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 08-02-2008, 07:37 AM
 
348 posts, read 1,109,659 times
Reputation: 94

Advertisements

I'm curious to know if anyone has a take on why the South Bronx would be the next logical place to pop (for those priced out of Manhattan and the hot spots of Brooklyn and Queens) when parts of East Harlem (much closer to the City) still look like crap?

I own a condo in Parkchester and think it will turn out to be a solid investment, but have my eyes on other areas of the Bronx - which obviously is the most undervalued borough in NYC. So, places around the new Yankee Stadium development makes huge sense to me, as does places like Mott Haven with its close proximity to the City.

However, on my express bus ride home from work, I travel up 3rd Avenue and there are just rows and rows of boarded up buildings. Worse than anything I see in the Bronx, frankly (although, admittedly, I haven't been to some of the rougher parts).

So, my question is - why would a place like Mott Haven be a logical choice for development and/or renewal when East Harlem still has so much potential and room to improve? If it was already a hot spot, then Mott Haven and other areas just North would gain from neighborhood "creep", but what are some thoughts on the current situation? And who owns all that boarded up real estate in East Harlem?
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-02-2008, 11:38 AM
 
242 posts, read 835,540 times
Reputation: 71
Both nabes are stuck in a rut because of the massive amount of housing projects they contain.

In NYC the cream rises to the top and shyte settles.....in the projects
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2008, 01:40 PM
 
348 posts, read 1,109,659 times
Reputation: 94
I just got back from walking from Valentine Road / Fordham Road down the Grand Concourse to about 149th Street. I also walked around some of the side streets near Yankee Stadium. I will definitely go back when I have more time to get a feel of the area when there aren't so many tourists around (I take it there was a game today) and when it's not pouring and thundering outside!

While I found the Grand Concourse further north of about 167 not my cup of tea (some areas were, to me, a little sketchy) - the area near the Bronx Musuem was lovely. Anyone have any ideas on how much co-ops in the area are going for? Some of those deco buildings are to die for. (And SuperMario - no jokes about that comment, ok? LOL)

There were also some great looking brownstone-type single-family homes on Gerard or Walton (??) that are just begging to be renovated. The only thing that concerns me is the seeming lack of amenities. I walked all those blocks down the GC (looking down the side streets as well) and it wasn't until I came to right next to Yankee Stadium that I found a diner. Maybe I'm just used to Parkchester (where everything you need - and then some - is just a few blocks away), but where does everyone go to shop for necessities?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2008, 05:09 PM
 
Location: No Sleep Til Brooklyn
1,413 posts, read 4,673,890 times
Reputation: 591
I don't buy the projects argument. There are massive projects in Chelsea and that neighborhood was able to turn around.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2008, 07:24 PM
DAS
 
2,530 posts, read 5,824,659 times
Reputation: 1086
The projects in Chelsea are clustered in a small area between 9th and 10th, and W. 25 and W. 28th. Some of the buildings are senior only.

There is also a Parkchester type complex someone may know the name of it, that some may confuse with a project but it is not it is either coop or condo.

Chelsea was always somewhat edgy, but it never really had to turn itself around, it used to be very affordable like UWS and UES so it always attracted professionals like teachers and nurses etc.

The projects in Mott Haven and East Harlem near the river are massive. So those areas not near the pjs are developing.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2008, 07:36 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC & New York
10,750 posts, read 25,531,740 times
Reputation: 6676
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAS View Post
The projects in Chelsea are clustered in a small area between 9th and 10th, and W. 25 and W. 28th. Some of the buildings are senior only.

There is also a Parkchester type complex someone may know the name of it, that some may confuse with a project but it is not it is either coop or condo.
That is correct about the clustering of projects in Chelsea, it's a relatively small number of buildings that are in the NYCHA.

The community that I think is being referenced is the Penn South development, which was built by the ILGWU, and are not projects. They are limited-equity, non-profit cooperatives, and total around 2800 residential units. The development spans from 24th to 28th Streets and 8th Ave to 9th Ave.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2008, 07:50 PM
 
235 posts, read 998,764 times
Reputation: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by UpsonDowns View Post
I don't buy the projects argument. There are massive projects in Chelsea and that neighborhood was able to turn around.
There are a couple of projects in Chelsea. On the other hand, some areas of the South Bronx have anywhere from 1/3 to almost 100% of the housing stock in the form of Public Housing. You cannot compare Chelsea with the South Bronx when talking about the number of PJ's.

The thing with private housing is that even if it's run down, it can be bought and renovated--aka GENTRIFICATION! Public Housing, however, uses taxpayer money to ensure that it is kept as low income housing, which pretty much makes PJ apartments impossible to gentrify.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2008, 08:50 PM
 
348 posts, read 1,109,659 times
Reputation: 94
Default Clarification on Stuy-Town

Just a quick clarification - the Stuyveson Town development (the "sister-development" of Parkchester") has been converted to market rate rentals (not sure if they are selling off units in a condo/co-op conversion as of yet). Can anyone shed some light on this?

The one-bedrooms that are being rented at market rate are going for close to $3,000 and there is huge controversy/scandal and an irate tenant population about how this complex now is being managed and the long time residents are being treated. (Stuyvesant Town's Lux Living - extreme satire alert!) The exact same 1 bedrooms (without the drama, irresponsible management and shabby treatment!) in Parkchester are renting for between $1,000-$1300.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2008, 09:07 PM
DAS
 
2,530 posts, read 5,824,659 times
Reputation: 1086
I'm not a resident, a resident can give you more inside information, but I am guessing the location of Stuyveson Town has a lot to do with it. Also a majority of the residents are white professionals. This would attract those that could afford the market rates. If the apts are as well constructed as Parkchester this would also be very attractive to a buyer or renter.

Parkchester also has professional but is now mostly "minorities". It attracts teachers, social workers, nurses, civil service workers like transit, workers from various state agencies. The Bronx has always been the place for the working/middle class. I don't think that you could ever get Manhattan prices for the Bronx.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2008, 09:16 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC & New York
10,750 posts, read 25,531,740 times
Reputation: 6676
Stuvysant Town and Peter Cooper Village are still rentals, and have been one of the most iconic battlegrounds in the rent control debate in recent years.

Fresh Meadows Apartments in Queens, Parkchester in the Bronx, and Riverton in Harlem are all related to Peter Cooper and Stuyvesant Town in that they were developed by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company during the same general time period, conforming to a specific development model.
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