nym-housing-chart-032808.jpgWhen we talk about the Brooklyn neighborhoods that are likely to fair best in the market downturn, blue chips like Brooklyn Heights and Park Slope are typically mentioned. But a New York Magazine article yesterday suggests that it’s all relative. While Park Slope may be holding up better than, say, Bedford Stuyvesant, it’s evidently doing a whole lot worse than Tribeca, which is the article cites as the richest neighborhood in the city. As the chart, at right, shows (with data provided by Streeteasy), one-bedrooms are up 23% over the past year in Tribeca while they’re down 2% in the Slope; three-bedrooms are up 26% in Tribeca and down 14% in Park Slope. Does this suggest a relative weakening for Brooklyn as a whole versus Manhattan going forward?
Where Boom Meets Bust? [New York Magazine]


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. This is pathetic. you nay sayers need to get a life. all you do is complain about everything. Park Slope is an amazing neighborhood with lots to offer.
    i don’t agree w/ the comparison of park slope to tribeca only because the prices in the city are so much higher than anywhere else. i would like to know the price ranges they used and why they chose to compare these two neighborhoods (i haven’t read the article yet).

  2. I expect prices in Park Slope and nearby neighborhoods to crash to the point where young college-educated couples in their early 30s can actually afford to buy rowhouses there, even if they are not hedge fund traders. And those with somewhat lesser incomes, the proverbial cops/firemen/small shop owners, can afford to live in 2 Br condos.

    And I don’t see that as a problem.

1 6 7 8