Extreme Rents Forcing Tough Decisions in NYC

[dchan]

Originally Posted by tdawg

If you were living in the City, you could just walk home or take a short cab ride home.
But what if you live in Morningside Heights, Harlem, or anywhere above 125th Street but hang out in the East Village? I guarantee you that I can get home faster to Astoria by cab. There is a certain mindset that believes "I have to live in Manhattan." When I first moved here I had that mindset. It's only by letting go of preconceived notions of what the outer boroughs are like and exploring them that you reap the rewards. When I lived in a 2 story brownstone with a kick ass garden in Cobble Hill (a neighborhood much livelier and more expensive than many parts of Manhattan), I had the same attitude about Queens. I thought "why would I ever want to live in Queens?" I'll never have that attitude again.

By Manhattan, I mean everything south of Harlem and Central Park North (I might even include UES and UWS in this). So for the most part, I am referring to the area of Manhattan south of the Central Park South-ish and 59th Street-ish area.

[10023]

Originally Posted by tdawg

If you were living in the City, you could just walk home or take a short cab ride home.
But what if you live in Morningside Heights, Harlem, or anywhere above 125th Street but hang out in the East Village? I guarantee you that I can get home faster to Astoria by cab. There is a certain mindset that believes "I have to live in Manhattan." When I first moved here I had that mindset. It's only by letting go of preconceived notions of what the outer boroughs are like and exploring them that you reap the rewards. When I lived in a 2 story brownstone with a kick ass garden in Cobble Hill (a neighborhood much livelier and more expensive than many parts of Manhattan), I had the same attitude about Queens. I thought "why would I ever want to live in Queens?" I'll never have that attitude again.

My point, since my first post in this whole exchange, is that if you're mostly hanging out in the East Village, and you can afford it, then it makes the most sense to live in the East Village. The "is it better to live in Astoria or in Morningside Heights?" argument that seems to be starting from the Manhattan vs. Queens debate is an entirely moot point if you can in fact afford the rents in lower Manhattan.

Remember that the post that started this whole argument was me responding to someone saying that, in effect, anybody stupid enough to pay $3400/mo. to "see and be seen" deserves to pay a lot for rent. That struck me as a ridiculous statement, because most people that live in Manhattan's (or Brooklyn's) most desirable neighborhoods aren't there to see and be seen, they're living there because that's where the things they like about the city are located. And it makes perfect sense, if you've bothered to come to a city like NYC and put up with all of the inconveniences and hassles it entails, to spend as much as you can afford to live in as exciting and convenient of a neighborhood as possible.

[babybackribs2314]

It may be faster to get to Astoria by cab from the East Village if you're an idiot and don't know the subway... it takes 20 minutes to get to 125th Street from Broadway/Lafayette. Living off 125th is one of the most convenient locations in Manhattan, unless you want to go to the Upper East Side... both the A & D express trains are fantastic, and the D runs express 24/7.

[babybackribs2314]

Originally Posted by 10023

I feel like the L is down every other time I go visit my buddy in Williamsburg.

The L train and G train are terrible. Most frequent service? Maybe when it's actually running, which is about half the time... LOL

[599GTO]

Originally Posted by 10023

Ok maybe Astoria was a bad example, given it's the one decent urban non-immigrant neighborhood in Queens.

But you know what I mean... if you aren't at least planning to live in a "cool" neighborhood, with great restaurants, nightlife, galleries, music, shopping, etc. (whatever it is that you're into), then why bother living in New York City as opposed to say Cleveland?

Generally speaking, neighborhoods that aren't fairly expensive are either relatively dangerous or they're relatively devoid of the things that make living in New York worthwhile.

Well, we have feet, subway, bicycle, taxi, car service or the personal automobile to take you from uninteresting point a to "cool" point b, which in Manhattan can be in as little as 5 minutes. Do you really confine yourself to a one block radius of your apartment?

I live in North Tribeca and it's certainly not the most exciting neighborhood in New York, but I love it. I could certainly afford to live in the middle New York's more exciting neighborhoods (clearly, as Tribeca, especially the northern section, is the most expensive section of New York City) but I love my neighborhood and I wouldn't trade it for anything. When I feel like braving the obese Midwestern tourists littering cupcake wrappers all along Bleeker Street or Euro tourists causing pedestrian gridlock in Soho, I can easily walk or have a car dump me in one of those neighborhoods in a matter of minutes.

[10023]

Originally Posted by 599GTO

Well, we have feet, subway, bicycle, taxi, car service or the personal automobile to take you from uninteresting point a to "cool" point b, which in Manhattan can be in as little as 5 minutes. Do you really confine yourself to a one block radius of your apartment?

I live in North Tribeca and it's certainly not the most exciting neighborhood in New York, but I love it. I could certainly afford to live in the middle New York's more exciting neighborhoods (clearly, as Tribeca, especially the northern section, is the most expensive section of New York City) but I love my neighborhood and I wouldn't trade it for anything. When I feel like braving the obese Midwestern tourists littering cupcake wrappers all along Bleeker Street or Euro tourists causing pedestrian gridlock in Soho, I can easily walk or have a car dump me in one of those neighborhoods in a matter of minutes.

North Tribeca is actually pretty well situated in my opinion (and I looked at apartments near the Franklin stop when I moved) - there are good restaurants in Tribeca, the river is right there and yes, you can get to SoHo, the Village, Nolita and the Lower East Side very easily.

I really didn't mean to be a prick, I just took umbrage to someone suggesting that people live in "cool" downtown neighborhoods because they want to "see and be seen". I used to live on the UWS (hence the username), and now pay more to live in the West Village because I got sick of taking $20 half hour cab rides downtown in traffic every night that I wanted to go out. And I certainly don't confine myself to a block radius of my apartment, but it's nice to be able to walk to tons of places that are "destination" restaurants or bars (not because they're trendy, but because they're good) for people elsewhere in the city. From where I live I can walk to SoHo, the Bowery, or anywhere in the Village (West or East) pretty easily.

Yes it's pretty easy to get from neighborhoods in western Queens to Midtown (which only gets me to work, I don't hang out there), but it's a pain to get to neighborhoods below 14th Street, and the local places don't compare IMO.

[tdawg]

It's really a "to each his own" situation. Maybe it's because I'm a little older now but I'd take a day or night hanging out at the Bohemian Hall beer garden here in Astoria than anywhere in the city. Regarding the subway, we all know what a bitch it can be getting anywhere late at night. I have not so fond memories of it taking me up to 45 minutes (wait included) to get home to Chelsea from the E. Village on the F after midnight on weekends.

[10023]

Originally Posted by tdawg

It's really a "to each his own" situation. Maybe it's because I'm a little older now but I'd take a day or night hanging out at the Bohemian Hall beer garden here in Astoria than anywhere in the city. Regarding the subway, we all know what a bitch it can be getting anywhere late at night. I have not so fond memories of it taking me up to 45 minutes (wait included) to get home to Chelsea from the E. Village on the F after midnight on weekends.

Fair enough. I do like the beer garden... but I also don't stay in the city most summer weekends, so I'm more into local bars that are good on weeknights or in the winter. And I'm past the age where I'm going out just to drink... I'm more into restaurants.

Agree with you on the subway at night... I pretty much only take cabs after 9pm, which is another reason why living close to the places I like to go is paramount.

[dchan]

Originally Posted by tdawg

It's really a "to each his own" situation. Maybe it's because I'm a little older now but I'd take a day or night hanging out at the Bohemian Hall beer garden here in Astoria than anywhere in the city. Regarding the subway, we all know what a bitch it can be getting anywhere late at night. I have not so fond memories of it taking me up to 45 minutes (wait included) to get home to Chelsea from the E. Village on the F after midnight on weekends.

45 minutest from East Village to Chelsea by subway? Why didn't you just walk instead?

[tdawg]

you know the rationale: you go down to the platform, wait maybe 10 minutes or so, think about leaving and walking or taking a cab, but something in the back of your mind says, "If I leave now, I know the train will come once I'm up those stairs." So you stay and wait, and wait, ...

[dchan]

Originally Posted by tdawg

you know the rationale: you go down to the platform, wait maybe 10 minutes or so, think about leaving and walking or taking a cab, but something in the back of your mind says, "If I leave now, I know the train will come once I'm up those stairs." So you stay and wait, and wait, ...

If I were in the city at a late hour and my apartment wasn't too far away from my current location, I would always walk. I know the subway service at late night, and it is pure shit even by 10PM, never mind 1AM. You're more likely to see the money train or construction dumpster cars than you are to see an actual in-service train.

Of course, if I were inebriated, I would always take a cab. Walking or taking a subway is too risky at that point.

[Chase Unperson]

Originally Posted by 599GTO

Why do these losers insist on living in Manhattan? I don't get it.

If rent is too high, move to the Bronx or Newark or something. Dumbasses.

Because manhattan is totally awesome.

[Chicago103]

Originally Posted by 10023

But you know what I mean... if you aren't at least planning to live in a "cool" neighborhood, with great restaurants, nightlife, galleries, music, shopping, etc. (whatever it is that you're into), then why bother living in New York City as opposed to say Cleveland?

I can answer that. I live near Midway Airport in Chicago in a neighborhood that would not be considered "cool" in any traditional sense, it is mostly just a middle class family oriented bungalow belt neighborhood. While it may not have upscale sushi bars and hip bars and clubs what it does have is walkability for basic necessities, within a one block radius of where I live is a Walgreens, a decently sized Polish grocery store, a bakery, several fast food eateries (subway, dominos and little caeser's pizza, a chinese place, several others within a few blocks, nothing great but enough for basic food needs on nights I am home) and most importantly I live down the block from a CTA bus turnaround that gives me 21.5 hour a day acess to the Orange Line and downtown Chicago in 40 minutes with good timing.

Now structurally my neighborhood might be similar to many in Cleveland or Saint Louis but in those cities you only have access to downtown Cleveland or Saint Louis and most probably don't even have the transit acess I have here. Where I live I can acess everything that Chicago has to offer and the same applies to people who live in less well known neighborhoods of the outer boroughs of New York City. These neighborhoods may not be places that newcomers flock to but as much as people like to knock on places like Queens you have to put things in perspective, Queens is a more interesting place to live than where probably 95% of Americans live. Even very average neighborhoods in New York City or Chicago are vastly superior than anything middle America has to offer IMO. As long as said neighborhood meets a basic standard of transit accessibility and walkability and the vast majority of neighborhoods in NYC and Chicago do you have access to everything that makes those cities great even if your exact neighborhood is not world class.

[uaarkson]

But, Chicago is Middle America.

[rs913]

I can chime in with my own experiences about the allure of living in Manhattan. When I lived in NYC, my address was a tiny studio on the Upper West Side. If I had to give my "location" a grade, it would have been an A+. All the perks of living in a cool, high-profile NYC location without being somewhere too crowded (I could never live downtown).

I considered moving to Hoboken at one point but decided not to. This was 10 years ago when the area was starting to catch on. It's easy to get hooked on living in Manhattan and to dread the idea of leaving, feeling like it would isolate you from what's going on in the city. I'd be lying if I said that didn't factor into my decision, regardless of how much my Hoboken friends claimed it was the city's 6th borough.

Looking back on it, those fears may have been a little overblown, even though I don't regret my decision.

Of course, Hoboken is much more developed now and probably has price tags to match.

[Chicago103]

Originally Posted by uaarkson

But, Chicago is Middle America.

I didn't mean Middle America in the geographic sense as in midwest I was more thinking in terms of built environments. The average American lives in places like Anyburb USA, small towns and cities and even many second or third tier big cities for the most part are middle American by this definition. Even much of suburban NYC metro is middle american by this definition.

The point is there still is a big difference between living in an average neighborhood in Queens or SW Chicago and living in Cleveland, that difference being the easy access to vastly superior city centers.

[Chicago103]

Originally Posted by rs913

I can chime in with my own experiences about the allure of living in Manhattan. When I lived in NYC, my address was a tiny studio on the Upper West Side. If I had to give my "location" a grade, it would have been an A+. All the perks of living in a cool, high-profile NYC location without being somewhere too crowded (I could never live downtown).

I considered moving to Hoboken at one point but decided not to. This was 10 years ago when the area was starting to catch on. It's easy to get hooked on living in Manhattan and to dread the idea of leaving, feeling like it would isolate you from what's going on in the city. I'd be lying if I said that didn't factor into my decision, regardless of how much my Hoboken friends claimed it was the city's 6th borough.

Looking back on it, those fears may have been a little overblown, even though I don't regret my decision.

Of course, Hoboken is much more developed now and probably has price tags to match.

Is there a bigger cultural divide in living across the Hudson in New Jersey as opposed to one of the other boroughs? What I mean is that the Hudson River has mostly tunnels and limited subway routes wheras Brooklyn. Queens and the Bronx have numrous subway access points to Manhattan and even several bridges pedestrians can cross (Brooklyn Bridge). Then there is also the idea if you live in the outer boroughs you are still living in New York City. If I were to move to New York City I would want to live in one of the boroughs because at least then you can say you live IN NYC, I wouldn't want to live in New Jersey because they are technically suburbs. Then there is this whole thing of people calling Manhattan "the city" in NYC that is a bit foreign to a Chicagoan. The outer boroughs for the most part are more "city" than virtually every other city in the US. In Chicago there is much less of a divide between downtown and the neighborhoods because it is not an island and as a result there is even debate on what neighborhoods are downtown or "greater downtown".

[rs913]

Originally Posted by Chicago103

Is there a bigger cultural divide in living across the Hudson in New Jersey as opposed to one of the other boroughs? What I mean is that the Hudson River has mostly tunnels and limited subway routes wheras Brooklyn. Queens and the Bronx have numrous subway access points to Manhattan and even several bridges pedestrians can cross (Brooklyn Bridge). Then there is also the idea if you live in the outer boroughs you are still living in New York City. If I were to move to New York City I would want to live in one of the boroughs because at least then you can say you live IN NYC, I wouldn't want to live in New Jersey because they are technically suburbs. Then there is this whole thing of people calling Manhattan "the city" in NYC that is a bit foreign to a Chicagoan. The outer boroughs for the most part are more "city" than virtually every other city in the US. In Chicago there is much less of a divide between downtown and the neighborhoods because it is not an island and as a result there is even debate on what neighborhoods are downtown or "greater downtown".

There might be (more of a divide between NJ/Manhattan vs. between boroughs/Manhattan). I actually remember putting Hoboken in the same category as Brooklyn and Queens, while my friends thought of it in the same class as Paramus, Morristown, and various other NJ suburban outposts. I got a lot of "Dude, you're moving to NJ? We'll never see you again!"

Which was silly back then and even more so now, because Hoboken is relatively dense and walkable and is connected to NYC by subway and ferries, not just by commuter rail. Many NYCers have never even been there, though...hence the misconception.

I think Hoboken would be a great place to live. But then again, I could be wrong.

[NYRY85]

Originally Posted by 10023

"see and be seen"

If you're not in a place that has things to do, why live in new york? no one moves to nyc so they can live in astoria.

+1

[NYRY85]

Originally Posted by Kingofthehill

Sunnyside as the 3rd-best NYC nabe...LOL. I enjoy Queens and its multiculturalism and unpredictability, but to call Sunnyside the third-best nabe in NYC is laughable. I wouldn't even call that overreaching, as I doubt Sunnyside would even legitimately considered a top-tier NYC nabe. Nor would any of my favorite NYC neighborhoods, for that matter. And I say this as somebody who spent time in the area this Spring, and is a fan of its vibrant, Colombian-flavored Art-Déco character, killer Midtown views and short commute, and myriad cheap ethnic eats.

I think what 10023 was (bluntly) getting it, is that Astoria, Bed-Stuy, Crown Heights, Washington Heights, Harlem, LIC, etc., though they are not without their charms, are not the places people have in mind, or fantasize of living in upon moving to NYC, and for a number of reasons. More often than not, the people moving into these areas do so because it is what they can afford, with their true feelings of the area known in online blog rants about lack of dining/bar/retail options and amenities, and lengthy commute times. They are great areas, no doubt, but I doubt that for some kid in the Midwest or in any number of countries in the world, for better or worse, Sunset Park and Inwood are not what comes to mind when they dream of living in NYC. And that isn't a knock on those areas; much of it has to do with the lionization and romanticization of Manhattan in popular media, society, and lore vis-à-vis the comparatively less-known and much more (formerly, anyways) stigmatized Outer Boroughs.

100% true.