The Real Deal New York

Affordable housing? Rents through the roof since 2000

Study finds median apartment rent up to $1,100 from $630 -- a 75% hike

April 23, 2014 08:30AM

scott-stringer-1

Scott Stringer

Rents in New York City have skyrocketed by 75 percent since 2000, while median incomes have grown static.

The median apartment rent rose to $1,100 per month from $630 over a 12-year period ending in 2012, according to a report from the office of Comptroller Scott Stringer. Compared to everywhere else in the U.S., the 2012 rent level in the city was 31 percent higher. Michael Bloomberg was elected mayor in 2001. Several more apartments rents in the range of $1,200 and $1,600 now than in 2000. Back then, apartments renting for $400 through $1,000 per month were far more common. There were 360,000 fewer units in that range in 2012, Crain’s reported, citing the study.

The median income of residents is down by 4.8 percent. The average annual U.S. inflation rate during the same period was around 2.5 percent, Crain’s reported.

Mayor Bill de Blasio is slated to unveil a plan for preserving 200,000 affordable-housing units on May 1.

“Rents are going through the roof, while incomes are sinking. And that’s where you get the affordability crunch, and it’s hitting our city at virtually every income level,” Stringer said, calling some of the data “chilling.” [Crain's]Mark Maurer

17 Responses to “Affordable housing? Rents through the roof since 2000”

  1. April 23, 2014 at 9:19 am, how about an income check? said:

    This tenant who makes more than a lot of people including SPONYs is saying that she isn’t moving because she can’t find as good a deal but most people live in less convenient areas two fare zones so basically this affordable housing argument is only representing a protected few. It’s not a we’re all in this together situation at all. No one is addressing the ongoing hikes such as today’s water and sewer hike announcement.

    How can expenses go up but rents be reduced or frozen? That makes no sense. No one can carry that. They’re not asking owners to make less profit, they are demanding that owners go even further out of pocket. Apartments should at least carry themselves and if regulation is appropriate, the tenants really should provide their financial records so that we are not inappropriately carrying them.

    http://nypost.com/2014/04/23/as-rents-rise-some-stuck-in-affordable-homes-with-moving-too-costly/

    • April 23, 2014 at 9:23 am, end succession rights said:

      If the govt won lotto and froze everyone’s expenses. That would be awesome. But they’re saying we are going to charge owners even more while calling them slumlord and demanding that they lower the rents so their tenants can afford a lifestyle that the SPONYs can’t afford because of this situation?

      Really?

  2. April 23, 2014 at 9:32 am, ohh I am so racist said:

    If I didn’t read the story, I have to say that Audrey Quantana looks like a lot of fun: Harlem and ONYX.

    But what is up with the kid gloves?

    You know, African Americans are the ones (like Sicilian nuns) who lay down proper behavior because they’re not afraid to speak up with moral authority. One look of disdain at someone not wiping their wet shoes before entering a store is enough for a kid to never make that mistake again.

    So how is it possible that this tenant did not get moralsueded by herself or her neighbors into taking a little holiday while the building makes repairs?

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/uptown/east-harlem-grandmother-refuses-relocate-grim-conditions-article-1.1765252

    Here she is again and yes, the NONPROFIT rep is claiming that tenants damage the premises intentionally:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/uptown/west-harlem-developer-developed-enemies-tenants-properties-article-1.1765480

    • April 23, 2014 at 12:38 pm, unfair to owners said:

      That photograph of the hallway with the water damage ceiling could only come about if the hallway above was flooded and that might be because they were playing with water upstairs and caused the damage i.e. not a plumbing issue.

      Can we get a bill proposed and passed into law about tenants who habitually cause water damage?

      • April 23, 2014 at 5:38 pm, NL1975 said:

        Hope they checked for mold and did mold/mildew remediation.. Water Damage to walls and ceiling = major increase in owners insurance costs due to the possibility of toxic mold

  3. April 23, 2014 at 9:56 am, basiceconomics said:

    When prices are held artificially low, shortages naturally ensue. Goes for food. Toilet paper. Real estate. Basic economics. Half of NYC’s housing stock is artificially priced lower than market. Is it any mystery that the units that are free market inflate in response?

    • April 23, 2014 at 10:22 am, very difficult said:

      not every building can get market rates as reported but I think the govt charges all buildings based on the top shelf buildings’ successes

  4. April 23, 2014 at 11:02 am, JB said:

    How come this report has been provided to press outlets but it’s not actually available on the Comptroller’s website? Because its primary purpose was a PUBLICITY STUNT rather than an attempt at good housing policy. Fuzzy math, bad economics and bad policy. Let’s get someone in the top financial office in the City who truly understands the issues.

  5. April 23, 2014 at 12:07 pm, Josh said:

    Why does every article on housing affordability focus on people who already can qualify for city subsidies? Who is watching out for the 100k+ crowd that can only “afford” housing that is substandard to what the city gives away?

  6. April 23, 2014 at 12:42 pm, unaffordable real estate taxes said:

    Also, wages are not going up but rents are because Manhattan is a magnet for out of town young people so locals are competing against the freshfaced and wellrested and employers know that they don’t have to raise wages at all. We have a surfeit of employable people and it grows everyday because everyone wants to try out being a New Yorker for themselves.

    • April 23, 2014 at 5:36 pm, NL1975 said:

      Manhattan as a ‘magnet’ for out of town young people?? Maybe 10 years ago, now it is much of northwestern brooklyn and much of Queens from the East River to the Van Wyck Expressway

  7. April 23, 2014 at 12:52 pm, doesn't make any sense said:

    There really is a complete disconnect from the govt claiming to be on the side of tenants while making owners go out of pocket to run rent regulated buildings:

    http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20140422/REAL_ESTATE/140429971/debt-heavy-buildings-seen-sinking-tenants

    • April 23, 2014 at 12:57 pm, have mercy on owners said:

      And doesn’t the city charge residential and commercial rents above what regulated owners and commercial market rents go for?

      And that is because they need rents to cover expenses, correct?

  8. April 23, 2014 at 5:34 pm, NL1975 said:

    LOL!!!! Where in ANY of the five boroughs can you find an apartment (even if under rent stabilzation) for $1,100 a month?? Even on Long Island, the ‘Median’ rent in Nassau & Suffolk is over $1,800 a month.. In 2007 I was paying $2,107 a month for an older non updated apartment in Stamford CT.. I wonder how much the median rent is… Just like saying the median household income is $71,000 in NYC, that isn’t even MIDDLE CLASS

    • April 23, 2014 at 7:25 pm, there is affordable housing said:

      There are plenty of 2 family homes in Staten Island and Queens and yes, Brooklyn and the Bronx where you can rent an entire unit very casually. No one asks for a credit check. Why don’t you go to immigrant neighborhoods or talk to immigrants and ASK them where they rent in NYC. There are plenty of people who need those tenants.

  9. April 25, 2014 at 1:39 pm, David Brown said:

    Means nothing without analysis of underlying trends. Firstly, how much was increase in rents of existing buildings. I’ll guess 30% for twelve years and much of that reflecting utilities and taxes. Secondly how much of the increase represents capital improvements to existing buildings. NYC’s rental controlled inventory is aging rapidly and, given construction costs, required midlife upgrades raises the rent substantially. Thirdly, how much of the increase reflects new building? Given land and construction costs today the more units built, nominally the objective of the city government, the more quickly the median rent increases. Catch-22.

  10. April 26, 2014 at 6:13 pm, Thomas Healy said:

    Well guess what? Because of rent stabilization, law, rent stabilzed apts give their landlords an automatic annual increase of about 4% per year. Thus, over 10 years, that’s a neat 40% increase. Thank city governement for that.

comment form

You must be logged in to post a comment.

MENU