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.
My wife and I are moving to the NY City Area from the Bay Area in the spring of 09'. Both of our offices are in the Soho/Union Square area. Because we'll only be in the area for 3 - 5 years, we've decided to not sell our house in Menlo Park, CA and rent in NY. We've been considering Park Slope and Cobble Hill in Brooklyn. We like the Upper West Side, but feel it's way pricey for the amount of space you get compared to our nice house w/ a gorgeous yard in Menlo Park. For that matter, Brooklyn is also more expensive than Menlo Park and it's more difficult to find a yard, which our 2 year old boy would love.
For these reasons, we've begun to consider other 'suburban' neighborhoods that are farther out, but not more than 20 - 30 min. train ride. Of course, nice nieghborhoods with good schools are desirable.
Can anyone suggest other options ranging the city to the burbs that we should consider?
You do not need a yard. That is what parks are for. Yards are lonely whereas with playgrounds and parks there are other kids. No one plays in their "yard" in the city.
Check out Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper. It is close to Union Square and great facilities for little ones. And I'm not a broker!
You do not need a yard. That is what parks are for. Yards are lonely whereas with playgrounds and parks there are other kids. No one plays in their "yard" in the city.
Check out Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper. It is close to Union Square and great facilities for little ones. And I'm not a broker!
I do disagree that one "does not need" a yard. It's an individual thing for sure.
Sure, parks are great, And so are playgrounds. But many outer borough NYC'ers would never part with even their postage size yards as they place a premium on them for the privacy, 24/7 access, safety, little patch of green that they offer. It is theirs and theirs alone.
You do not need a yard. That is what parks are for. Yards are lonely whereas with playgrounds and parks there are other kids. No one plays in their "yard" in the city.
Check out Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper. It is close to Union Square and great facilities for little ones. And I'm not a broker!
Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper look to be either amazing with everything that a young family would want in a neighborhood and community or another vision for a planned community that doesn't live up to its promise, which is it? Is it as popular and lively as the web site suggests?
What I meant was that a two year old does not need a yard in the city. It might be nice for older kids who can go outside by themselves, but not for toddlers. The parents are always going to be there. Plus, there won't be any other kids there so chances are you are going to be heading to the park or playground anyway.
The deal with Stuy Town and Peter Cooper is that they have the nicest grounds and playgrounds in the city. Everyone comes from all around to use them. It is ultraconvenient to be able to step outside your apartment and be in a safe and green place. That is why it is hard for people to move to other parts of the city.
The downside is that ever since Tischman bought the properties they have slowly but surely made a lot of changes and Stuy Town has lost some of its old boring but family focused feeling and is now focused on the younger crowd. The apartments are not huge, but they are at least normal apartments for adults and not some of these nonsensical apartments in the surrounding areas where you are expected to have the third "bedroom" in the corner of your living room. Two bedrooms in stuy town and peter cooper have two actual separate and distinct rooms you can use as a bedroom. The kitchens are small and definitely not "eat in" but you are going to have to pay significantly more for an eat in kitchen. There are no doormen, no health clubs located on the 2nd floor, etc. that you get with the newer luxury apartments. And the rent isn't that cheap, either, but the tradeoff is you get to leave the building and be in a car-free green space instead of smack in the middle of a busy street.
Also check out Waterside Plaza, which is a little further away from Union Square. It is right on the FDR drive. It seems very remote, and I almost moved there but didn't because it seemed too remote. However, my kids go to school right next door and it is so ironic because now I realize it's not that bad. People who live there really seem to love it and you can get a killer view right on the river.
Our budget is roughly 4k and we'd prefer a 3 bedroom.
I dont' know what the rents are right now but I would go with a 2 bedroom in peter cooper because the apartments are bigger and you get a second bathroom which is really nice.
What I meant was that a two year old does not need a yard in the city. It might be nice for older kids who can go outside by themselves, but not for toddlers. The parents are always going to be there. Plus, there won't be any other kids there so chances are you are going to be heading to the park or playground anyway.
The deal with Stuy Town and Peter Cooper is that they have the nicest grounds and playgrounds in the city. Everyone comes from all around to use them. It is ultraconvenient to be able to step outside your apartment and be in a safe and green place. That is why it is hard for people to move to other parts of the city.
The downside is that ever since Tischman bought the properties they have slowly but surely made a lot of changes and Stuy Town has lost some of its old boring but family focused feeling and is now focused on the younger crowd. The apartments are not huge, but they are at least normal apartments for adults and not some of these nonsensical apartments in the surrounding areas where you are expected to have the third "bedroom" in the corner of your living room. Two bedrooms in stuy town and peter cooper have two actual separate and distinct rooms you can use as a bedroom. The kitchens are small and definitely not "eat in" but you are going to have to pay significantly more for an eat in kitchen. There are no doormen, no health clubs located on the 2nd floor, etc. that you get with the newer luxury apartments. And the rent isn't that cheap, either, but the tradeoff is you get to leave the building and be in a car-free green space instead of smack in the middle of a busy street.
Also check out Waterside Plaza, which is a little further away from Union Square. It is right on the FDR drive. It seems very remote, and I almost moved there but didn't because it seemed too remote. However, my kids go to school right next door and it is so ironic because now I realize it's not that bad. People who live there really seem to love it and you can get a killer view right on the river.
Thanks. These are very useful recommendations, that look like they're right up our alley. Do you have recommendations beyond the city?
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.
