that some months are more fortuitous than others for finding an affordable home.

The Best Time of Year to Move to New York

According to most real estate agents, the best months to find an apartment are May through June and October through November. Late spring brings plenty of fresh options on the market, while fall has more discounts and deals.

Spring is buzzing in the New York market. More apartments hit the market during and after May than the rest of the year, giving renters plenty to choose from. The only caveat is that other people know this too, creating a competitive and challenging rental market. If you find a place you love- act fast. Apartments come and go quickly in the springtime, while the fall market is a little less intense. 

How Early To Begin Apartment Hunting in NYC

The earlier you look for the next place, the better. With low vacancy rates around 2.6%, there is much more demand than supply.

“Prospective renters should begin looking for their apartment 4-6 weeks before their anticipated move-in date,” explains Allyson Waddell, RentHop’s Success Manager, “Many landlords and management companies will not show an apartment unless they know they can profit from that potential deal within the month.”

More time may be needed if you are considering a condo or co-op, which includes board application approval. Experts recommend searching 2-3 months prior to the anticipatory move date, as board approval can take from 2-4 weeks.  If you are moving somewhere new, that could impact your timeline as well.

“Renters moving to an area with a market they’re unfamiliar with, should consider looking at online listings two months before they wish to move,” says Allyson Waddell, “Researching ahead of time can help paint a picture of rental prices and common amenities in the area. Additionally, renters may find a listing with an availability date that matches their desired move-in time.” 

Cheapest Month to Rent in NYC

Looking across ten major cities, including New York City, RentHop research found the cheapest months to rent between December and March. The most expensive months were May through October. The “peak-to-trough” difference, measuring the highest seasonal rent to the lowest, found dollar savings between $38 and $139 a month for a 1 bedroom and $47 to $176 for two bedrooms. One quick look at RentHop’s stats and trends page shows you just how much rent can differ in NYC over the year.

The pandemic has not been helpful to renters. A year-to-year comparison shows renters have struggled- median rent increased up to 32% across the five boroughs between March 2021 and March 2022. Current New York City rent prices are up 10% since before 2020, slightly lower than the 15% national average. 

Once you find a place that piques your interest, it’s important to jump on the application process. If there’s one thing about New Yorkers- they move fast. 

The Love and Hate Reality of New York Brokers 

Many out-of-state folks are not familiar with broker fees, but they’re a painful part of renting in New York City. As agents work on commission only, a broker fee is a fee paid to a licensed real estate agent or broker for representation during the transaction. Sometimes chosen by the landlord, their fee is covered by the renter.

Is It Worth It To Hire A Broker in NYC?

“I don’t think we would have gotten our current place in Brooklyn if we didn’t pay the broker fee,” says Tina Gray, a renter from Brooklyn “He did genuinely have our back through the process and was trusted by the current homeowner. With that being said, to pay a 13% fee of rent upfront as nearly a sunk cost was painful.”

In New York, broker fees apply to most apartment rentals. Plan to spend around 10-15% of the first year’s rent. Despite the sometimes enormous fee, better deals can be found through a broker or real estate agent, they also may help you get a lef up if you’re looking to move during a busier season. They can assist in more ways than one.

“Most of my work for clients is completed before the first phone call,” explains New York real estate agent Burton Frey Jr. “The primary service agents can provide their clients is guidance earned through experience. What neighborhoods or types of properties are conducive to an individual’s likes, dislikes, and needs? Which management companies or owners are responsive to service requests? A renter may not have the relationships and intel that an agent has with other agents, owners, and management companies.”

If you are ever worried you’re paying too much- just be glad it wasn’t $20,000. The state is currently investigating a $20,000 broker fee charged by Ari Wilford for a rent-stabilized one-bedroom apartment in the Upper West Side. 

What You’ll Need To Apply for an NYC Apartment

So, you’ve found the apartment of your dreams. What next? There are a number of steps between love-at-first-sight and the move-in date, and while they may differ from apartment to apartment, you’ll likely pass through the following steps.

During the application process, you will fill out an application, usually including a background and credit check. In some cases, the landlord will want to meet you.

To help with income verification, the landlord may ask for bank statements. If you do not make the required amount- generally 2.5x the monthly rent, then you will need a guarantor to sign for you. Once credit and income have been verified, it’s time to set the walkthrough and move-in dates. The walkthrough process is very important and is not to be missed. 

Background checks may soon be a thing of the past as the New York City Council debates a law to ban criminal background checks by landlords. Background checks can potentially allow landlords to use criminal history against potential tenants, which is grounds for discrimination. Most landlords remain firmly against the bill, worried it will affect tenant quality. 

Worries about crime remain one of the biggest detractors from moving to New York. Counter to these trends, the demographics of New York depict a different reality- a city in a slow and quiet decline.

The Shifting Demographics of New York City

From the very beginning of the news, residents began moving from the city in droves. Migration panic slowly set in, shifting demographics in real-time. New York City was hit harder than any other city in the United States. 

Starting in 2020, over 160,000 households relocated out of New York, with Manhattan losing the most people at the highest rate.  Outbound migration peaked directly following the start of the pandemic, and the overall population is in decline. Much of Manhattan relocated to suburban enclaves like Rockland County, Westchester County, and Suffolk County. 

New York has processed a number of changes since 2020. Adjustments in office dynamics and the availability of remote working led to low office returns, endangering many local businesses. Working from home has also changed living preferences. Remote workers are often looking for larger square footage so they have space for an office. The National Bureau of Economic Research recently found that US housing costs rose about 15% as a direct result of remote working.

“New York City had one of the largest declines in the first stage of the pandemic and one of the fastest rebounds,” said Rob Warnock, a senior researcher at the rental search platform Apartment List.

While housing prices soared throughout the United States, Manhattan real estate was at first an outlier, experiencing plunging home values as people left in mass exodus. 

“In the past decade, most of the counties [in New York City] have been experiencing out-migration,” Crystal Delbé, a statistician in the population division of the US Census Bureau, told Bloomberg. “And in 2020, which is the first year of the pandemic, we saw that same trend kind of persist.

Of course, this was not permanent. Beginning the second year of the pandemic, the situation reversed as outbound migration slowed and inbound migration increased. As housing expenses and real estate increased throughout the rest of the United States, folks began slowly returning to the big apple. 

Other factors contribute to New York’s population decline. The pandemic brought higher death rates, lower birth rates, and limited international travel and migration; all of which reflect as a loss in population. 

As you might discover in your new neighborhood- New York today is different than the New York of the past. But then again, it always has been. 

The post When Is the Best Time to Rent an Apartment in NYC? appeared first on CitySignal.

1009 5th Ave Listed For Sale

The Benjamin N. Duke House has just been listed for sale at $80,000,000 by Compass agent Jorge Armando Lopez. One of the last remaining mansions on the Gold Coast of 5th Avenue, also romantically known as “Millionaire’s Row,” this property boasts all the same elements as other Gilded Age Beaux Arts Mansions. During its landmark designation process in 1974, it was stated that it is “one of the few surviving houses which once formed part of an almost uninterrupted series of palatial residences facing Central Park.”

History of the Benjamin N. Duke House

Developers William W. Hall and Thomas M. Hall built this property designed by Welch, Smith & Provot between 1899-1901, and it is rumored to have been for no specific owner. In 1901 Benjamin N. Duke, who was the Vice President of the American Tobacco Company and founder of Duke Energy, purchased the property. In 1907, Duke’s brother James B. Duke purchased the home until his own mansion at 1 East 78th Street was ready in 1912. The Duke brothers were the classic example of Gilded Age socialites who were categorized as  “wealthy industrialists, philanthropists, and residents of New York’s most fashionable Avenue”.

From there, the mansion was passed to Angier Buchanan (Benjamin’s son), then Mary Lillian Duke and A.J. Drezel Biddle Jr, and later Mary Semans (aka Mary Duke Biddle). The property stayed in the hands of the Duke family until 2006, when it was sold to Tamir Sapir for $40 million, who later sold it to Carlos Slim. 

Carlos Slim and 1009 5th Ave

Back in 2010, Mexican telecom mogul Carlos Slim Helú purchased the Benjamin N. Duke House for $44 million, telling Forbes that he was purchasing it as an investment. In fact, in 2015 when Slim went to sell the home for $80 million, he said he had never stayed in the residence. It was reported he preferred to stay in luxurious hotels when in NYC and that may have been the case up until recently. Does this mean that no furniture was brought to the property?

Currently, Carlos Slim is worth $93.5B, according to Forbes.

Previously, the home was listed by Sotheby’s, but it seems that Slim has pivoted towards Compass in hope of getting the deal closed this time around. 

Inside 1009 5th Ave

The Benjamin N. Duke home is a New York City Landmark designed in the Italian Renaissance palazzo style with “strong Beaux Arts elements” that has over 20,000 square feet of living space. It’s a limestone and red-brick building with 100 feet of frontage looking out over 82nd street and 27 feet of side section staring directly at the MET and Central Park. 

There are 8 bedrooms and 10 baths, as well as numerous fireplaces, ornate moldings, glass and wrought iron doors, stone balconies, and gorgeous chandeliers. Like so many people dream of in NYC, the rooms have spacious rooms, high ceilings, large windows, and natural light.

The listing states the property could be owned as a private residence, however, there is the ability to transform it into a gallery or museum. These options seem most likely due to the building’s historic nature and coveted space near the Met Museum and other notable museums on Museum Mile. 

The post Benjamin N. Duke House Listed For Sale by Owner Who May Have Never Lived There appeared first on CitySignal.

What is the difference between YIMBY and NIMBY?

YIMBYism, which stands for “yes in my backyard,” and its antithesis, NIMBYism, meaning “not in my backyard,” are two principles that, unlike their calmer and cooler cousins, “Ying” and “Yang,” tend to engender conflict, with either side hurling hyperbolic accusations in defense of its constituents while the other side tries (and often fails) to stay level-headed.

Each side propels an opinion they believe will benefit the greater good. Yet, the two camps have different objectives. YIMBYs are focused on creating density and growth in their communities, often with an emphasis on affordable housing or commercial development, while NIMBYs are focused on maintaining stability and preserving what they’ve built in the community.

Both YIMBYs and NIMBYs have made their presence felt in NYC, where the two camps are at the center of debates about development and zoning. One instance saw the contentious proposal to build an Amazon headquarters in Long Island City. When tensions between the two sides reached a fever pitch, NIMBYs ultimately prevailed, leading to the project’s demise.

But YIMBYs haven’t lost steam. In 2022, the city’s Department of Buildings (DOB) approved the construction of 45,019 housing units borough-wide, according to NewYorkYimby.com. Queens leads the pack with 743 new development projects, many of which will break ground in Long Island City, the very place Amazon considered for its headquarters.

Why Do NIMBYs and YIMBYs Clash?

In New York City, YIMBYs and NIMBYs have engaged in a series of high-profile battles over the years, ranging from the development of Hudson Yards on Manhattan’s West Side to the proposed construction of an affordable housing complex in Soho.

The Soho project aka “Haven Green,” which would provide housing for low-income seniors, has pitted left-progressive NYS assemblywoman Yuh-Line Niou against Habitat for Humanity, the non-profit organization behind the proposal.

Niou, who is 100% NIMBY on the issue, has joined a lawsuit to stop the project. While some Soho community members are upset about the construction taking place atop Elizabeth Street Garden, which has been around for nearly 200 years, Niou’s beef with Habitat lies elsewhere. She argues that Haven Green is an impermanent solution to a much deeper problem: the city’s lack of truly affordable housing. Once completed, Haven Green will go from low-income housing to market rate in 60 years, per the agreement between Habitat and the DOB.

Niou makes a powerful case against the project: In a city with a dearth of low-income housing, why compromise and settle for a short-term solution? Moving forward with the project would be short-sighted, like building a network of upright dominoes for the fleeting satisfaction of watching them all topple.

But YIMBYs make a powerful case, too: What’s more important? They ask. Making sure that seniors, who are among the most vulnerable communities in NYC, have access to safe and affordable housing now (and over the next 60 years) or watching yet another affordable housing project die in committee? Never mind that Elizabeth Street Garden is often closed to the public and that new projects often end up improving their neighborhoods in ways that even some of their most ardent opponents come to appreciate, adding more jobs, more housing, and more amenities than ever before.

Rarely does the debate end in a chorus of Kumbaya, however; there’s just too much passion and too many divergent interests on both sides. Take, for example, the overwhelming NIMBY argument against gentrification.

NIMBYs often see gentrification as a form of displacement, plain and simple, as the gradual transformation of a neighborhood from a primarily low-income area to one that caters to the well-to-do may drive out longtime residents who can no longer afford to live in the ever-more-expensive zip codes. This fear is especially acute in U.S. cities where the job market has been drastically outpacing the capacity for new housing, with San Francisco serving as a prime example.

Some YIMBYs, on the other hand, prefer to see a cityscape bristled with cranes rather than an ever-growing myriad of homeless encampments. To them, infusing the city with jobs and new businesses is a way to make it more vibrant and livable for all. They see value in the revitalization of a neighborhood that could use a little more TLC. They argue that gentrification, when done responsibly and with consideration for local residents’ needs and interests, can yield a net positive.

But the YIMBY vs. NIMBY debate is incredibly nuanced, with divergent interests boiling down to two core questions: 1) How do certain forms of new development impact the needs of the individual and the greater community? 2) And what is each side willing to sacrifice to get what they want?

In a Backyard Far, Far Away

A June 2022 poll by international data analytics firm YouGovAmerica suggested an answer to question number one.

The poll, which surveyed 1,000 U.S. adult citizens, asked what forms of development did they wish to see in their backyards and which ones they’d rather see at the national level instead, many miles away from their homes.

Most homeowners in the survey supported the construction of local amenities that could potentially increase their property values and add to the neighborhood’s allure. They voted “YIMBY” in favor of police stations, charter schools, and nightlife venues, but signed off on “NIMBY” when it came to large-scale projects that may bring about social change, such as homeless shelters and low-income housing.

By contrast, most renters voted “YIMBY” in favor of low-income housing and homeless shelters, according to the poll. They had no skin in the game, as it were, so why band with their home-owning counterparts and keep the status quo? For renters, subsidized housing presented a host of viable solutions that could help alleviate some of the city’s most pressing issues, such as crime and poverty.

Does this mean, then, that renters and other left-leaning voters are pro-social change and homeowners are anti?

Not necessarily.

The same poll showed that, in a country whose prison system is one of the most overcrowded in the world, both renters and homeowners voted “NIMBY” on the issue of building a new jail at the local level and “YIMBY” as long as the prison wasn’t built in their backyards. A similar consensus was reached when asked about waste management facilities, with both camps saying, “Not in my backyard, but thank you,” when presented with the prospect of having one built in their neighborhoods.

By and large, the poll results demonstrate that while the YIMBY vs. NIMBY debate is often viewed as a bi-partisan issue, it’s much more nuanced than that. People’s opinions on development projects are shaped by their unique circumstances, as well as what they think the community needs. What’s best for one may not necessarily be best for another.

 Can YIMBYs and NIMBYs Reach a Compromise?

When city council members, assembly persons, and other lawmakers spar with each other at town halls and community meetings, often using rhetoric and hyperbole as weapons, it can be increasingly hard to find a middle ground.

With so many opposing voices drowning each other out, one has to wonder, is there even a middle ground?

In its Spring 2013 issue, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences published an essay anthology titled “American Democracy & the Common Good.” In it, authors Amy Gutmann and Dennis F. Thompson contributed a piece on valuing compromise for the greater good. They argued that “pursuing the common good in a pluralist democracy [i.e., a political system where there is more than one center of power] is not possible without making compromises. Yet the spirit of compromise is in short supply in contemporary American politics,” to quote the essay’s abstract directly.

It goes on to say that “a common mistake is to assume that compromise requires finding the common ground on which all can agree. That undermines more realistic efforts to seek classic compromises, in which each party gains by sacrificing something valuable to the other, and together they serve the common good by improving upon the status quo.”

In other words, a successful compromise requires all parties involved to recognize each other’s needs and interests, even if they don’t necessarily agree with them. In the YIMBY vs. NIMBY debate, this means that developers and neighborhood advocates must come to the table and consider each other’s perspectives. Not only that, but they must also be willing to give something up to reach a solution that benefits all involved.

Easier said than done, of course, but in New York City, where urban development has been shaped by the NIMBY attitude for years, some YIMBY-friendly compromises have been reached in recent years.

The city’s 421a program, which provides tax incentives to developers who set aside 20% of their units for low-income housing, has added thousands of affordable homes to the city’s housing stock.

Moreover, NYC mayor Eric Adams, who was elected to office in 2021, is looking to #GetStuffBuilt across the five boroughs and has called on both YIMBYs and NIMBYs to work together to create vibrant, livable neighborhoods for everyone.

But the second question at the core of the YIMBY vs. NIMBY debate is the toughest to answer: What is each side willing to sacrifice to get what they want?

Only time will tell, but in a city where both sides of the debate are deeply entrenched in their positions, mutual understanding and compromise may be the only way for YIMBYs and NIMBYs to get stuff built for the greater good.

The post YIMBYs vs. NIMBYs: Who’s Right in the Heated Debate Over Urban Development? appeared first on CitySignal.