Survey finds 601 troubled condo projects

Some big buildings, some small ones. If an average of 50 units per building, add another 30,000 units to the city's rental inventory before the next vacancy survey. That's about 1.5% of total rental inventory.

Where are all the tenants going to come from? Other buildings. 5% here we come.

W'Burg condos are not troubled?

They only surveyed those six neighborhoods, so this is simply a snapshot of the issue.

secondandc, Thnx. Another question, why only those six hoods were surveyed?

"Both buildings have been on the market for at least a year. "

I'm not so sure I like their methodology: it seems like they may have counted some units/buildings which HAVE to be vacant because they aren't ready to close yet? What condo buildings get fully occupied within 1 year of coming on the market?

They have an agenda so yes their methodology should be suspect. But even with a large margin of error that is a pretty shocking number.

modern, sorry, they want to turn those buildings into affordable housing. not vacant apartments. whether they shall succeed is another story.

The six neighborhoods surveyed seem to be a mix of "high" value and "low" value areas as well as a probable mix of high activity areas and low activity areas. Obviously a complete accounting for all neighborhoods would be of the most value, and with apologies to folks that live anywhere else, the Manhattan neighborhoods below 96th would probably be of most interest to us RE dorks.

"modern, sorry, they want to turn those buildings into affordable housing."

Which is counted as part of the housing inventory and affects the vacancy rate. Either they will be vacant or someone will move from another place that will be vacant.

Household formation growth and net in-migration ain't happening in NYC right now or in the next few years.

> Another question, why only those six hoods were surveyed?

Maybe because WB already got all the coverage. NYmag did like a 10 page spread on all its troubled buildings. There was even a map with lots of red on it.

30yrs - I agree. They have an agenda, so you have to at least take it a little bit with a grain of salt.

nyc10022,

Thnk you.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I follow: what is Crain's agenda?

Right To The City has the agenda, not Crains. They sponsored the survey "as part of an effort to urge the city to convert vacant condos into affordable housing"

This is a ploy to bail out developers. The idea is for the City to buy the empty units at market prices and convert them to subsidized housing.

That hurts everybody. It hurts the market because it artificially keeps prices at high levels, even tho there is no true demand at those prices. It hurts the taxpayers of the City because they are being forced to pay through the nose for this undesirable real estate.

The city should just let the market fall to its natural levels and voila ! They will get affordable housing.

It is also not right for all those that either sold into the bubble or resisted buying into the bubble because it was not prudent. If the govt is not going to interfere with the market by putting caps on prices going up, they shouldn't put in supports on the way down. If they want to spend tax payer money, then pay for decent education systems and give mandatory economics classes in high school.

this must be why they are trying to lock people into 2 year leases all of a sudden. Prices are going to TANK