Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

TheDurtlerTurtle t1_iweai8p wrote

Rising rents in Manhattan ripple out to Jersey City and Hoboken which will push people out to Newark. There are a number of large residential developments happening downtown, in 10 years it's going to be a totally different look.

17

poete_idris OP t1_iweanwe wrote

I hope it doesn’t mirror JC

7

ABrusca1105 t1_iwgpdrc wrote

What is that? The rise in prices? They simply are not building fast enough.

1

Aggravating_Rise_179 t1_iwh9qdd wrote

I mean, yes... their dream is to also make the urban parts of the metro area seem like natural extensions of each other where it is easy to get people to easily move from Queens or Brooklyn to JC or Newark and vice versa. It opens up their potential pool of tenants by making the areas with subway lines much more attractive, and thus allows for more people from the region (suburbs or the cities) and outside the region attracted to those neighborhoods.

1

ABrusca1105 t1_iwhaf2b wrote

That's... Exactly what I want. I moved north to Woodbridge, but kinda want to move more urban. Except $$$$$ and I'm a snowflake suburbanite so don't know which areas are dangerous in Newark, JC, and NYC.

1

Aggravating_Rise_179 t1_iwngw5p wrote

For the most part, in Jersey, the urban neighborhoods with a Path train in it or close to them are generally the safest parts. The more you have to rely on the buses to get around, the more likely it is the neighborhood is a bit more rundown and dangerous. So for Newark, Downtown (which includes the arena district; university heights; the government buildings; and the Commercial District); the Ironbound are generally the safest. You can also play around with the light rail a bit as those neighborhoods tend to be a bit more stable, but are spotty. JC, any place along the path is usually safe. For NYC, thats usually a toss up as good neighborhoods border sketchy ones all the time, but for the most part its all pretty safe, outside of extreme pockets in Queens; Brooklyn; and the Bronx.

Im all for urban living, you should try it out, I think you would love it.

2

ABrusca1105 t1_iwnqnjt wrote

Do you recommend continuing my strategy of moving closer and closer over time or should I just... Do it. (Like moving to rahway or Elizabeth first, then JC)

I already don't own a car, only a bike, e-bike and motorcycle. I am getting a promotion to go into effect Dec and will be making fix figures and technically I can qualify for over $3k/month but I absolutely do not want to pay that. I have a small 1-bed now, but frankly I can make a small studio work if it has a separate kitchen.

My lease ends Feb, Is that even possible? Like would I even be able to get something? JC is my dream but it's just soooo expensive.

3

Aggravating_Rise_179 t1_iwormn9 wrote

So... asking me isnt going to give you an objective answer as I will always go up to bat for Urban NY and NJ, I just think the neighborhoods in that collection of cities and boroughs (especially the ones with 24/7 train access) is just hands down offer the best value in the region.

With that said, I would caution against Elizabeth, not because its a bad city (its pretty fun) its just difficult to get in and out of if you are relying on public transit and want to access the rest of the urban core since the city is only connected to Newark and NYC by NJ Transit.

I would advise picking Harrison, along the path, as its super quiet to give you a more suburban lifestyle, while having 24/7 Path access to Newark/JC/Hoboken/ and 4 of the 5 boroughs. It would make it much more doable to get into Manhattan for a night out/make it easier for you if you decide you want to venture out into Queens or Brooklyn for a night out as you wont be stranded past midnight (just need to either plan ahead of time to make sure you connect easily without a huge wait or prepare for a 20 plus minute wait once you get to a path station). JC is definitely expensive, but as long as you live along the path, you can access JC and beyond without much of a hassle for about half the price.

To make a long story short, I do think moving closer will be best. Even if you arent in the center center of the action (living in manhattan south of 96th Street) so long as you have 24/7 train access you are literally living in the center of the action and can access some great neighborhoods for fun as well if you want to explore outside of your neighborhood

2

Ironboundian t1_iwgcjqf wrote

Here is a counterpoint to the idea that Newark will naturally flow into a bustling downtown—We skipped the renegade small landlord stage and went right to the corporate landlords stage. Corporate landlords don’t want some loud music near their $4000 apartment. And so Downtown perhaps could never have the nightlife everyone thinks is naturally going to happen. Just more and more apartments near salad spots for lunch

4

thebruns t1_iwgwu9s wrote

Now hold on, Newark needs more salad spots. We need Chopt

3

Kalebxtentacion t1_iwgxwfd wrote

I mean swahili village be blasting music everyday until 2am and it’s literally on the first floor of one theater square and the hotel. And trust you can feel the vibration from the music

3

Aggravating_Rise_179 t1_iwh9b9c wrote

on top of the fact that other bars on the ground floor of residential buildings in Newark are extremely loud as well.

1

Aggravating_Rise_179 t1_iwh954l wrote

Um who do you think owns the nightlife in Manhattan, Washington Ave in Hoboken, or Grove Street... the rent in those places are extremely high for a mom and pop place to open up and the people running those places tend to be corporations.

Corporations have realized they can raise the rent alot more when there are things to attract the high earners, and part of the attraction is night life. Small landlords are the ones that care more about loud noise not the big corporations.

0

Ironboundian t1_iwhxol2 wrote

The buildings on newark ave? Not corporate landlords. For example the building that Porta is in is owned by a family that lives in Long Island and bought it 20 years ago. Not by one of the big Jersey City downtown Landlords.

3

sutisuc t1_iwj0p38 wrote

That guy had some big r/confidentlyincorrect energy going on

1

Aggravating_Rise_179 t1_iwniich wrote

Did I say all of those places are all run by corporations, I said they tend to be run by corporations. Pound for pound, the vast majority of the landlords in those parts of town are not mom and pop. You do have holdouts, but they are the minority.

In Hoboken, the vast majority of the small mom and pop places cashed out a long time ago. In Manhattan the definition of a small landlord is usually just an LLC that owns like 3 buildings. Im excited there are some still there, especially in along Newark Ave, but thats usually the exception now a days.

At the end of the day, landlords in redeveloping or up and coming neighborhoods want to make the neighborhood as attractive as possible to get the tenants they want. Downtown is increasingly being advertised to university students, recent graduates, and young professionals looking for easy access to Manhattan/JC/Hoboken. That crowd tends to want a more active nightlife close by to compliment the nightlife of the rest of the region. So landlords will change with the crowd and attract those places.

Another counter point, small landlords (the more mom and pop places) tend to shy away from attracting rowdy crowds because they have limited incomes to deal with the damage that a rowdy crowd causes/to deal with their tenants complaining about noise violations/etc. Corporate landlords have the funds to deal with it so they generally have no issue leasing out to businesses that cater to night life etc.

1