« Languishing at the LPC Big Plans for 79-81 7th Avenue Quashed »

November 26, 2008

Wanna Save Money? Leave Brooklyn For Manhattan

The NY Daily News reports today that some Brooklyn neighborhoods are now more expensive than those in Manhattan (the article looks at neighborhoods below 90th Street, traditionally the pricier part of the island). "The median rental prices in DUMBO, Park Slope and Fort Greene were higher than those in the East Village, Lower East Side, Upper East Side, Midtown East and Murray Hill," they write. Median sales in Fulton Ferry and DUMBO rose above Midtown East, East Village, Murray Hill and the Lower East Side, too. The apartments they looked at were of comparable size, they say. Brooklyn Heights one-bedrooms run a median rental of $2,180, while it's $1,950 on the Upper East Side and $2,085 on the Lower East Side. What does this mean about our fair borough? "Brooklyn's hot now, and your pricey rent just proves it."
Brooklyn Neighborhoods and Homes Outpace Manhattan [NY Daily News]
Photo by raph.v.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/7375

Comments

really comparing apples and oranges in terms of neighborhoods there. park slope vs. east village?

Posted by: goldie at November 26, 2008 9:51 AM

the UES a a horrible commute to almost anywhere that's why it's relatively cheap. and the housing stock on the LES is really disgusting and everything is super tiny.. except for the luxury condos built there, but that's not included in this study. plus living in certain parts of brooklyn just feels nice and it's much more laid back and it's not filled with gaggles and packs of screetching women with cupcake crumbs all over their faces.

*Rob*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 26, 2008 9:53 AM

car insurance is less in Manhattan too -and there are garages.

Posted by: Inigo at November 26, 2008 9:54 AM

Yep, but interesting nonetheless. Bet the average Manhattan apt is a bit smaller though. Plus it suffers from being in Manhattan ;-)

Posted by: Johnny at November 26, 2008 9:55 AM

Its not the neighborhoods. ALL of those apts that go for 2000 dollars or less for a 1 bedroom are awful in the village. If you get something nice in that area it would cost upward of 2500 easily. 1 bedrooms in Hoboken go for 2000 a month and those are usually shitty as well...

Posted by: HOBOKENROCKS at November 26, 2008 9:56 AM

A one bedroom in the Upper East Side or a one bedroom in Brooklyn Heights? That's a no brainer (for me).

I had a discussion with a friend of mine about this. She claimed that just about everyone in Brooklyn would move to Manhattan if it were cheaper. She's in real estate, so she is speaking from experience, but I completely disagree, and plenty of my friend do too.

I live in Brooklyn because I prefer it, not because it's cheaper. It would be much more difficult to get to many work locations in Manhattan if I were living in the UES or LES as opposed to across the street from 10 subway lines that filter into every part of Manhattan. And I find it hard to believe that these apartments were all "of comparable size." They don't give us those numbers. But these are just a few reasons.

I also have to point out that renting in Manhattan would also mean more shopping and dining in Manhattan, which is much more expensive.

Posted by: dwarbi at November 26, 2008 9:56 AM

I am not surprised. After 10 years in Manhattan, I moved about 1 year ago to Brooklyn, Cobble Hill. If I knew, I would have moved much earlier. Beautiful brownstones streets, it's quiet and CIVILIZED ! Still lacking the top quality service industry (restaurants, etc ...not as good as Manhattan) but the quality of life is just so much better.
GO BROOKLYN !

Posted by: brownie77 at November 26, 2008 9:57 AM

I've always said, long ago, that Manhattanites transplanted in Brooklyn would eventually move back to Manhattan once prices dropped there. This should help put downward pressure on prices as buyers remaining in Brooklyn will likely be of a lower income class. This headline suggests how overvalued Brooklyn has become (financially but not socially). The notion that Manhattan (excluding LES and Uptown) is cheaper than Brooklyn is unsustainable and will correct itself.

Posted by: 25 to 50 Percent Drop at November 26, 2008 10:03 AM

I would assume that Brooklyn Heights has always been more expensive than the LES.

Posted by: Santa at November 26, 2008 10:12 AM

"Brooklyn's hot now"

Brooklyn was always hot. Ask life long residents (me). This is the borough we always wanted to be in. This is where we called home, gew up, raised familes.
As neighborhoods improved, Condos went up,and prices got overinflated...now, they're calling it hot??
Please, even if the shift changes again, brooklyn lovers will always think Brooklyn is HOT!!!

Posted by: bayridgegirl at November 26, 2008 10:14 AM

25/50% Drop: totally agree ... even thought I prefer to live in Brooklyn, every non-native NYCer I know prefer Manhattan

Posted by: ZooLander at November 26, 2008 10:15 AM

"The notion that Manhattan (excluding LES and Uptown) is cheaper than Brooklyn is unsustainable and will correct itself."

This is the crux of it. You either agree or disagree with this statement. It is "unsustainable" only if Manhattan is more desirable. It certainly was not more desirable to me. I did not move to save money, I desired Brooklyn... a lot more.

...and in a downturn i want to be in brooklyn even more, not because it is cheaper but because it is a better place to relax.

...but then I'm not 30 anymore

Posted by: Aussie at November 26, 2008 10:16 AM

Streeteasy as the source? c'mon.
Just read that $1950 is median rent on UES for a 1 bedroom apt. Immediately you know something is way off. That is saying 1/2 of apts (1 bedrooms) are less than $1950.
Maybe if UES includes the Bronx.

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 26, 2008 10:20 AM

My UES one bedroom, 765 sq. ft., rents for $2,350. I don't think that it is a very big one bedroom. It has one bath but a nice kitchen with an island. It's not a modern building so the closets are just OK. No other amenities. I think those numbers they quoted might include a lot of high rises above 100 St!!!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 26, 2008 10:25 AM

and Corcoran list 60 1 bedrooms aots on UES - 2 of which are under $2000.

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 26, 2008 10:26 AM

But Pete, what about rent statbilized apts - wouldn't that skew the numbers?

Posted by: cobblehiller at November 26, 2008 10:27 AM

youd be suprised how many "1 bedrooms" are on the UES that are about 350'. the bedroom can fit a twin bed and maybe a small dresser, and you can put your feet up on the stove while sitting on your couch. and that'll run you about 1500.

Posted by: RobertMosesJr at November 26, 2008 10:30 AM

The trend is interesting in what it says about the increasing desirability of Brooklyn, but the comparison would be much more interesting if you were comparing, side by side, individual apts renting at the same price. You undoubtedly get a great deal of additional square footage and probably a much nicer place in Brooklyn for the same rent.

Posted by: squaredrive at November 26, 2008 10:31 AM

dave in bed stuy lives on the UES?

some people prefer brooklyn to manhattan. some people prefer queens to manhattan. some people prefer wyoming to manhattan. but still, manhattan prices should be higher generally speaking excluding the exception (brooklyn heights more expensive than the murray hill). when fort greene is more than the UES, something is whack

Posted by: Ringo at November 26, 2008 10:32 AM

As is being said - the median rents for Manhattan seem WAY WAY low.

Posted by: fsrg at November 26, 2008 10:33 AM

DIBS - 765 sq ft is decent size for an nyc 1BR. Many 1BR convertibles are even smaller. Up until a year ago, I paid 1600 to live in a 450 sq ft small 1BR in prime park slope, so 2350 sounds about right unless yours is further east than 2nd ave, and it if its close to the 4/5 at 86th, then its probably a pretty good deal.

Posted by: bktycoon at November 26, 2008 10:33 AM

Article states that they are talking about current rental Listings....not what current renters pay which would include longterm r/s r/c tenants.
My guess is that since talking about listings - there are many more phony listings by not very reputable rental agencies in Manhattan. This always seemed to be case back when Village Voice classifieds was 'the source' for rental apts. TOns of come-on ads for cheap rents in Manhattan neighborhoods from all these shady rental agencies. I think that is what StreetEasy figures are picking up.

Posted by: Petebklyn at November 26, 2008 10:35 AM

Ringo...I live in Bed Stuy now. Thenonly thing I miss about the UES is the ability to walk to work and all the grerat restaurants that I can walk to. The other place was at 54th & Lexington.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 26, 2008 10:38 AM

There may be too many cookie cutter apartments in the Manhattan sample, while the Brooklyn neighborhoods mentioned (ex Dumbo) are Brownstone neighborhoods. Would rather a brownstone apartment with tall ceilings ect. than cookie currer.

Posted by: Boerum Hill at November 26, 2008 10:44 AM

There are a lot of really crappy apts. in Manhattan. I saw some miserable looking holes in the east village before moving to park slope.

So, all things being equal, I'd personally rather live in the East Village or east teens/20s than park slope, but if I have a choice between a crappy apartment in Manhattan or a nice place in Brooklyn, I'll take the nice place.

That said, the Manhattan market is just faster paced than Brooklyn and prices change more quickly. If Manhattan prices trend downward, Brooklyn will follow.

Posted by: northsloperenter at November 26, 2008 10:49 AM

"My guess is that since talking about listings - there are many more phony listings by not very reputable rental agencies in Manhattan."

Very true. The signal-to-noise ratio for Manhattan listings is brutal.

Posted by: northsloperenter at November 26, 2008 10:50 AM

'every non-native NYCer I know prefer Manhattan'

Chiming in for the first time here...My wife and I moved to NY this summer and didn't even look in Manhattan. Everyone we knew in NY, with the exception of one poor soul in Murray Hill, lived in some Brooklyn nabe.

I think there are a certain number of non-native NYCer's who move to NYC in large part because of Brooklyn. I'm not saying that's the majority - but for some people it's not because it's cheaper, but because we actually prefer it.

Posted by: laik at November 26, 2008 10:51 AM

yeah, agree with what most of the others are saying. i doubt we're really looking at true equals here. i bet there's a lot of fake listings, exaggerated sq. ft, and 5th floor walkups in that mix.

Posted by: i disagree at November 26, 2008 10:53 AM

Manhattan is great if you like living in a shopping mall.

Posted by: billyboomer at November 26, 2008 11:00 AM

This is a joke. Apartments are at least 30% more expensive in EV than they are anywhere in Brooklyn. When I left the Village in 2002, I was paying $2,100/mo for a 600 sf 1-bedroom. That place is at least $2,500 now, probably more, and it was on Houston between C & D, hardly prime.

Posted by: FatLenny at November 26, 2008 11:05 AM

Yeah, I agree with FatLenny - All my friends who have been looking for 1 bedrooms in the EV/LES have reported back that it's at least 2300 for a real 1 bedroom. And that's a filthy walk up east of Ave B.

Jeez who pays that kind of money to live in the EV/LES? Makes me kinda miss my old studio on Clinton and Delancey (900 bucks circa 2005) Much happier in BK now though

Posted by: A Guest at November 26, 2008 11:12 AM

I'm not a native New Yorker, and after 7 years in Manhattan, and 2 now in Brooklyn, I would NEVER move back to Manhattan. Even if you gave me 10 million, bucks, I wouldn't move back.

I don't even like coming to my office in Manhattan anymore and have bargained for a day a week working from home.

Unless I have to, I don't leave Brooklyn from Friday after work till Monday morning.

All my friends (but one) have since moved from Manhattan to Brooklyn.

Posted by: 11217 at November 26, 2008 11:44 AM

Brooklyn was and will always be better. Period.

Posted by: Nanook at November 26, 2008 11:50 AM

I grew up in Brooklyn Heights, lived in SOHO in the mid 80's, Tribeca in the early 90's, moved to Fort Greene in the late 90's and would never move back to Manhattan. I, too, only travel there for work and hate it. Downtown Brooklyn is now akin to early SOHO, Tribeca before money invaded and culture once existed. Manhattan, thanks to Bloomberg, is soulless. Brooklyn is seriously where it's at. Don't understand why you'd want to live in Manhattan unless you're a Russian billionaire with not class or taste.

Posted by: PropJoe at November 26, 2008 11:59 AM

I love Brooklyn but I would move back to Manhattan in a heartbeat if the cost of living and spatial arrangements were equivalent. That said, the EV was turning into a B&T circus by the time I left. It was getting annoying, but I think you still meet more interesting people in Manhattan. It's still the world's epicenter, and Brooklyn is what it is only because of that fact.

Posted by: FatLenny at November 26, 2008 12:09 PM

If you're fresh off the boat from the Midwest or just out of college, I can still see wanting to give Manhattan a go for a couple years, but most people it seems...especially ones in the creative fields...end up discovering and moving to Brooklyn after a certain point.

The unique nature of the many different neighborhoods and how they are woven together is what makes it such a special place to live. I don't feel any difference in Manhattan anymore...other than the physical difference in the way the neighborhoods look, they all have a pretty similar feel, with pretty similar people.

In Brooklyn, you can take the train a few stops and be transported to a whole new world. That's the beauty of it, I think.

Posted by: 11217 at November 26, 2008 12:10 PM

"but I think you still meet more interesting people in Manhattan."

I absolutely do not agree. Definitely not the case in my life.

Posted by: 11217 at November 26, 2008 12:11 PM

No one interesting lives in Manhattan anymore. FatLenny definitely has Fratboy written all over him. His idea of intersting is Zeta Tau

Posted by: PropJoe at November 26, 2008 12:23 PM

I moved to NYC in 1990 and, after viewing and rejecting several cramped, crappy apartments in Manhattan, made a beeline for Brooklyn and never looked back. As with others on this thread, I would never move to Manhattan, even if I hit the lotto! The changes that I've seen in Brooklyn since then have been tremendous, such that Brooklyn now offers the laid-back atmosphere of yesterday combined with expanded amenities (bars, restaurants, better food stores, etc.).

The only way I'd leave Brooklyn is through death, but, then again, maybe I could trade my estate for a plot in Greenwood Cemetary.

Posted by: Big Jugs at November 26, 2008 12:37 PM

quote:
I think you still meet more interesting people in Manhattan.

if by more interesting you mean soulless, vapid, consumerist shopaholic, elitist, trust-funded, and brain dead, then fine you have a point.

alol

*rob*

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 26, 2008 12:37 PM

I like Brooklyn, sort of, but I moved here when it was cheap. I don't know what people are thinking today. But I am partial to the mutant bubble theory.

Posted by: Inigo at November 26, 2008 12:52 PM

I love Brooklyn and have always preferred it over Manhattan but only because of it's close proximity to and toned down pace from The City. From an international perspective, Brooklyn simply does not compare. Top earners will always prefer Manhattan. Jennifer Conolly, Spike Lee, Heath Ledger (RIP), etc. Brooklyn is and always was an extension of Manhattan, not the other way around. I think our preferences hinge on our reality. If we could really afford a WV, UWS or UES townhouse the majority of us would go for it. I know I would. There are exceptions of course.

Posted by: 25 to 50 Percent Drop at November 26, 2008 12:56 PM

Fratboy? Come on. There is nothing fratboyish about the Village or any parts of Manhattan with the possible exception of some steakhead nabes.

There may be an annoying elitist strain to the folks you meet in Manhattan but that's just a symptom of Manhattan's place on the world stage. The best and brightest flock to Manhattan and they are engaged in just about every cultural and intellectual industry on earth. You meet people there that you wouldn't meet anywhere else on earth. It is the most international city on earth.

You saying Brooklyn has that? Only to the degree that it is a couple of subway stops from Manhattan.

Posted by: FatLenny at November 26, 2008 1:03 PM

Remember when Manhattan was overrun with Gap stores, then Starbucks, then Duane Reades, then Banks. Nothing more than a Mall below 96th st.

Posted by: billyboomer at November 26, 2008 1:03 PM

Everyone interesting I've met while in Manhattan actually turns out to live in Brooklyn. Then again, I'm easily impressed.

Posted by: A Guest at November 26, 2008 1:05 PM

"There may be an annoying elitist strain to the folks you meet in Manhattan but that's just a symptom of Manhattan's place on the world stage."

It's called swaggah.

Posted by: 25 to 50 Percent Drop at November 26, 2008 1:10 PM

Manhattan a mall? Hon, you need to rent a car and go to Paramus. Those are malls.

Posted by: Inigo at November 26, 2008 1:15 PM

I have five friends that all have great apartments in Manhattan (SOHO, West/East Village and UWS) three own and two rent (rather cheap). The thing is that they are not only moving to Brooklyn but they are all looking to come to South Bedford Stuyvesant to buy a brownstone. My friend from the EV just mad a offer on a place Sunday. Every weekend they are in my area looking at houses asking me questions about the area. I ask them coming from prime Manhattan neighborhoods why don't you move to nice gentrified Park Slope Cobble Hill or Ft. Greene etc... They all say the same thing and that is they feel a connection with that part of Brooklyn... I think that is how New York is... Whatever neighborhood you feel connected to is where you want to live... Sometimes it has nothing to do with money.. I could have brought a house in another part of gentrified Brooklyn but I was not feeling a connection with that area anymore.

Posted by: Amzi Hill at November 26, 2008 1:16 PM

I love Brooklyn and will undoubtedly never live in Manhattan again since I have 2 kids and need as much space as I can get. But if someone wants to trade their WV townhouse for my PS townhouse, I'll drop off the keys tomorrow.

I am saddened, btw, that drug stores and banks have blighted some of the coolest parts of the city. Unfortunately, Brooklyn seems to be importing some of that culture as well.

Posted by: FatLenny at November 26, 2008 1:17 PM

I love the Manhattan swagger. It's generally possessed by recent grads who share a 1 bedroom with 2 other people on 74th btw York and the FDR.

Posted by: A Guest at November 26, 2008 1:23 PM

"I would NEVER move back to Manhattan. Even if you gave me 10 million, bucks, I wouldn't move back. "

11217 - I hope you are kidding or very very rich - otherwise frankly, I think you are an idiot.

Posted by: fsrg at November 26, 2008 1:54 PM

You could build a nice replica of Brooklyn on the roofdeck of your Manhattan penthouse for $10MM. Probably.

Posted by: Heather at November 26, 2008 1:59 PM

I was a typical Manhattanite for many years and now that I live in Brooklyn (where we originally moved to save money) I really do much prefer Brooklyn over Manhattan, and like 11217, pretty much spend the bulk of my weekends here. That said, would I *never* move back if money was no object? I have to say there are some beautiful parts of Manhattan in the Village or UWS (even the UES) that are near tons of cool things, have great schools etc. And, while I know Bklyn is now crawling with Europeans, we have tons of European friends and Manhattan is still the premiere NYC destination, even if Brooklyn is regarded as a quaint and beautiful place to live. The reality is that Manhattan still has a much higher concentration of cultural offerings, high-powered offices, etc. What I really wish is that more offices would move to Brooklyn - when that happens, maybe there will be more parity with prices. I've actually lobbied my company to consider moving to Brooklyn but as a nonprofit with lots of VIP funders, there still seems to be a perception - fair or not - that Brooklyn is more a "shlep" (albeit it a beautiful, slightly exotic one) for many of the city's more well-heeled residents.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at November 26, 2008 2:08 PM

it's a preference issue and nothing more. any other explication and assumptions run wild...

Posted by: bklynbpr at November 26, 2008 2:11 PM

FSRG - I'm going to have to agree with 11217 on this one. If you had 10 million dollars where would YOU live in Manhattan?

Posted by: A Guest at November 26, 2008 2:20 PM

A guest - what about a beautiful apartment on the Upper West Side, near Riverside or Central park? Or perhaps in the Village? Surely one can find a nice apt for 10million in those areas!

Posted by: Miss Muffett at November 26, 2008 2:26 PM

UWS - eh, never liked the UWS but I can understand it's appeal
WV - Maybe if they close up the PATH station on Christopher Street.

No ones saying there aren't beautiful neighborhoods in manhattan, but it seems the people who would "never move back to manhattan" prefer Brooklyn's more laid back, quiet atmosphere.

Posted by: A Guest at November 26, 2008 2:33 PM

I feel like you can sleep better at night in Brooklyn the energy is up way too high in Manhattan. Brooklyn is great but it goes to sleep at a certain time. Manhattan is 24/7.

Posted by: Amzi Hill at November 26, 2008 2:51 PM

Having lived for years on UWS, and now for years in Brooklyn, I can definitely say it's for me a generational thing. I liked the energy, never sleeping vibe when I was younger--but the connectedness/interesting but more laid back Brooklyn atmosphere is more my taste now. But it IS comparing apples and oranges you know....

Posted by: nk at November 26, 2008 4:58 PM

I'd move to the UWS in a heartbeat, just for the proximity to Lincoln Center. Leaving the opera at 11:30 or midnight, then having a 45-minute subway ride to Brooklyn that turns into an hour or more due to 'necessary track work' is a real drag when you have to get up for work the next morning.

For people with different taste in entertainment, this wouldn't matter.

Posted by: Sparafucile at November 26, 2008 6:04 PM

i dislike the upper west side, it is beautiful, but it is jammed-packed with upper west siders (blech!) I like carnegie hill. quiet, classy, interesting. a big apartment on a high floor in the east 90's? heaven!

Posted by: Inigo at November 26, 2008 7:08 PM

Very late on commenting but as a transplant from Chicago to New York almost 17 years ago, you couldn't pay me to live in Manhattan. I enjoy walking out of my door and seeing trees and grass and hearing birds chirp. Manhattan is a concrete jungle while Brooklyn has a real neighborhood feel. When I moved to New York, my plan was to live in Brooklyn. Brooklyn was, is and will always be hot.

Posted by: kev 121 at November 27, 2008 10:46 PM

« Languishing at the LPC Big Plans for 79-81 7th Avenue Quashed »

November 26, 2008

Wanna Save Money? Leave Brooklyn For Manhattan

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions