Sign up for the Brownstoner daily email
« Brooklyn Food & Drink Round-Up House of the Day: 273 Brooklyn Avenue »

January 13, 2010

Co-op of the Day: 449 9th Street, #2F

449-9th-Street-0110.jpg
This one-bedroom co-op at 449 9th Street is very cute. Great brownstone-y moldings and parquet floors plus good natural light. The major negative is the size of the bedroom, which appears to be just a standard single-windowed side room. Still, for one person, this could end up working quite nicely. Do you think they'll end up getting close to the asking price of $389,000?
449 9th Street, #2F [Warren Lewis] GMAP P*Shark





Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/12969

Comments

According to yesterday, 9th Street is horrible and no one would want to live there. Half off.

Posted by: denton at January 13, 2010 12:51 PM

Teeny Tiny Kitchen. How do you turn around in there without you A$$ getting caught on the refrigerator door handle?

Posted by: Expert Textpert at January 13, 2010 12:53 PM

Teeny Tiny Kitchen. How do you turn around in there without you A$$ getting caught on the refrigerator door handle?

Posted by: Expert Textpert at January 13, 2010 12:53 PM


Some of us aren't such big asses.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 12:54 PM

Looks really sweet. I personally prefer small bedroom and more common space.

But -- small, no w/d, nice southern exposure but that's the only side of the apt. with windows (kitch, bath no windows), and maintenance is nearly a dollar a foot. But maybe location can get close to this price. (Around $650 a foot.)

Posted by: Nomi at January 13, 2010 12:55 PM

"There's buskers at night in that station" - weirdly haunting quote someone once whispered to me.

There's nothing wrong with this place.

Posted by: infinitejester at January 13, 2010 12:56 PM

Yeah, noticed the photo of the kitchen makes it look much bigger than it could possibly be according to floor plan. Trick photography!

Posted by: Nomi at January 13, 2010 12:57 PM

Actually, i think that maintenance isn't so bad given that it includes the taxes.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 12:58 PM

Floor plan and kitchen pictures don't seem to jive. Sweet place and at least it has southern exposure.

Posted by: DeLepp at January 13, 2010 1:00 PM

The kitchen photo is kinda deceiving. The kitchen measures 5'x6'-6" and after cabinets that's only 3'-0" by 4'-6" to maneuver in.
Forget turning around with a plate of food, you have to back out.

Posted by: Expert Textpert at January 13, 2010 1:02 PM

So... we're talking just under $2,800 a month.

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 1:13 PM

Your math is off again Tyburg. $2196 a month and that's before the tax deduction. This is about the going rate (maybe slightly more) than a comparable rental in Park Slope. The average according to that report last week for the neighborhood was right around 1900/2000 a month.

When you factor in the tax deduction, it's cheaper to own this place than to rent.


Down Payment
$77,800
Mortgage Amount
$311,200
Mortgage Payment
$1,671
Total Monthly Payment
$2,196

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 1:24 PM

Wow... 5% mortgage rate and a full 20% down payment. Those are some pretty great assumptions for a very small co-op.

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 1:35 PM

"When you factor in the tax deduction, it's cheaper to own this place than to rent."

Assuming you believe that ~$78k is safe and you can ride out any severe drop in value

Posted by: Consultant at January 13, 2010 1:38 PM

The non-owners don't understand the concept of living rent free after the mortgage is paid off.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 1:39 PM

> a full 20% down payment

Hell yeah. Any co-op that small that you would want to be part of would demand 20% skin in the game.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at January 13, 2010 1:40 PM

They'll get close to asking on location alone.

Posted by: blackie blackerson at January 13, 2010 1:44 PM

DIBS - 40 years in this place sounds like a treat!

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 1:45 PM

20% is customary in a small co-op. Usually required.

And today, you could most definitely get right around %5.0. I know since my mortgage broker calls me every other day asking me if I want to refinance.

You can spin it any way you want, Ty but your $2800 number is totally bogus.

This is not a bad deal.

Yesterday's Brooklyn Heights 1 bedroom at $3200 a month with mortgage and maintenance is however a bad deal.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 1:46 PM

DIBS - 40 years in this place sounds like a treat!

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 1:45 PM


Who takes 40 years to pay off a mortgage??? I've never even heard of a 40 year mortgage.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 1:48 PM

"DIBS - 40 years in this place sounds like a treat!"


It's usually 30 years, and most people over that time are able to leverage up. 30 years is a few boom/bust cycles.

You'd rather spend the next 30 years moving from rental to rental trying to find a better deal because your landlord keeps raising the rent.

That sounds like fun when I'm 60.

Some people would like to stay put and have a home. Many many New Yorkers live in the same 1 bedroom they've lived in for decades. Not really so weird. If you're single (like 65% of New Yorkers are) why would you need much more than a 1 bedroom apartment?

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 1:49 PM

Wow, this listing really shows how much better brownstones look painted in a deep color rather than the white and beige you see everywhere.


Posted by: mopar at January 13, 2010 1:50 PM

I'm already regretting painting my rental unit beige. I feel like I'm living in a sugar cookie. (It's the rental but we live there for now.)

Posted by: mopar at January 13, 2010 1:51 PM

30 years in this place? shoot me now.

Posted by: saminthehood at January 13, 2010 1:53 PM

if diff btwn fha and renting is (aftertax) $500/mo, y wouldn't you buy that call option (assuming you have some savings)? you might hit the jackpot, but your worst case scenario is about 15k in dp and 6k/yr for the option. your upside could easily be huge: if gross price actually rises 15% in 3 years, you've doubled your dp.

i would venture that the real tax savings number would actually make the annual cost of call option cheaper (almost insignificant).

on the other hand, i'm pretty sure you'd have to pay pmi on a 3% dp loan.

Posted by: antidope at January 13, 2010 1:54 PM

Ummm... I said 40 years because you suggested some "rent free" years, No?

OK, fine. This place is perfect. Perfect for the single person, earning $75-80,000 a year and has $80,000-100,000 in savings.

And don't worry, I'm not going to argue that renting is fun.

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 1:56 PM

Unless they start to make more money, then yes, they'll likely live there forever...or, they could rent and like 11217 says, move from year to year looking for an ever-cheaper and ever-smaller rental.

This is a +starter home" and normal expectations are that you stay there for x years and when your income level is higher you upgrade.

But you eventually pay offf a mortgage and live rent free or upgarde because your finances permit it.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 2:04 PM

I just think that when things finally pick up in the real estate market (which they always do) this blog is going to become unbearable to read with people who were even more bitter they didn't buy than when we were experiencing the run up. Imagine when the market picks up and we have to hear about how Muffie missed the bottom.

This (and by this, I mean now and moving forward in the next few months for those who still think prices are falling) might be the best time in your life to consider a NYC home purchase if that's something you're interested in.

Think about it. Once prices level off and eventually start to rise, real estate prices aren't going to be crashing again for quite a while.

This apartment would have sold for 450K during its peak. You aren't going to see prices in NYC fall to Kansas City levels so keep in mind that this city is and will be expensive even after the bust is complete.


Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 2:05 PM

I know this is Park Slope and I can just as easily live in Canarsie, East New York or Bay Ridge or commute in from Westchester. BUT... this IS a starter home. That means it should be the same as rent because you're not keeping it. Right?

I dunno. This just seems strange that you have to earn $75,000+ and have $100,000 in your savings account to get a little 1-1/2 room starter pad like this. But I'm probably alone with this one.

Not to mention, during the first few years of a mortgage you're not building any equity anyway -- you're just banking on your property to increase in value (from one high price to an even higher one). Unless you win this little lottery, what have you gained after, say, five or so years? Not a whole lot i would imagine.

Seems you could earn almost as much sticking your $100,000 in a CD or savings account. Rent for cheaper, and then just skip to the next "level" of home buying... when you're earning $250,000 and have saved another $200,000.

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 2:22 PM

Do you know what current CD and savings account rates are????

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 2:26 PM

Between 1.25 and 2.00% -- better than the current negative yield on real estate...

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 2:31 PM

But sure... Brooklyn real estate will outstrip the inflation rate by 5 or 10 fold. So, in a few years you'll be sitting on tens of thousands of dollars of pure profit!

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 2:33 PM

The thing with starter anything is that waiting around for things to start, it never does. Just do it already!

However that transformation is often very hard to do.

Posted by: infinitejester at January 13, 2010 2:35 PM

Here's the thing Ty. While no one is necessarily predicting it, in 5 years from now, prices might shoot up again because construction in the city has practically come to a standstill and as more and more people move to the city, the housing shortage here will be even more pronounced. It's certainly shaping up that way.

Imagine....if the new owner landed this place for 375k and were able to sell it for 450K in 5 or 6 years (or whatever, I'm making those numbers up) that's an additional 75K to plunk down on the next place. Plus they've got the amount of the downpayment on this one in addition.

It would be easy to trade up to a 2 bedroom and then be set for life. Just getting the foot into the real estate door is the hard part and assuming you aren't in any rush to move and can buy and hold you can make money. If not, one expects that your salary will increase with time and you will be able to afford more home in 10 years.

Either way, it's a process, nothing is certain but if history has anything to say about it, prices will rise again. And probably more than anyone right now is predicting.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 2:36 PM

"Seems you could earn almost as much sticking your $100,000 in a CD or savings account."


Clearly you haven't been paying attention to the 3 J condo sales in the past month which have sold for 200K more than they were bought for 2 years ago.

And that was DURING THE BUST!

You think you're gunna make that in a CD???

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 2:43 PM

11217 -- I get this. I understand the process.

But I have a serious problem with the 'entry threshold' that seems to be silly. This is a very small place. This isn't Tokyo, Hong Kong or even the Village... While just my opinion, I see this as a pernicious real estate sickness that is very harmful to this city in the long-run. A single person or a couple should get a lot more than 450 sq ft in the form of 2 rooms if they earn $75,000+ and have $80-100,000 in their savings account.

Or am I totally off the mark here?

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 2:47 PM

I think you're off the mark, but I do understand you.

I just don't think you realize that NYC is the cultural and financial capital of this country (and some say the world). It is very expensive. No, it's not Tokyo or Hong Kong...some would say NYC is so much better than either of those cities. And Brooklyn is the "it" place to live right now.

But you know what...you'd pay 350K for a (slightly larger) 1 bedroom in nice areas of Seattle, Portland, Washington DC and Boston as well. This apartment is not outrageously priced at all.

As I said, the average Park Slope 1 bedroom rental costs $2000 a month. Given that this place costs about the same means that it's actually not off the mark...it's about right.

But certainly I agree with you that there are many places in this city which ARE severely overpriced. I just don't happen to think that this is one of them.

This is exactly the kind of place I would be interested in upgrading to in the next couple years. But I don't want kids, so I don't really have any desire to have more than a 1 bedroom apartment in my lifetime. I like living in a small, compact space and find that it makes life simple and enjoyable (for me). It also allows me extra money to travel, eat out a lot and do other things which I love.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 2:54 PM

And the reason why I say 350K is because I'm factoring in that there might be some room for negotiation on this price. It might go for closer to ask...who knows...

350K would be a good deal for the buyer.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 3:00 PM

tybur6 - instead of banging your head against the wall of Park Slope prices, why not look in cheaper neighborhoods? You could get a "starter" place for half this price in a perfectly decent area.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at January 13, 2010 3:02 PM

On the Tokyo and Hong Kong analogy, you are way off base. Things very far from "Central" in Hong Kong and Maranouchi in Tokyo sell for multiples of this place.

HK prices are well above US$1,000 psf even for crappy places.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 3:04 PM

Agreed, Ditmas.

Park Slope is not the best neighborhood to be speaking about here since it's one of the highest priced in Brooklyn.

I've seen really great 1 bedrooms for sale just a couple stops farther on the Q train from PS for 200K and even less.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 3:05 PM

I have to day - that's a pretty sweet 1 BR and for a good price in an excellent area, even if it's on 9th street - it's still prime!

Posted by: gemini10 at January 13, 2010 3:07 PM

Agree Gem. And just to clarify...I never said yesterday that 9th Steet was bad, I just said that it's more heavily traveled than most PS streets.

And was pointing out that 2 million for a house on 9th Street was a buttload of $$.

I like 9th Street though and really like this apartment.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 3:11 PM

ty, my friend just closed on a great pre-war 1 bedroom in ditmas for $225. It's got great floors, a true hallway, big foyer/dining area and two exposures. Pre taxes she's probably spending about $100 more than a comparable rental, but post taxes is where the deal really shines and she's in non profit.

Posted by: DeLepp at January 13, 2010 3:12 PM

9th st is fine until you get to the area between 2nd and 3rd avenue. of course, that is where i live!!

Posted by: joeingowanus at January 13, 2010 3:13 PM

BTW, According to Streeteasy...Unit 2R in the same building (also a 1 bedroom) was listed for $430,000 on 9/22/09 and went to contract on 11/4/09.

No idea what the sales price was/is but I'm guessing it was about the same as this unit size-wise.

3R sold for $410,000 in August 2009.

This one seems priced to sell according to these numbers....


Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 3:16 PM

"Who takes 40 years to pay off a mortgage???
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 1:48 PM"


Poor people. I hate poor people. They're so....poor...


ps I don't hate poor people - it was just a quote from a movie that I forgot the name of.

Posted by: the chicken at January 13, 2010 3:18 PM

"When you factor in the tax deduction, it's cheaper to own this place than to rent." - 11217 @ 1:24

Not if the value drops -20% or more by the time you sell (say 36 months later). You'd at least lose a 20% downpayment. Total effective gross monthly cost would be 4,161/mo compared to renting at 2,000/mo. Net cost not much different after tax deduction and principal paid are offset by interest, fees and miscellaneous costs. But, as you know, I predict values to drop another -37.5%. The celebrated tax deduction is an overrated hook to snag the oblivious buyer.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 3:50 PM

You only lose if you sell, BHO.

You come at the entire home buying process as if everyone is a flipper.

Some people buy to LIVE in their home. Your comments have become so useless, I don't even need to respond to them anymore.

You expect home prices in Brownstone Brooklyn to drop another 37.5%??

Are you on crack?

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 3:53 PM

BHO..if they haven't dropped that much by now, it just ain't gonna happen.

Pull your head out of the sand or your ass or wherever it is.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 3:58 PM

if you are a serious buyer that is simply afraid of a double dip or second gd, there is an option. buy dmm for an amount equal to your dp. see http://bk.ly/bjb

Posted by: antidope at January 13, 2010 4:00 PM

And most buyers actually sell, 11217.

Another -37.5% is consistent with half off, 11217.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 4:02 PM

So you think that when the crash is complete, this 1 bedroom in PS is going to sell for $245,000?

LOLOL

Keep dreaming.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 4:06 PM

"BHO..if they haven't dropped that much by now, it just ain't gonna happen."

Didn't work like that after 1987. Won't work like that now. There's no deadline for the collapse. It's on nobody's schedule. Especially when temporarily but futilly life-supported by Washington/FEDS.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 4:07 PM

Yeah, I read about that a while back, 'dope. But isn't there a short-covering risk? From what I recall, you have to get the timing right. There's one more option: wait and save appreciating dollars (deflation) and put more $ down on a cheaper house.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 4:12 PM

Neither DMM or UMM exist anymore.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 4:16 PM

245,000/(10 x 12) = 2,042/mo rental
245,000/3 = 82,000/yr median income

Not far fetched at all. I'll keep basking in reality, 11217.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 4:16 PM

If prices fell another 40%, I think we'd see half the world try to get in on some NYC real estate action.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 4:17 PM

At 9.5% mortgage interest rates the monthlies on this place @ $245,000 are the same as it is now @ $389,000.

Now now... I'm not saying that rates are going up to 9.5%. But, you gotta think that an increase of a point or two would have a substantial affect on prices, no?

Posted by: joeingowanus at January 13, 2010 4:19 PM

"Not far fetched at all. I'll keep basking in reality, 11217."


But that's the point. You AREN'T basking in reality. Reality is that a similar unit in this building sold for 410K in August and another for probably about the same or more in November.

Your 37% PREDICTION is not reality. It's the musings of a half crazy person.

So far, you've been so wrong about this bust that I don't know why you think anyone here should listen to you.

REALITY is that this place is probably going to sell for close to ask, then you will pretend like it never happened.

Just like you do EVERY time actual data is presented.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 4:27 PM

There's one more option: wait and save appreciating dollars (deflation) and put more $ down on a cheaper house.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 4:12 PM


ROTFLMMFAO

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at January 13, 2010 4:27 PM

real estate is like stocks in that one make money if one got in at a good price. buy high and hope it goes higher is for the dreamers. since there's no such thing as a NEED TO BUY, there's no need to rush in. wait out the mkt till you see prices go up then think hard if you can afford to buy and/or want to buy.

no one is preaching renting is better than owning on a FOREVER basis. simply that NOW is better to rent and wait out the mkt then consider buying later.

no mortgage is not living for free. I have no mortgage and I'm paying a maintenance fee that's probably increasing again this yr

Posted by: more4less at January 13, 2010 4:28 PM

Did anybody see this cheery article in the Telegraph?

- http://bk.ly/bjc

"America slides deeper into depression as Wall Street revels

December was the worst month for US unemployment since the Great Recession began.

. . .

The stock market has become a lagging indicator. Tear up the textbooks."

Posted by: DitmasSnark at January 13, 2010 4:29 PM

Dave,

We should have made it our 2010 resolution to ignore BHO.

Literally I think me, you (and sometimes antidope) are the ONLY people left who even bother to respond to him.

The rest have gotten smart and ignore him.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 4:29 PM

"If prices fell another 40%, I think we'd see half the world try to get in on some NYC real estate action."

You got it backwards, buddy. Through Ponzi credit, half or more of the world did get in. -20% down into the Ponzi credit collapse, we have another -40% to get to the intrinsic value.

Interest rate hikes AND fear will rule the market, joe. Obviously, fear has not peaked. It started to last March but Wash/FED's have kicked the can down to summer '10. Guess what, nothing has changed. So-called toxic assets (overpriced RE loans) are still on the books and worse, more gov debt. All this bad debt needs to be defaulted so we can start all over again (real recoveryy). This requires a substantial RE crash.

DIBS, please elaborate on the demise of DMM/UMM.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 4:30 PM

This place is great - ideal location, doesn't require any reno (just maybe some paint, though I do like the red) and it has a good layout (no walking through kitchen to get to the bedroom).

This apt is for a single, first-time buyer who's sick of sinking more money into rentals when - for a couple hundred more/month - ownership is possible.

Yes, the kitchen is small, but it's great for someone who doesn't make large meals at home and orders in/eats out from all that awesome restaurants that Park Slope has.

Yes, the bedroom is small, but why do you need a huge bedroom when you have a great living room and dining room? You'd invite guests (plural - singular guests will be ok w/the small BR) over to hang out in the living/dining area not hang out in the little BR.

Yes, you can get cheaper and bigger in other areas in B'klyn, but, generally, people who prefer to live in those areas are a little more settled in life than those interested in this pad. They're an established couple, a little older, don't mind being away from the pulse of the borough, etc. Around this area is what I want to live - 9th St. is actually close to my cut-off on the south...

Albeit, someone like me is currently only dreaming about the day when I can actually weigh the pros and cons of buying this place...

If I had the 20% down, I'd visit this place tomorrow and prob make an offer; I like it and the demographic this co-op will sell to will also drool over this place. If anyone wants to be my sugar daddy/momma, or y'all would like to pool $ and put the 20% down for me to serve as a ginuea pig, I'd be happy to show the general audience that a single person (and hopefully one day couple) earning $75k+ would fare quite well in this "starter home" for 5+ years.
I'd even blog AND TWEET about it!!!

Posted by: Bklynight at January 13, 2010 4:31 PM

Are we really having this discussion? This is a starter apartment, but Park Slope is not a starter neighborhood.

Try Jackson Heights, the aforementioned Ditmas Park, etc.

In Jackson Heights, you can get a perfectly lovely 1,100 sf two/three bedroom prewar in a walkup in the historic district for $350,000. Or a similar flex one/two bedroom in one of the same buildings for $180,000. Or a 1,100-square-foot one bedroom in an elevator building with a shared garden for $270,000.

Even cheaper in the Bronx.

Posted by: mopar at January 13, 2010 4:35 PM

Mopar has it right.

Park Slope is NOT a starter neighborhood unless you are willing to compromise (greatly) on size.

They just recently did a report somwhere which said that Park Slope is more expensive than Murray Hill, LES and Hell's Kitchen.

It ain't cheap, people.


Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 4:39 PM

> Park Slope is NOT a starter neighborhood unless you are
> willing to compromise (greatly) on size.

A perfect summation.

Posted by: DitmasSnark at January 13, 2010 4:47 PM

Of course today's comps are reality, 11217. You have to have SOMETHING to crash FROM. But historic fundamentals will eventually show how euphoric it is that these comps would stay this way.

So far, I've been right on the money. DOW/SP touching down to 8000/800, rents falling, Forte bankrupted and reincarnated, etc etc. Of course I'm crazy! Sense aint common.

"I don't know why you think anyone here should listen to you"

Yes you do - it's because I have a point. And it's your worst nightmare.

"The rest have gotten smart and ignore him."

Or, they've gotten smart and are starting to "listen". I'm over the top sometimes but most of what I write has not been strongly refuted except that it hasn't happened YET. Can't seem to keep that key word away from your statements.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 4:47 PM

11217, I'm seeing a bunch of upper west and upper east Man 2-3 bdrm listings that are cheaper than BK prime

Posted by: more4less at January 13, 2010 4:48 PM

"This apt is for a single, first-time buyer who's sick of sinking more money into rentals when - for a couple hundred more/month - ownership is possible."

See me @ 3:50 and revise my math, Bklynight.

***Bid half off peak comps***

Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at January 13, 2010 4:51 PM

Honestly... I think I've figured out why I feel so 'resistant' about this apartment. It's tiny and when i think of BUYING a property, I'm not thinking about a space that's only 3 times bigger than my office at work.

Not to mention, the idea of ponying up an $80,000 downpayment for this tiny space just makes it worse. That's a lot of money -- like $26,000 per window.

I get the "trading up" process, but to start here? Really?

I guess I'll never wrap my head around the idea that a very healthy salary and a huge savings account gets you nothing substantial in "prime" Brooklyn (and no, these two rooms does not make for a substantial property in my book). Just a little sad.

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 4:53 PM

That doesn't surprise me More4Less.

As someone who not only used to live on the Upper West Side but works there currently, I think BK Prime is much nicer than the Upper West Side and Upper East Side.

I wouldn't live in Manhattan if I won the lottery. True story.

The Upper West Side used to be a nice place...now it's rather dreary and filled with Duane Reade's, Starbucks and empty storefronts. Can't stand it anymore.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 4:56 PM

sad = the situation... i'm fine. :-)

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 4:57 PM

Tyburg,

The bulk of NYC housing is 1 bedroom apartments.

You seem to be coming from all of this from a suburban mentality.

If you are expecting your first place in NYC to be a 3 bedroom 1 and 1/2 bath rancher, then yes...you are never going to be happy with what you see here.

MOST of NYC lives in a 1 bedroom apartment, not a brownstone.

How much room does one person (and hopefully a girlfriend at some point) need? If you're still single, you won't be having kids for years, so why would you need more room than this??

All of my neighbors have been living in their places for 10, 20 and one of them 47 YEARS!! and guess what...they are all 1 bedrooms. Some single, some couples.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 5:01 PM

Tybur6, ownership is over-hyped. renting is too frown-upon. if you can afford the rents in a hood, rent there and enjoy the perks. renting doesn't preclude you from the nice restaurants, good subway ride, the quaint sidewalks,....

owning is a bonus but not a necessity to live in and enjoy the benefits of a good hood

Posted by: more4less at January 13, 2010 5:02 PM

M4L is correct.

Only about 36% of New York City residents own their home.

The rest rent.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 5:06 PM

11217, many of the Man units I saw are on really nice blocks, great full svc pre-war bldgs, good units, etc. the impression I walked away after seeing them is BK prime units are over-priced in comparison. Only thing is most of Man listings are still pricier but I'm seeing more & more good listings that make prime BK units look real pricey

Posted by: more4less at January 13, 2010 5:10 PM

11217 -- I probably will never be satisfied. You're right. The idea of owning an apartment is strange to me all by itself. It's not a "suburban" mentality... I grew up where the density was lower, not suburban. There was no metropolitan center that everywhere else was a referent to. (I'm not from upstate, but think of upstate NY. Most if it is not "suburban" ... it's just not urban!)

Most of my life has been in cities... but i was younger than I am now so the whole notion of buying never entered my head. "Condos" where I grew up were substantial properties... multiple bedrooms, etc. Not 400 sq ft, 3-window apartments. Those were for rent, not to buy.

M4L has a point. Buying is over hyped. It must be if spending $850 per sq ft for this little place (plus $600 for maintenance) is attractive to so many....

Posted by: tybur6 at January 13, 2010 5:13 PM

M4L:

Sure, there are nice blocks on the UWS side, but Broadway is like shopping at a mall in Anytown, USA now.

Almost NO mom and pops left. There are 3 Starbucks within 2 blocks of my office. It's grotesque what the UWS has become, if you ask me.

Clearly you are after the bargain though. I get it. Space for the family takes priority.

For me, loving my neighborhood was key and the #1 priority, and I definitely do not love the UWS. And actually the UES is my least favorite neighborhood in the 5 boroughs. Wouldn't live there if you paid me.

Posted by: 11217 at January 13, 2010 5:19 PM

11217, if not for the school for the kid, I would be looking at gramercy park or murray hill vs. UES

Posted by: more4less at January 13, 2010 5:29 PM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions