U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 12-17-2014, 07:11 PM
 
1,119 posts, read 2,171,859 times
Reputation: 873

Advertisements

I think 1st and 2nd ave are the low end of upper east side. York ave is on the higher end compare to the 1st. East end ave can rival Park ave.

There is a street named "Central Park West" on the upper west side. But there is no "Central Park East" on the upper east side.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-17-2014, 07:12 PM
 
2,268 posts, read 2,211,881 times
Reputation: 2637
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverbullnyc View Post
Let someone who works in the field answer this.

From stuff i actually show, seen, rented to clients. Studios range from $1500-$2300 east of first ave. 1BRs from $1849-$2500 east of first ave.

Hmm, the fact that any studio apartments would go for as low as $1500.00 (which is still more than I'd want to spend anyway but I know this is considered very very affordable for the UES/Yorkville areas of Manhattan) makes me wonder: Just how is the quality-of-life, safety, conveniences, ambience, et al when one lives "east of First Ave." including all the way up to the East River? That is, why would Manhattan landlords/realtors charge only $1500.00/month for any type or size of apartment? One who wants to live in Manhattan south of Harlem (or even enough times including Harlem) expects to spend much more than $1500.00/month . . . even for a mere studio. Why would any landlords managing non-subsidized housing charge only $1500.00/month just because their properties are situated "east of First Ave."? Is it only because of the distance to walk to the nearest subway line?

(but if so to that last question about distance to the nearest subway line, I imagine that all the rents, even east of First Ave., will skyrocket once the Second Avenue Subway is completed)
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-17-2014, 08:55 PM
Status: "Halloween! Can't wait." (set 8 days ago)
 
Location: Manhattan
1,781 posts, read 755,985 times
Reputation: 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by leoliu View Post
I found ues very quiet and boring whereas uws more vibrant.

I was down in the mid 40s on the west side and noticed that it is undergoing a big face lifting given the rises of a lot of glass flashing skyscrapers.
But still has a gloomy, glum atmosphere to it. I can't explain it but the area still has this dark, grey, cloudy look about it despite the new hi-rises. The east side has a more clean, classic and sunny air to it. I'm talking about streets between 40 and 50. Which is not considered the UWS but more Midtown West or Hell's Kitchen. The UWS is okay but it does have a different look to it than the UES although I can't put my finger on it.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2014, 02:45 AM
 
18,242 posts, read 11,653,926 times
Reputation: 11855
Quote:
Originally Posted by bill83 View Post
I think 1st and 2nd ave are the low end of upper east side. York ave is on the higher end compare to the 1st. East end ave can rival Park ave.

There is a street named "Central Park West" on the upper west side. But there is no "Central Park East" on the upper east side.
Central Park West, along with Amsterdam and Columbus Avenues were renamed from 8th, 9th and 10th Avenues a few years after the Park was complete and the UWS was being developed. Nearest idea as to why the City went on a renaming binge was to divource those avenues above West 57th Street from the low rent, slums and louche "Tenderloin" area of the West Side that was below.

To round out the rest of this query, the UES at least far as wealth is concerned pertained to 57th Street to 86th Street and from Lexington Avenue west to Fifth. Third Avenue was the dividing line between "polite" society and working class Yorkville. This mainly had to do with the face ELs ran up Third and Second Avenues. In fact if you stand anywhere on the UES and notice how different architecture is from Lexington and most certainly Third Avenues versus going west towards the Park.

East End Avenue with it's views of the River is where "wealth" returned. But even then you still have tenements and other low rent types of buildings between York and East End. You also have quite a lot of old, to very old townhouses (now carved up into apartments) and tenements.

Long story short much of the UES especially from Second Avenue going east did not develop much or change due to lack of subway access. OTOH on the UWS the Broadway subway lines mean only a few block walk to get west.

As to the difference between UES and UWS it mainly falls to commerce (the UWS is much more commercial than UES), and that aside from Central Park West and Riverside Drive the bulk of the housing stock was geared towards middle, rich and some wealthy households. The UWs is also racially, ethnically, religiously, economically more diverse than the UES.

The UES from Fifth to Lexington or even Third was developed by wealthy persons and or for them. You had mansions, townhouses, apartment buildings, all designed for that demographic.

Manhattan's Eastside long is where the wealthy lived especially on Fifth Avenue. The stop before the UES was what is considered Mid-Town East today. This is why you still see some mansions on or around Fifth Avenue (turned into stores or other commercial use). As the area became more and more commercial wealthy packed up and moved again, staying true to Fifth Avenue and surrounding blocks but this time across from the newly created Central Park. They also got at the City to zone much of the area between Fifth and say Park to keep out commercial and certain types of buildings. This is why there is no commercial buildings or stores on Fifth Avenue. You have very few on Park. More on Madison and of course Lexington is full.

The wealthy of the UES have long looked down on the UWS as socially and in other ways inferior. To them the UWS is/was dirty, louche, and filled with persons they did not associate with (blacks, Eastern European Jews, Communists, actors, etc...).

To me the UWS just seems "dirty" compared to the UES. The IRT is clean with nice subways but the A,C,E and 1,2,3 subways are just dirty IMHO.

Of course during the bad days of the 1960's, 1970's, and 1980's the UWS was dangerous as well. I remember coming back from a party on West End Avenue and it was "put' into a taxi and told to go directly home (to the UES). Normally would have walked towards the Park until a cab appeared but that idea was nixed. This was in the 1990's and as the cab made it's way towards the park I could see drug deals going down on street corners. You didn't have *THAT* on the UES.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2014, 08:35 AM
 
Location: Upper East Side
110 posts, read 165,108 times
Reputation: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreshFresh View Post
Is one, less desirable than the other? If so, why?
I've lived on both the UES and the UWS and they're very similar. I find the UES to have slightly more affordable apartments. There ARE deals to be found if you look really hard - I have a nice studio with outdoor space (in the 80's off 2nd Ave) for $1500. Granted, there aren't many places out there like mine - but one can most certainly find a studio for wayyyy under $3K, even west of 1st Ave.

Seems like there are a lot more young families on the UWS and more single, young professionals on the UES. I prefer more young professionals and less children plus I work on the East Side - so those were both factors in my decision to live on the UES. I'd much prefer to pass a 20 something puking on the street at 2am than a mom taking up the sidewalk with her triple decker stroller! To each their own!

UWS seems to have slightly more bars/restaurants, but there is definitely not a shortage on the UES. Fairway opening a few years ago was definitely a game changer, and the Whole Foods opening soon will be amazing. Now we just need a Trader Joe's!

If you're trying to decide between the two, I'd just walk around both neighborhoods and see which you like better.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2014, 08:38 AM
 
263 posts, read 395,129 times
Reputation: 278
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverbullnyc View Post
Let someone who works in the field answer this.

From stuff i actually show, seen, rented to clients. Studios range from $1500-$2300 east of first ave. 1BRs from $1849-$2500 east of first ave.

So basically what I said, under 3k per month. And I'm not even in the field
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2014, 09:59 AM
 
1,119 posts, read 2,171,859 times
Reputation: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Central Park West, along with Amsterdam and Columbus Avenues were renamed from 8th, 9th and 10th Avenues a few years after the Park was complete and the UWS was being developed. Nearest idea as to why the City went on a renaming binge was to divource those avenues above West 57th Street from the low rent, slums and louche "Tenderloin" area of the West Side that was below.

To round out the rest of this query, the UES at least far as wealth is concerned pertained to 57th Street to 86th Street and from Lexington Avenue west to Fifth. Third Avenue was the dividing line between "polite" society and working class Yorkville. This mainly had to do with the face ELs ran up Third and Second Avenues. In fact if you stand anywhere on the UES and notice how different architecture is from Lexington and most certainly Third Avenues versus going west towards the Park.

East End Avenue with it's views of the River is where "wealth" returned. But even then you still have tenements and other low rent types of buildings between York and East End. You also have quite a lot of old, to very old townhouses (now carved up into apartments) and tenements.

Long story short much of the UES especially from Second Avenue going east did not develop much or change due to lack of subway access. OTOH on the UWS the Broadway subway lines mean only a few block walk to get west.

As to the difference between UES and UWS it mainly falls to commerce (the UWS is much more commercial than UES), and that aside from Central Park West and Riverside Drive the bulk of the housing stock was geared towards middle, rich and some wealthy households. The UWs is also racially, ethnically, religiously, economically more diverse than the UES.

The UES from Fifth to Lexington or even Third was developed by wealthy persons and or for them. You had mansions, townhouses, apartment buildings, all designed for that demographic.

Manhattan's Eastside long is where the wealthy lived especially on Fifth Avenue. The stop before the UES was what is considered Mid-Town East today. This is why you still see some mansions on or around Fifth Avenue (turned into stores or other commercial use). As the area became more and more commercial wealthy packed up and moved again, staying true to Fifth Avenue and surrounding blocks but this time across from the newly created Central Park. They also got at the City to zone much of the area between Fifth and say Park to keep out commercial and certain types of buildings. This is why there is no commercial buildings or stores on Fifth Avenue. You have very few on Park. More on Madison and of course Lexington is full.

The wealthy of the UES have long looked down on the UWS as socially and in other ways inferior. To them the UWS is/was dirty, louche, and filled with persons they did not associate with (blacks, Eastern European Jews, Communists, actors, etc...).

To me the UWS just seems "dirty" compared to the UES. The IRT is clean with nice subways but the A,C,E and 1,2,3 subways are just dirty IMHO.

Of course during the bad days of the 1960's, 1970's, and 1980's the UWS was dangerous as well. I remember coming back from a party on West End Avenue and it was "put' into a taxi and told to go directly home (to the UES). Normally would have walked towards the Park until a cab appeared but that idea was nixed. This was in the 1990's and as the cab made it's way towards the park I could see drug deals going down on street corners. You didn't have *THAT* on the UES.
Thanks for your informative long post.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2014, 01:22 PM
 
18,242 posts, read 11,653,926 times
Reputation: 11855
Historically you could find cheaper rents the further east you went past Second Avenue. Main answer is that due to lack of subway access made that part of Yorkville less desirable.

Things are slowly changing from Second to East End as the older tenants die off and more RS apartments become vacant. That allows LL's to renovate and or do what they must to get the units out of that program. Am also seeing more and more basement apartments in that area as well.

As for families with children, am seeing so much more of that on the UES and Yorkville now than say back in the 1990's when the 80's and 70's were "singles" heaven. The area long had been known as a place for secretaries and nurses to find housing, but then you have all those bars on First, Second and Third.

Being as all this may the UES especially from Lexington to East End is changing. Look at how many new buildings have gone are going up on 78th and 79th Streets. Three-quarters of Second Avenue between 81st and 80th Streets is slated for demolition for luxury housing. 245 East 80th was practically emptied of tenants and is being converted into "family sized" luxury housing. Then you have the new high rise condo buildings on Second from 79th down through 76th Streets.

On First Avenue there has been a hole in the ground at 78th Street for over a year now (whatever is going on there), and the deli across the street was shut and that building may come down as well. In fact up and down York, First and Second Avenues at least all those low rise tenements from 57th Street going north through the 90's may all be gone in decades to come. Once the SAS opens improving access to the "far East Side" those properties become vastly worth more.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2014, 06:25 PM
 
2,268 posts, read 2,211,881 times
Reputation: 2637
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Historically you could find cheaper rents the further east you went past Second Avenue. Main answer is that due to lack of subway access made that part of Yorkville less desirable.

Things are slowly changing from Second to East End as the older tenants die off and more RS apartments become vacant. That allows LL's to renovate and or do what they must to get the units out of that program. Am also seeing more and more basement apartments in that area as well.

As for families with children, am seeing so much more of that on the UES and Yorkville now than say back in the 1990's when the 80's and 70's were "singles" heaven. The area long had been known as a place for secretaries and nurses to find housing, but then you have all those bars on First, Second and Third.

Being as all this may the UES especially from Lexington to East End is changing. Look at how many new buildings have gone are going up on 78th and 79th Streets. Three-quarters of Second Avenue between 81st and 80th Streets is slated for demolition for luxury housing. 245 East 80th was practically emptied of tenants and is being converted into "family sized" luxury housing. Then you have the new high rise condo buildings on Second from 79th down through 76th Streets.

On First Avenue there has been a hole in the ground at 78th Street for over a year now (whatever is going on there), and the deli across the street was shut and that building may come down as well. In fact up and down York, First and Second Avenues at least all those low rise tenements from 57th Street going north through the 90's may all be gone in decades to come. Once the SAS opens improving access to the "far East Side" those properties become vastly worth more.
On the one hand, it is a wonder to me that there are so many many many people available to take advantage of all this "luxury housing" that has has been built to-date and that continues to be built all the time. But then on the other hand, I know that New York City draws from a worldwide audience of persons and interests. . . . so all the wealthy and super-wealthy of the world can & do look upon New York City as either a place to live all the time or to have a second (or third or fourth or . . .) home in.

If not thinking about it in the way that it is stated above by myself, I'd otherwise wonder to myself: "How is it that there are so many many highly wealthy and super wealthy persons to spend the kind of monies charged to live in or own such living spaces as these "luxury" homes (along with all the other living expenses they incur in life-at-large)? What exactly is it that they all do to have so much in monies and assets at their avail to live like this?" That is, I wonder what they all do that is so very very valuable to society that they are compensated so well and therefore have so much in monies and assets at their avail.

Well, apparently Manhattan-at-large (and enough others parts of New York City proper and varied surrounding areas) caters to such persons.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-18-2014, 06:33 PM
 
18,242 posts, read 11,653,926 times
Reputation: 11855
Luxury is perhaps a relative word for these buildings.

Yes, places like OneW57 are truly for the very to super rich, but there is more to it than that.

As Manhattan once again has been deemed scrubbed up, safe and clean to raise children you have large numbers of persons seeking family sized units. They also want all sorts of amenities (well developers pretty much have to add them if they are going to sell/rent the space) , which in the end pushes up the cost. When you consider how expensive land is in NYC, in particular Manhattan, then factor in construction and other costs then yes, it is "luxury" housing because only those earning >$1.5k per year or more can afford to live in such buildings.

If it is of any comfort to you there are signs the uber-wealthy part of the RS market is slowing/cooling. There is simply too much existing product and more to come that some in that demographic are deciding to wait rather than pay big money now.
Quick reply to this message
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.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top