For those who don't desire a one year lease or their own apartment: Co-Living — Brooklynian

For those who don't desire a one year lease or their own apartment: Co-Living

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2015/07/16/co-living-startup-common-raises-7-3m-in-series-a/

I am interested in seeing how successful this model works in Crown Heights.

It really serves young people who are fresh out of college well. I believe the units come with basic furnishings, so one only needs their own clothing and laptop.

Another benefit: Potential dating pool lives within building.

Comments

  • edited July 2015
    http://therealdeal.com/blog/2015/07/16/co-living-startup-common-raises-7-3m-in-series-a/

    I am interested in seeing how successful this model works in Crown Heights.

    It really serves young people who are fresh out of college well. I believe the units come with basic furnishings, so one only needs their own clothing and laptop.

    Another benefit: Potential dating pool lives within building.
    That would make it that much more awkward if there were a breakup. 
  • Agreed. But people coped in college, and this seems to just be an extension of sleep away college.

  • I'll take them as a neighbor.  I imagine the place will be taken care of pretty well, and although young and fun loving, I presume those able to pay that kind of rent will be working 50+ hours a week and very tired by the time they get home.  They will likely be relatively quiet neighbors.

    Definitely better than what I have now.
  • The new buildings with very small, rental units (341 EP) seem to have only slightly less transient tenants.

    Some are med students and new corporate lawyers.
  • I wonder how this is going to work because these buildings now go from being individual apartments to SROs and rooming houses. They're under a whole different set of rules, not only from the city but from insurance carriers as well. There's a fine line here that borders apartment sharing but still, I can see NYC all over this.
  • As long as they lease the units for more than 30 days, they seem to not violate the rules that pertain to hotels.

    I believe each apartment has a bathroom and micro kitchen, so they skirt the SRO and rooming house rules.

    Micro apartments are a similar trend, but -from what I have read- do not seem to be going after the group that seeks a less than one year lease.
  • edited July 2015
    Rooming houses have what are called "kitchenettes". Sometimes a stove, sometimes a microwave and a refrigerator. Many of them have bathrooms. This still looks like that kind of a situation. Also, there may be overcrowding issues. I have clients who own rooming houses where the tenants have been there for years.
  • These are priced in such a way that I think they will have regular turnover.

    Also, I expect there to be lots of screening on the front end re: type of income, quantity of income, etc.

    The goal seems to be to fill them with people who are rarely home.
  • edited July 2015
    Some won't even decorate...
  • edited July 2015
    There aren't easily-available middle grounds between hotels & long-term leases these days, unlike when there used to be YMCAs and similar options— just Craigslist sublets, which can be a crapshoot to actually move into. Now there's AirBnB as well, but the corporate setup where you pay a little more for a sure option (as opposed to showing up at a random apartment and hoping someone's home) definitely has value.

    I certainly would have considered such a living situation for a month or two when I first moved to the city and was seeking a longer-term option.
  • This seems worse than having roommates as the people that you share with can come and go as they please. In addition, I'm wondering what refusal rights one has. Say the person, is someone that the others really can't get along with. At least with a roommate you know who you're with when you move in together.
  • edited July 2015
    In Craigslist "roommate wanted" situations, you really only get to know that the applicants can act pleasant for 30 minutes.

    Because there is always one roommate who seems to be home there ALL THE TIME, I found such situations to be tolerable only when I was out of the house a lot.

  • I've never had to room with anyone and since I went to college locally I didn't have to put up with dorm mates but when my daughter went to Pratt she couldn't wait to get her own room in a dorm. Cost about $1100 a term extra but she didn't have to put up with any crazies (and they didn't have to put up with her).
  • In college, I think I found the rommate who believed that "being his roommate meant being his best friend" the worst.

    He was a likable guy, and we hung out on occasion. However, he felt that I had far more obligations to his social life, than I felt I had to his social life.
  • More on "Pure House", the co-living space:

    http://gothamist.com/2015/08/02/disrupt.php
    As is the case with most businesses, not everyone has to like the Pure House product; They merely need to have enough customers to survive.

    It is starting to remind me of the Officers BOQ.

    https://www.dodlodging.com/html/MB-hawaii.htm
  • edited September 2015
  • Are these rooms all going to be in one building or scattered across a few?  Which building(s) in Crown Heights?
  • http://technical.ly/brooklyn/2015/09/16/common-crown-heights-co-living-rockets-out-of-the-starting-gate/
    There are no answers to my questions there, but thanks for posting the link again.
  • There seem to be a few locations being looked at and possibly multiple would open in the fall.  Some could be large buildings and some could be brownstones. 

    Articles that I'm seeing from July indicate that the location(s) is/are TBD. 

    http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2015/07/co-living-startup-moving-brooklyn-brownstones-raising-7-35-million/
  • edited September 2015
    Yes, the link I posted references a 19 bed complex, called The Common.

    150 applications seems substantial, but I hope the people are not nutty or broke in some way.

    This group of buildings seems like it would be a good, but ambitious use: http://www.brooklynian.com/discussion/46153/1432-1440-pacific-st-near-kingston-will-come-back-to-life
  • Articles that I'm seeing from July indicate that the location(s) is/are TBD.
    Thanks.
  • edited September 2015

    I think I might last a week:

    "Common will open its first dwelling at an as-yet-unannounced address in Crown Heights in mid-October, Hargreaves said. Residents will pay between $1,500 to $2,200 a month for one of its 19 private furnished bedrooms, which are grouped into suites and conjoined by shared kitchens, bathrooms, and living areas, plus a common area for the entire building.

    The company doesn’t actually own the buildings — investors are buying them and leasing them back to the company — but will act as landlord and den mother — buying the toilet paper, taking care of all the gas and power bills, cleaning, and organizing social activities like Sunday-night potluck dinners."

    “They can really open up, they can become vulnerable, they can really share themselves, and in doing so you create an environment where others can do the same and a really magical experience emerges,”

     

     

    http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/38/40/dtg-common-boarding-house-2015-09-25-bk.html
  • As I said in a previous post and the article linked to above states, these building are now becoming boarding houses which are governed by different rules than regular apartments not to mention they are insured differently. I'm wondering if the city will have to issue permits for this kind of use in buildings where the certificate of occupancy does not specifically state these buildings are suitable for SRO.
  • I have never seen an SRO described as a place to have magical experiences. 

  • Hey....imagination is a wonderful thing.
  • edited October 2015

    This sounds like it is going to attract people who want to make up for lost childhoods by bonding, sharing and caring. 

    The family and mother they never had.

  • Hopefully that's not the case. Because 150 lonely (or soon to be formerly lonely) people in a few buildings may result in some unique situations. I see a reality show in the making sort of like "Jersey Shore" but in a high rise.
  • It sounds like the founder will be disappointed if normal people show up, who -say- just want some place to sleep while they look for their own apt.

  • Nothing like making money off those who don't have much.
  • It sounds like the founder will be disappointed if normal people show up, who -say- just want some place to sleep while they look for their own apt.

    Maybe. Won't change the market. People new to the city will probably make friends with each other, but not because this guy is magically changing the world or anything.

    But boardinghouses serve a useful place in society, even if this guy sounds like a tool.
  • I think the real question is whether this crowd will be more like the crunchy folks who like Youth Hostels, as opposed to the khaki wearing minions that occupy extended stay hotels. 


  • Hey, if this doesn't work out he can always turn the place into shelters and rent to the city.
  • edited October 2015
    @pragmaticguy -

    Like shelters, it seems one can also create dorms without getting special permissions.

    http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2015/10/lich-controversy-continues-as-fortis-proposes-student-dorms-for-site/

    Dorms can be very profitable. ...their parents have money.
  • edited October 2015
    @pragmaticguy -

    Like shelters, it seems one can also create dorms without getting special permissions.

    http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2015/10/lich-controversy-continues-as-fortis-proposes-student-dorms-for-site/

    Dorms can be very profitable. ...their parents have money.
    If the parents aren't putting up the money, the would-be resident can take out student loans to cover the cost of dorming. 
  • edited October 2015
    Another plus is that they will pay more to live in settings that don't have RA's and they don't tend to want fancy finishes.

    Instead of illegally installing a washer and dryer in their unit, they might install a kegerator.

    BTW, the first (?) site of The Common's will be located at 1162 Pacific, but he doesn't look like he is going for the kegerator crowd

    http://www.brownstoner.com/blog/2015/10/co-living-nyc-common-in-crown-heights-brooklyn/

  • man. i'm not going to go down that "rent is too damn high, blergh!" tangent, but trying to put myself in the shoes of people who will be living here.... even then, with an open mind, this really doesn't seem worth it... i'm sure a lot of these youngsters will be willing to pay a premium to have everything basically taken care of for them (utilities, TP, garbage bags, etc), but this would only be appealing to me if they promised privacy and solitude, which seems to be totally not the case. Pretty much any roommate situation i've ever been to DEMANDED community and togetherness, to the point of it being seriously annoying/a catalyst to living alone. so why would someone pay a premium for that? is it just the premium of being able to have an overwhelming roommate situation (I mean, come on; you essentially have 18 roommates instead of 3 or 4....) in a "hot" neighborhood? what would transplants from out of the city really know about it anyway? couldn't you just as easily rent a cheaper house near BK college and find a handful of other young people you will probably end up hating too, but for less money?

    tl;dr, this situation would probably feel more "worth it" if it was more in the $1500 range. which is still a lot for 1 bedroom in the area...but not bad when bills and all that shit is included.
  • This style of living seems to have worked in other cities with those employed in technology.

    https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=tech+co+living

    They tend to be mobile, work from home, not have a lot of possessions and (as a result) lonely.



  • edited October 2015
    Friends was a big hit series.  It seems that folks have a lot of interest in imaginary living situations.

  • Not a fan of this.  Just a fancy SRO.
  • edited November 2015
    As I said in a previous post and the article linked to above states, these building are now becoming boarding houses which are governed by different rules than regular apartments not to mention they are insured differently. I'm wondering if the city will have to issue permits for this kind of use in buildings where the certificate of occupancy does not specifically state these buildings are suitable for SRO.



    @pragmaticguy -

    the city is asking those same questions

    http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20151120/REAL_ESTATE/151119831/is-this-crown-heights-rental-building-illegal-city-will-investigate

  • This is no different than when Uber and Lyft started out. Their philosophy was "we'll disregard the rules and do what we have to to become legal when someone notices." I suspect this will happen here too. And I think they're digging their own grave when they said they provide housekeeping and other amenities because, it just makes them more like a hotel or rooming house.
  • edited November 2015
    I do think that cities should re-legalize rooming houses.

    American society over the past 50 years or so systematically eliminated many of the traditional forms of affordable housing for single people, like small apartments, rooming houses, and SROs— now growing cities are reaping the bounty of a homeless crisis, and families complain about young people splitting up family-sized apartments when that's the majority of the available housing stock in most places and our society has more single people and fewer nuclear families than ever.

    People move to the city all the time, and the options now are generally:
    -crash on a couch
    -pay out the nose for a hotel
    -desperately dig through Craigslist for the first people that'll take you as a roommate, hoping they're in a decent building and neighborhood
    -(now) AirBNB

    But a rooming house or SRO or the like, where one can show up whenever and pay a higher-than-rent price while getting one's footing is a great idea.

    They should be legal in the suburbs, too, since that's where there are a lot of big houses and kindly widows. And the suburbs should do their share of housing all segments of society, too.
  • This model is clearly not for all segments of society. 

  • "About 70 percent of the Crown Heights residents have never lived in New York before, says Hargreaves"

    Oh dear.
  • edited December 2015
    It is now possible to safely live in New York without much common sense, so I don't know how much of a problem that poses.

    Google maps, along with subway shower curtains, help newbies quickly adapt.


  • whynot_31 said:
    It is now possible to safely live in New York without much common sense, so I don't know how much of a problem that poses.

    Google maps, along with subway shower curtains, help newbies quickly adapt.


    Oh, no, I mean, that figure is the kind of lie that you could only possibly come up with by categorizing only white people as 'Crown Heights Residents'
  • edited December 2015
    I assume he (and/or the writer) is referring to 70% of The Commons residents.

    I assume the remaining 30% have lived in NYC before, but expect this stay in NYC to be brief.

    ....or perhaps their move here was on short notice?
  • Oh, what a good laugh, on so many levels.
    Race, safety, costs, services, etc. Everyone acts as if moving to NYC is any different now than say 30 years ago for newbies or the young on tight budgets - it has always been "expensive" or a cheap nightmare - depends on your bank account, family, wants and desires. Millennials fast talk is no different than Baby Boomers blather, just a different angle. This guy will profit mightily, buying buildings for himself, thats business.
This discussion has been closed.