Darkness on the Edge of Town

Answer to the question:
Yes, I moved because I grew to dislike the UES. I lived on Park in the low 80's and got tired of the sidewalks rolling up at 6PM. Things have gotten busier over that-away since the time I lived there but it's just not that nice of an atmosphere to live around. Too snooty in one direction and too blech in the other. A friend was badly mugged on E77th bt/w Lex and Park. A car window was smashed in front of our building (!)...a doorman building. Central Park was a big plus but there was a lack of any real sense of community where I lived.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 10:03 AM

i try not to walk outside at 4 am
no matter where i live

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 10:15 AM

She was not outside at 4am. Someone broke into her apartment and she was woken by the burglar in her bedroom.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 10:22 AM

i try not to live in bushwick
ever

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 10:24 AM

Just FYI. This image is of the main strip in Windsor Terrace and not a picture of Bushwick. I agree with the statements/article, though Windsor Terrace's strip is onlt 4 blocks long and pretty safe it is desolate after 2am for the most part. There are always police stopping by the 24hr bodega or the bagel shop at night. I have lived in WT for 8 years and never felt threatened. My first 3 years (bt '99-'02) in WT I dated someone in Clinton Hill. I never felt comfortable there at night and though they neighborhood is changing over there for the past few years I still don't feel safe walking around at night.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 10:45 AM

In 1999,the realtor that showed my wife and I the apartment we still rent in Clinton Hill was smart(deceptive) enough to show us our apt. around 5:30pm on a weeknight, It was alos the middle of winter, it was quiet and clean. We soon learned that the night we saw and took the apt was an anomilie, we live on one of the busiest, nosiest, teenagers eating chinese food on the doorstep, dealers, runners and lookouts lace the corner around my building, moving to this part of BKLYN was a mistake. When its time for us to move again we will be sure to visit the location a number of different times and on the weekend, we didn't do our homework and put to much faith in our realtor when we pointedly asked what the block was like at night and in the summer and she replied "Oh its one of the quitest blocks in Clinton Hill" Bull shit.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 11:21 AM

The article says renters tend to be quicker to jump into a situation that turns out to be uncomfortable than buyers. But I think buyers aren't always careful enough either. Before buying anything, you should definitely spend some time on your potential new block at a variety of times of day and night, including weekends. Some friends bought a really lovely apartment only to discover once they had moved in that a long light at their corner meant very loud car radios sitting right under their bedroom window.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 11:22 AM

So true - bought a place in lower Park Slope 2004, went there on a warm night in the winter b/4 moving in - music playing out of car windows, people drinking on the front stoop, teenagers training (abusing) pit bull puppy for fighting, craps playing on sidewalk, dealing etc...

=NIGHTMARE, it was post closing so nothing I could do. Luckily area is slowly changing.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 11:42 AM

I learned this lesson the hard way 6 years ago. I’d just moved to NYC and rented my first apartment in Crown Heights that I found via a broker. Long story short, I broke my lease and lost my security deposit. Man did that hurt and still hurts when I think about it.
Never again would I rent an apartment without checking out the ‘hood at night and asking the landlord about noise in the building.
I live in Boerum Hill now and feel completely safe walking around at 3 am.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 11:46 AM

My mother always told me to check out a neighborhood at various times of the day, especially at night, before moving there. I've always listened to dear old mom and it's worked out for me.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 11:53 AM

Banking
Credit Crunch Whacks WaMu
By Laurie Kulikowski and Mark DeCambre
Staff Reporters
10/5/2007 8:55 AM EDT
URL: http://www.thestreet.com/newsanalysis/banking/10383000.html

Washington Mutual (WM) predicted a steeper-than-expected decline in third-quarter earnings, becoming the latest bank to assess the damage done by the collapse of the market for mortgage-backed securities and this summer's credit crunch.

The Seattle-based bank said profit for the quarter ended last month will fall 75% from a year ago, when Washington Mutual made 77 cents a share. A decline of that magnitude would put the bank's earnings at 20 cents a share -- well short of Thomson Financial analysts' mean estimate of 58 cents.
Washington Mutual said results will be weighed down by a $975 million provision to its loan loss reserves, reflecting ongoing weakness in the housing market. WaMu said its net charge-offs will be $550 million for the quarter.
Washington Mutual also took a $150 million writedown on the value of held-for-sale mortgage loans, a $150 million loss in its trading portfolio and $110 million of impairment losses on its mortgage-backed securities portfolio.
"While we're disappointed with our anticipated third-quarter results," said CEO Kerry Killinger, "we look forward to an improved fourth quarter as we continue to see good operating performance in our Retail Banking, Card Services and Commercial Group businesses."
Killinger said WaMu "continues to have the liquidity and capital necessary to grow the company's businesses and support its current dividend."
TheStreet.com Ratings reported in August that WaMu could face serious liquidity problems amid a sharp downturn in its bread-and-butter home mortgage business.
Earlier this week, Citi (C) , UBS (UBS) and Deutsche Bank (DB) posted steep losses tied to their holdings of mortgage-backed securities and leveraged-buyout loans.
WaMu fell 28 cents to $35 in premarket trading.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 12:12 PM

I moved from Bay Ridge a few years ago and thank God I did. Young teens driving their parents car at night, blaring awful rock music eating pizza ,drinking beer and puffing on cigarettes while sitting on the hood of the cars,the girls with that awful smacking of gum so loud it woke the dead,other idiotic teens skateboarding all hours of the night,hearing ouch every time they fell off the board.So glad I moved after my lease expired cause I didnt check out the nabe at different hours and was it ever an eyeopener.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 12:16 PM

At least in Bay Ridge there's no risk of getting hit by a stray bullet, as in Crown Heights.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 12:27 PM

The irony of course is that the NYT article was mainly about how supposedly desirable hoods (The UES Gold Coast fer cryin' out loud) turned out to be undesirable for people who wanted to socialize. Nothing to do with crime, noise, teens, drug dealers, etc.

OK, so they mentioned Bushwick. Big deal. They could have talked to all you bstoner commenters but then that would have been a different article wouldn't it?

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 12:29 PM

i'm hoping to god 12:16 was meant to be sarcastic.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 12:42 PM

Subprime mortgage slipping into default at rapid pace
By Shannon D. Harrington and Mark Pittman
Bloomberg News
Monday, October 8, 2007

NEW YORK: Subprime mortgage bonds created in the first half of 2007 contain loans that are going delinquent at the fastest rate ever, according to Moody's Investors Service.

The average rate of "serious loan delinquencies" in the securities has been higher than 2006 bonds, Ariel Weil and Amita Shrivastava, analysts at Moody's Investors Service, wrote in a report last week. Serious loan delinquencies are those 60 days or more past due, including properties in foreclosure or already foreclosed upon.

"It is shocking what you see," said Kyle Bass of Hayman Advisors, a hedge fund based in Dallas that has profited from its bet that the U.S. housing market would fall. "Anything securitized in 2007 has got to have the worst collateral performance of any trust I've seen in my life."

Moody's, Standard & Poor's and Fitch Ratings have been downgrading subprime securities issued in 2006 as defaults on the underlying loans rise to record highs. Fitch said last week that it was now reviewing ratings on bonds created in 2007.

Moody's has cut ratings or placed on review 496 bonds backed by first mortgages issued last year, or 3 percent of such bonds created in 2006. Through Sept. 21, S&P had cut ratings on 433 securities from last year and backed by subprime loans, or 9.1 percent of the total. Fitch last week cut ratings on $18.4 billion worth of bonds backed by subprime loans.

Moody's said 6.3 percent of the loans in bonds issued in the first half were seriously delinquent four months after their securitization. The rate was 4.2 percent after four months for bonds created last year, and 4.5 percent for 2001 bonds.

"We see this as a continuation of the trend we had in 2006," said David Teicher, a managing director at Moody's.

"We're studying it, looking at the vintage carefully, as we are with all of the other vintages."

The Moody's report last week compared with research from S&P in March that said 2006 bonds might be the worst-performing ever.

For bonds older than six months, 2006 was the worst year for serious delinquencies since at least 2000. Data in the Moody's report suggest that accelerating delinquencies from 2007 bonds are likely to eclipse 2006.

Foxtons declares bankruptcy

Foxtons, a discount real estate agency based in New Jersey that pioneered selling homes at a 3 percent commission, joined mortgage lenders as a victim of the declining U.S. housing market and filed for bankruptcy protection.

Foxtons, which operated real estate offices in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last week in Trenton, New Jersey. The company listed debt of $480,944 and assets of $2.6 million in documents filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court. Last month the real estate agency laid off 350 of its 380 employees.

Foxtons joins mortgage lenders like American Home Mortgage Investment and New Century Financial that filed for bankruptcy. The National Association of Realtors has forecast that this year will show the first national decline in the U.S. median home price since the Great Depression.

Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code allows a company to reorganize its business while being protected from creditors.

The company was part of Foxtons Ltd. until this year, when the parent company, which is based in London, accepted a buyout offer from BC Partners. The founder of Foxtons Ltd., Jon Hunt, retained the U.S. branches as part of the transaction.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 12:56 PM

No such thing as stray bullet in BayRidge..those bullets are intended for specific victims.They "hit" the intended target most of the times.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 1:01 PM

Good lord. Another cut-&-paste troll...

And by 'another cut-&-paste troll', I mean The What looks to be taking the same anonymous road he used to call everyone else out on.

Who's the hypocrite punk fucktard now, The What?

To be fair, you were then, too.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 1:11 PM

"At least in Bay Ridge there's no risk of getting hit by a stray bullet, as in Crown Heights."

Yeah...right.

http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categories/category.php?category_id=7&id=15571

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 1:23 PM

"At least in Bay Ridge there's no risk of getting hit by a stray bullet, as in Crown Heights."

Yes....good thing it's SAFE in Bay Ridge!

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/30/37/30_37invisiblethief.html

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 1:30 PM

Reminds me of one crime that was really terrible in Bay Ridge: a young woman working by herself in a store near Century 21, was raped by a robber in broad daylight hours. That happened 2 or 3 years ago. Also my neighbor on a better street in Bay Ridge was mugged in our lobby. However in general it's true as someone said, the bullets only "hit" where they're aimed. It's all mobbed up down there. Makes for a generally safe neighborhood. Not very tasteful or hip, but safe.

The real issue though is that it's really unfair to insult another neighborhood completely unprovoked by anyone in that particular neighborhood, 12:27. Just because you didn't like what someone said about your neighborhood of Bay Ridge.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 1:39 PM

"Generally safe??" Looks like a lot of mayhem to me! Also, that stuff about shooting at "intended targets" is a myth. Take a look at the precinct crime blotter.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 1:45 PM

"The real issue though is that it's really unfair to insult another neighborhood completely unprovoked by anyone in that particular neighborhood, 12:27."

No it isn't - he/she has the right to say whatever he/she wants to. But he/she would be wise to remember what they say about glass houses!

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 1:48 PM

It's a joke about the mobsters, 1:45, all that stuff. That's why "hit" is in quotations. (one tires of explaining things)

I'm not defending Bay Ridge, if the perception of that is what offends you. I don't live there anymore. I rented there when I first moved to NYC.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 1:51 PM

Look into the second amendment folks. You'll all sleep better at night.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 4:46 PM

Citing anecdotal evidence, such as the article above, does not refute the main point, namely that Crown Heights, per capita, is far more dangerous than Bay Ridge.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 5:44 PM

Brooklyn Heights' lack of any real nightlife scene has definitely caused me to at least seriously consider moving. It's just deadeningly boring out here most times of the day, and at night it's a virtual ghost town. But it's way too difficult to ignore the proximity to Manhattan. And it never ceases to amaze me that it's considered favorable to live in equally deadening but further away parts of Manhattan (UES/UWS are 20 minutes away from lower Manhattan, while the Heights is barely 10), so the rents up there aren't any cheaper. Talk about ugly.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 5:57 PM

Guest @ 11:21-- Where do you live and when are you looking to move? Do you have a 1 bdr? I am looking to rent. Thanks!

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 7:28 PM

We moved from Caton and E16th to Ocean Pkwy and Church Ave after my husband got robbed at gun point twice. People in our building moved from Ft. Greene to Kensington after he got robbed on thier stoop. And neighbors in the house down the block left Carroll Gardens (near Gowanus) after getting pestered enough times. We may not have a coffee shop but Kensington is generally crime free (w the exceptional car break in). Most other places people (non-bankers) can afford are on marginal areas... they are affordable for a reason. I think its just a fact of life in NYC when you don't make millions

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 9:05 PM

by far, the worst neighborhood i ever lived in was prospect heights. there was an ongoing problem of teens (or gang members - they were tough)just hanging out in front of bodegas and phone booths. i was constantly hassled, but my old boyfriend suffered worse - they were just waiting to pick on a white guy. he had to frequently work late and the walk from the Q on flatbush freaked him out all the time. in general, too many aggressive young people just waiting for an excuse to be vioulent. also, there was an actual murder 2 blocks away.

i recommend old italian neighborhoods - cobble hill, carroll gardens around court, the named streets around 3rd/4th/5th in gowanus/park slope or the northern part of williamsburg between bedford and graham. the italians know how to keep away the truly scary.

i live on roebling in the burg now, and it is so nice and quiet and safe. there is a bar that attracts mellow patrons and is usually open down the way, and i feel that it really helps because there are people coming and going, but in a good way. no screaming post college types like in the east village.

agree that with renting, you have less to lose. i was renting in PH and when I moved, the first day in my new place was one of the happiest days of my life.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 9:34 PM

the rule has always been to ride your bike to your prospective appartment after 1am and go buy something at a bodega. if you can do this and linger a little bit then generally you will be safe.

i lived in clinton hill 11 years ago on grand ave by lexington where people tried to rob me multiple times. the straw that broke the camel's back was when i was attacked and ended up in a street fight with a teen ager gone bad at 2am. after that i decided to leave the area, mainly more from nerves than anything else. the only time anyone ever got my money though was when some kids pulled a gun on me downtown near livingston street.

Posted by: guest at October 8, 2007 9:44 PM

I don't recommend old Italian neighborhoods. I lived in one. Got called N*****, chased from the subway my a mob of 16-20 year old guido's, bottles thrown at me, etc... I guess this is how they kept "away the truly scary." I must have been truly scary as a 10 year old Black girl.

Posted by: guest at October 9, 2007 10:04 AM

as a person that lives in bay ridge let me say it is far safer then almost any place in brooklyn and far quieter to the point or boredom. i walked my dog at 3am last night and at no time did i never feel safe. i live close to shore road and i can spend sometimes an hour outside my house at midnight with no one walking past it.keep in mind bay ridge is so large that it is really almost 3 neigborhoods which have different personalities. as for the prior poster, im not saying everybody is an angel in bay ridge but the biggest misnomer is that bay ridge is still just an all italian neighborhood. predominatly moving in close to shore road in houses are greeks with a smattering of others including myself. im just sick and tired of people who have never been to bay ridge portraying my whole neighborhood as being italian meatheads and racists and not diverse. is diversity people who look different but all think the same or people who look closer to the same? why is it diversity is surrounding yourself with whites, asians and blacks who all have the same liberal thinking while its never greeks,italians,irish,muslims and local brooklynites who might think differently then you? im not asking you to like or live in bay ridge but please don't take cues from posters who have never been here and grew up in ohio.

Posted by: guest at October 9, 2007 11:35 AM

Bay Ridge was never traditionally though of as all Italian. It was historically known as a Scandinavian enclave. As a Black girl growing up in Bensonhurst getting chased by much older boys, when I visited friends in Bay Ridge where I also attended Fontbonne Hall Academy I never got chased. Who said diversity wasn't Asians, Arabs, Greeks, etc...?

Posted by: guest at October 9, 2007 6:55 PM