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.
Laughing my a$$ off at your sarcasam of your comment. Third avenue is only worse by Paterson, butler, Webster pj's, also its pretty rough by east Tremont.
South Bronx is straight up hood.
Despite the best efforts of some people on this forum to paint that area as 'up and coming', 'a bargain for new families' and 'an enclave of middle class people' It's just hood with most of its inhabitants being of the ghetto type.
Maybe after 2 or 3 generations we'll see a change.
Till then, you guys can keep that bargain
Exactly.
Speak to anyone who is in a shelter awaiting housing. 9/10 chances are they are being placed in the Bronx.
South Bronx is straight up hood.
Despite the best efforts of some people on this forum to paint that area as 'up and coming', 'a bargain for new families' and 'an enclave of middle class people' It's just hood with most of its inhabitants being of the ghetto type.
Maybe after 2 or 3 generations we'll see a change.
Till then, you guys can keep that bargain
I don't think so. There are already disturbing signs of ghettofication in the new developments, so the rational conclusion at this point is that the vicious cycle continues.
I don't think so. There are already disturbing signs of ghettofication in the new developments, so the rational conclusion at this point is that the vicious cycle continues.
Sorry, Majora Carter and Shira Gidding.
I actually was accepted to the Northrose buildings on 163rd. When I went in person to see the apt/area, I immediately turned it down. Luckily I did as all I hear is how the buildings have already been "ghettofied". I initially turned it down due to the extremely small size of the so-called master bedroom. It looked more like a nursery room. Not to mention the surrounding neighborhood is still crime ridden.
I guess Operation Clean Hall is an indication of a building with drug and safety problem. I haven't seen any sign like that in my neighborhood.
Exactly. While there are drug users in every neighborhood, it's the loitering and open sales and use in concentrated areas that brought about the Operation Clean Hall initiative. I've only seen the signs in parts of the Bronx and I think in Brooklyn, though would not be surprised to find them in parts of Washington Heights or Inwood.
_______
Regarding potential gentrification in some areas, I don't think that there has been a foothold, especially since some of the newer construction is very shoddy, such that the middle income earners that are supposed to be attracted to a given property may not remain for too long. It's one thing to put up with the QOL issues of transitional neighborhood if one has a decent building, well managed, and well constructed; yet, quite another to put up with a new building that has numerous problems, management issues, etc. from day one in the same neighborhood.
We have a rather lengthy thread about just such a new community that was constructed in the South Bronx, where residents seem to have had many issues in a new building. That does not bode well for overall long-term stability of the area if there are problems with a new building. People put up with shoddy construction in other neighborhoods because there is other attraction to the area, such as parts of Brooklyn and Manhattan, where they will put up with shortcomings for the neighborhood. Without affordable housing initiatives, would any of the new construction have been built or rented?
Given the city's profound, decades old, rental housing shortage, new construction would tend to stabilize the market. However, continued manipulation caused by an exacerbated shortage with all sorts of programmatic housing makes for a cyclical problem. Are the new affordable housing initiatives a step in the right direction, a success built upon Mitchell-Lama or Amalgamated housing ; or, are they a means to garner healthy profit at government expense, leaving the residents not much better off than before?
It is also a difficult proposition to create islands of new middle and moderate income housing in areas that do not have the level of services required by earners of the project's targeted income level. A lack of grocery store options, shopping options, basic services such as dry cleaners, produce stands with high quality offerings, etc. are at odds with a middle-class ethos, where in other areas, such items are readily available. That is one reason why the market has to be artificially manipulated with respect to construction and administration of housing via lotteries, because the project is unsustainable at the prevailing market at which it wishes to compete, given the issues in the surrounding neighborhood. People will travel a bit longer, and perhaps pay slightly more, to find a neighborhood that does not have the same problems, which is why there are stable areas in Kingsbridge, Bedford Park, VanCortlandt Village, Norwood, etc. where income levels are similar to those who are targeted by the middle-class housing initiatives in the South Bronx.
The Bronx is quite a diverse borough, with every type of housing imaginable, but there are neighborhoods that do engender views of a profound lack of security and perception of higher crime on sight. High concentrations of public housing, and associated problems, does not serve to stem the tide of that perception, either, no matter the number of new units constructed as they do not outnumber the subsidized housing in some Bronx neighborhoods, especially when compared with stable neighborhoods in the borough that do not have the same levels of crime and QOL issues.
__________________
All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.
~William Shakespeare (As You Like It Act II, Scene VII)
I'd rather live in a third world country than set foot in the bronx again.
How can a first world country have such bad areas? Honestly.
The projects are probably the #1 problem in NYC.
I agree with you on how such a first world CITY such as NY can have such bad areas. Well it all stems from LIBERAL policies. I kid you not. NYC is general has very "bleeding heart" liberal policies towards poor and working poor people. The turning point of the city when it started going bad was during the 60's-70's with the MASS PRODUCTION of projects and subsidized housing such as Mitchell-Lama same demographic as project people, just a tad better (Tracey Towers comes to mind). The construction of these type of housing complexes DOOMED the area/neighborhood it was built in. Til this day, neighborhoods surrounding projects or other subsidized housing remains crappy despite NYC as a whole improving from the "burning" 70's. Some that's one reason.
Not everyone qualifies for subsidized housing and/or there isn't enough money to subsides ALL poor NYers which results in poor people with social issues (ghettoness) living among regular working folks in Rent Stabilized apartments which is technically subsidized NOT by the city but by the landlord.
Now, let's take a look at the BIGGER PICTURE here. So far everyone on this thread agrees that the Bronx in general is "ghetto" with exception to a few neighborhoods such as Riverdale. Fine. Now let's say a native Bronxite like myself who also happens to be a landlord and let's assume I have BILL GATES money, and I want to buy up some of these "ghetto" apartment buildings in the "hood" with good intentions of getting rid of the ghetto demographic that contribute to society's ills in the neighborhood and replace them with non-ghetto people. Sound like a good idea? Wouldn't that be nice to actually have a landlord who genuinely CARES about the Bronx and is pro-active in doing his part to improve it?
But guess what? Despite my well-intentioned plan to CLEANSE the Bronx from ghetto people, I CAN'T!!!! WHY? Well because the majority of these ghetto people everyone is complaining about on this thread living in Rent Stabilized apartments. And if anyone knows anything about the NYC Rent Stabilization law, then you would know that despite so & so person being "ghetto" and a major contributor to the ghettoness of the neighborhood, I as a well-intentioned landlord with hopes of IMPROVING the neighborhood DO NOT have the luxury of getting rid of this "ghetto" tenant by simply NOT RENEWING their lease because under RS law, this ghetto tenant is ENTITLED to get their lease renewed which means this ghetto tenant remains in the apartment/neighborhood, hampering any progress thus allowing this ghetto tenant to continue contributing to the ghettoness of the neighborhood.
I would get NO WHERE in improving the neighborhood because of POLICIES such as these mainly protecting the undesirables of the neighborhood. So there is a bigger force dictating the outcome of neighborhoods which are the democrats/liberals who support such laws to protect the few that pay cheap rent in RS apts. ignoring the fact that giving a RS entitlement to a lease renewal to an apartment takes away any leverage a landlord may have in removing ghetto tenants thus allowing the ghetto tenant to stay put. And then people wonder why it's so difficult to CLEAN UP a ghetto neighborhood....well now you know.
A good trade off would be keeping the rent stabilization portion of the law as in keeping rents affordable BUT ABOLISHING the whole LEASE RENEWAL entitlement RS tenants have and/or revising the RS law by issuing a CAP that allows a RS tenant to live in the RS apartment for MAXIMUM 4 years. After the 4 years are up, if the tenant is desirable, obviously the landlord will choose to renew their lease BUT if the tenant turns out to be ghetto, the landlord can choose NOT to renew their lease, hence getting rid of the ghetto tenant.
But it's probably one of those hoods like out in LA where it's all houses with lawns that have the flag over the door, etc. but there's still 10 people getting dropped every night...
Well this thread turned into a bash the Bronx thread because 1 kid decided to make a silly statement. He didn't like one area of the Bronx and now will never go to anywhere in the Bronx. Silliness...and everyone else on here is being just as silly.
The Bronx isn't for everyone, but neither is Manhattan or any other borough. While everyone (renters of course) is being poo-pooing the Bronx, and Southern Bronx in particular, these are the same people who were (or would have been poo-pooing) all those areas in BK that were once hood and people were starting to move to all those years ago.
It is what is it..the area is changing...most people can't see or don't care to. It is easier to complain about the 1 abandoned house on the block than acknowledge the 6 new ones across the street..that's just how people are.
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 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.
Its infested with nothing but hipsters and their bicycles. What's there to be afraid of? LOL.
