Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bushwick may be somewhat close to Manhattan, but it doesn't have a lot beautiful architecture aside from the few blocks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anon1
This was supposedly a selling point for why the neighborhood took off... Had nothing to do with being labeled "up and coming", "gritty" or close to manhattan...
What I'm confused at is the Bushwick I know has always been one of the ugliest areas in the city... Doesn't have any of that appealing architecture or apartment buildings that areas like Harlem, Clinton Hill, Fort Greene, Bed-stuy, Red Hook do...I've already posted pics on previous threads about what most of Bushwick still looks like to this day aside from some hideous new luxury rentals or condominiums popping up on completely random blocks...
But hey, whatever floats people's boat... It only adds further proof to my statement about insincerity...
I wasn't saying Bushwick was pretty, apologies if the wording was poor. I was saying that I think that despite all the hipsters, it's not going to be truly trendy in part because it lacks said architecture. Williamsburg got away with it due to proximity.
Prospect Heights is already old news - gentrifying rapidly now. Bushwick's biggest problem isn't its ugliness, but all the projects - it just has a trashy, low rent vibe (I spent 3 years there and hated it).
Flushing is definitely on the precipice of being uber hip. By 2016 it will be the new Williamsburg.
Fortunately most white hipsters despite claiming to be liberal don't want to live near "dirty"Chinese people... Hence Chinatown proper has not gentrified and neither will flushing or sunset park. Its hip to tell their friends in Ohio they live in the ghetto but not hip to live with dirty Chinamen.
Newspapers and magazines in New York receive a lot of advertising from the RE industry. These are simply padding for advertisements. Look through that issue of NYMag and then look through the issue before it. See how many more RE ads it has?
I subscribe to NY Mag and have done so for the past 10-15 years, and I dont place much stock in any of their listings. It is dead wrong in many instances, and like the pp poster alluded - there may be real estate folks who have a vested interest in promoting certain neighborhoods just to drum up business in that section.
I take any of these "Best of __" lists they crank out with a grain of salt. The only useful part is their Cover stories (which tend to be liberal left leaning politically anyway), and the restaurant reviews in the Strategist section. Sometimes they highlight a cool Papaya or Crepe place in Manhattan I have never tried..but I notice most of their writers tend to be transplanted hipster-wanna-be New Yorkers who think that they know NYC inside out just because they've lived in Park Slope and Chelsea for the past 5 years. I find it disappointing that they never go out of Manhattan to cover events or restaurants that are outside their "comfort zone", neighborhoods like College Point, Richmond Hill or even Howard Beach, Queens. I think I saw them talk about Gerritsen Beach, Brooklyn ONCE and it was a story related to either Tropical Storm Irene or Hurricane Sandy. Its like NYC for them consists of just Manhattan and Park Slope.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.