Monday, February 3, 2020

Live above the iconic Block Drugs



Back on Friday evening, a tipster noted the arrival of an apartment for rent sign on Second Avenue and Sixth Street — above Block Drugs...



As the sign shows, it's a five-bedroom, two-bathroom unit (perfect for a family?) .. that has a "tasteful renovation" in what is officially 240 E. Sixth St. (aka 101 Second Ave.).

While the for rent sign may be new, the apartment has been on the market for nearly two months, according to Streeteasy.

And NOT listed among the many amenities: the warm glow from the Block Drugs neon...


[Photo by Jeremiah Moss]

As for the monthly rent: $9,995.

The building dates to 1880. Block Drugs was said to open in 1885. Public records show that Adeline Residences Inc. has been the longtime owner of the building, dating to 1970.

10 comments:

  1. How does an old Pre-war Rent-Stabilized building with no renovations get the rent that high?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Five bedrooms?!? I think we know what market this apartment is designed for, and it's not families.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That apartment was obviously renovated. The rent can get that high due to an increase (a percentage of renovation costs) following a vacancy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "The rent can get that high due to an increase (a percentage of renovation costs) following a vacancy."

    There's no rent control for apartments that expensive, it's doesn't require a renovation. Landlords can set whatever rent they want.

    ReplyDelete
  5. AKA railroad flat. And TWO bathrooms for FIVE bedrooms, good luck with that.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @10:31 - I think the question is how the rent got so high in the first place. Even with renovations, the rent can't jump that high unless it was already deregulated. And that's probably worth investigating.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @1:02 and 10:31, 9:46 here -- The question was how could the rent get that high. Until last year rent stabilized apartments could be deregulated upon a vacancy and/or after the rent reached a certain level. So, if the apartment was vacant and renting for more than $2,774, it would become market rate(vacancy decontrol). If it was vacant and renting for less than $2,774, the owners could do renovations, raise the rent based on a percentage of the renovation costs, and if the new rent went above $2,774, it would become market rate. So, my answer is, that's how rent gets that high in an otherwise rent stabilized building.

    Luckily, laws concerning vacancy decontrol and increasing rents based on building improvements were both changed last year, so this shouldn't happen anymore. It's likely that this apartment had been deregulated way before the new legislation, tho.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The dream is to find a super bargain. That rent stabilized apartment with insanely low rent locked in. A quirky old apartment with character and a landlord with a heart of gold who takes care of the place as if they were charging market rate. Just a god fearing person who follows the law and does not look for loopholes, because that would be immoral. Ha, ha, ha, ha ha.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It may be an old building but units can be deregulated for many reasons over the years. When that happens the units are subject to market rates. Total gut renovations, which is what this sounds like, is one of the reasons. Small rooms with no amenities makes the $10K/month a bit of a puzzle though.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Who wants to pay $10,000 to walk past garbage cans to get to your door? Depressing entry and hallway. Tiny rooms.

    ReplyDelete

Your remarks and lively debates are welcome, whether supportive or critical of the views herein. Your articulate, well-informed remarks that are relevant to an article are welcome.

However, commentary that is intended to "flame" or attack, that contains violence, racist comments and potential libel will not be published. Facts are helpful.

If you'd like to make personal attacks and libelous claims against people and businesses, then you may do so on your own social media accounts. Also, comments predicting when a new business will close ("I give it six weeks") will not be approved.