So says this article in
the Brooklyn Paper, the presence of $2 million dollar homes and $2K-plus rents is not enough for the landlords along Flatbush to reel in the BIG G stores. This despite bars, eateries and coffee places galore that cater to the middle class and youthful newer residents. (Okay, a lot of them are white, but not all.)
It's a bit shocking...sort of. There is ALWAYS another level to go UP, until you reach, I dunno, Tribeca or DUMBO or Billyburg level gentrification (or the Upper West Side before that, or East Village or, uh, Dubai).
So where are we in the stream of upclassing? Who knows. Depends a lot on the economy, which given the current political crises could implode any day now. Look for a lot of discounts on storefronts if that happens, the UPside of DOWNturns.
Of course the whole narrative is slimy with irony at every turn. That shouldn't prevent you from having a good chuckle or snit fit when you read the piece. Happy reading!
9 comments:
This isn't simply a gentrification issue. There are lots of studies (this is my favorite: https://www.6sqft.com/mapping-manhattans-vacant-storefronts/ ) that show this is an epidemic across the entire city. Not restricted to one class/neighborhood. It's too bad they aren't filled, but greed is eternal not just opportunistic.
Yes, yes, we know all that. It's the "waiting" for the right clientele that's galling, and not just a bit racist. And frankly it doesn't even work very well to wait. My friend Marty had a place on 7th Avenue - the taqueria. He got priced out, and the place hasn't found a renter for half a dozen years. That is ridiculous, and that place made money. All this for, what, a grand or two more a month?
Well, because of the incredible faults in the tax code, a landlord can keep warehousing properties and still "make" money through tax deductions, writing it off as a loss on potential rent come April.
Who is this Urban Retail? Can we direct ire and Protest toward them? Because they have most of and the best of the very longtime empty storefronts. The empty Subway sandwich spot had garbage all over in front today. Total blight.
It can't hurt. I'll try calling them tomorrow and see what they have to say. But it's really a matter of supply and demand. I don't know what we could do or say, but I'm game.
You could rent a store front.
I am looking for a storefront on Flatbush and I have looked at a few of these spots. The boost mobile spot in the picture was available for 2,000 or 2,500 I can't remember which. Most of the other larger spots available from Urban Realty are 4,000 - 5,000 including the former Subway and the corner deli on maple. These prices are certainly high, but I am not sure it is accurate to say that they are warehousing the spaces. They are just charging what they see as the max they can get in 2017. The bigger issue to me is the long time businesses like Errols who cannot get a new lease at a reasonable rate. A reasonable landlord would see that keeping businesses like Errols around will actually help them get the rents they are looking for on the vacant spaces.
"Well, because of the incredible faults in the tax code, a landlord can keep warehousing properties and still "make" money through tax deductions, writing it off as a loss on potential rent come April."
Hey anonymous, this is a total myth and something I hear often. Can't write off potential rent. There are absolutely no mechanisms to allow this and really no advantage to keep storefronts empty. Often these landlords want to hold out for an area to gentrify before locking themselves into long-term leases. It's a two-way street and relationship really.
Some people do not realize the amount of additional expenses a tenant brings to a landlord. Hence, if the potential tenant does not cover those expenses and/or you think you can better a tenant in the future, it is a logical choice to leave the property vacant.
Sorry to state the obvious, but a future good tenant can't rent a storefront that is already occupied by a bad one.
Post a Comment