Why Inwood or Hudson Heights (versus other neighborhoods in NYC)

[Cletus Ray Ray]

I've looked in various parts of Queens, researched various parts of Brooklyn, and most parts of Manhattan off and on over a span of about 2 years.

Queens:

Astoria:  Small apartments for a market level price.  Most are walk-ups.  The transportation is limited.  The N, R and W lines are some of the most frustrating of my experience.  One Astoria resident nicknamed those lines:  N = Never; R=Rarely; and W=Whenever.  And when you're coming home late at night, that can be a major issue.

Jackson Heights:  Noise, congestion, dirt from the congestion.  Nice large apartments, some in landmarked buildings, which tend to be pricey.  More expensive on one side of the No. 7 line than the other.  Cocaine ravaged the neighborhood a while back and slowly is coming back.  While Inwood has a lot of folks who are inconsiderate with regard to the noise, JH is very, very congested and the noise is almost constant except those hours between just before night turns to daylight and sunrise - from then on, it's constant.  Prices tended to be much higher than I wanted to pay.  Transportation?  Excellent.  Roosevelt Avenue-7th Street has - the 7, the E, F, V, R for subways.  The Q32 - the only city bus that travels from Queens all the way down to Penn Station, and the Q33 which takes you from JH to LaGuardia for the price of a single fare ride.  There are also other buses which takes you to other points throughout Queens.  Because of all of this, there's dirt from all the exhaust.  Amenities, nightlife, etc. are good or are within easy travelling distance.

Forest Hills:  Expensive and everything is very far away unless you have a car.  Beautiful neighborhood with some "iffy" areas.  It's definitely a two-fare zone - bus to train.  While nice, overall, didn't meet my criteria of convenience.  Of course, if you have enough money you could be in Forest Hills Gardens but they're a little tough to get a rental.  Transportation was okay - E, F, V, R lines; and lots of various buses although primarily express buses.  Only 1 regular (non-express) buss will take you from there to Manhattan but it may take you a few hours particularly if you're caught in traffic.

Rego Park:  Pretty much the same as FH but a tad cheaper.  Transportation was limited as it is on the local stop.

Elmhurst:  Cheaper than all of the above so far and more rundown.  Bars on lower level windows are very evident including barred screen doors.

Flushing:  Well, there's another thread about my Flushing experience.   
Sunnyside and Woodside:  Nice nabes but transpo sucks.  Amenities begin to spread out more.

Brooklyn:

Brooklyn Heights, Carroll Gardens, Park Slope, Prospect Heights, Windsor Terrace:  Can we say - expensive for what you may get?  Transportation can be difficult in some areas.  Too trendy for me and some of the folks are too, too shallow.  Basically, for those who are the trendy ones - they moved to those areas because they couldn't live in the trendy areas of Manhattan.

Sunset Park, Bay Ridge, Bensonhurst:  Transportation time by subway would take longer than I want.  Bay Ridge happens to be a very nice nabe.  If I worked downtown, it wouldn't have been too much of an issue.  Also, transportation is limited to R, N and W.  N and R are local trains so one would just putt-putt along.

Manhattan: 

Downtown south of 14th St.:  Too crowded, too congested, too dirty, too noisy, too trendy.  No parks or green of any note.  Very convenient to many things.  Too expensive for what one would get for an apartment.  If you have pets, its even more money.  As one realtor told me:  Having pets is like having kids because that's the way landlords look at it. 

Chelsea (between 14th and 50th or so):  Too expensive and tough to rent unless you wanted to hit $1800 for a studio in an elevator building.  A 1 BR just off of Union Square, walk-up was priced at $1700.  No parks or greenspaces.

Hell's Kitchen:  Up and coming at the time.  Very, very convenient.  Not as insane as points south of it.  Realtor kept calling it "Clinton."  <barf>  The market was hot so the prices matched.  Some were walk-ups.  Quite a number of older buildings and row houses.  Had the old nabe feel to it.  Mind you, this is an area I was warned never to go to years ago because some of the gangs would have no qualms of attacking you if you weren't white.  Saw a studio, walk-up for $1650.  Wasn't worth it.

Upper East Side and Upper West Side:  Too trendy, too sanitized (particularly the UES).  Apartments varied and, interestingly enough, so did the prices as it varied between realtors.  UWS does have the small advantage of being near Central Park and Riverside Park but I wasn't terribly impressed.  I did turn down an apartment with an East River view - decent sized 1 BR - but the bathroom... well, let's put it this way, if I fell off the commode, I'd fall into the hall and if it wasn't for the fact that the door to the bathroom opened OUT and blocked the front door, I could conceivably answer the front door as I was falling.   

Harlem:  Some parts were fine and some parts weren't.  It was still hit or miss although gentrification was in full swing.  Prices began to skyrocket at the time.  The supply didn't meet demand and my criteria.Not much green unless you count Central Park.  Harlem has many mom and pop stores and such.  Also some real great "soul" food.  I've eaten where Al Sharpton eats - he orders his waffles with fried chicken  - and I gotta tell you, I don't blame him!

Washington Heights:  Saw a few apartments there but I didn't like the neighborhood feel.  Don't ask me why.  I just didn't.  At points I felt too closed in and at others just off-balance (for want of a better description).  I've walked through WH many times since and it still gives me that odd feeling.  Big, big plus with Fort Tryon.  Convenient to many things. 

Inwood:  The parks were one big draw.  The Hudson River was another.  The lower level buildings.  I know the dirt and the noise are major issues.  If one can afford to, rent/buy West of Broadway.  I also loved the feel of the nabe.  Hard to describe.  Apartments varied in size.  One 2BR I saw was in a walk-up building, and I had to laugh, all the rooms were each almost a perfect 9x9 (or was that 8x8)!  Another 2BR I saw was a block or two just south of Dyckman.  It faced Broadway.  Nice for the price - $1200.  Someone beat me to it.  Another 2BR was in an absolutely fabulous building - well maintained Art Deco lobby.  I felt like I was on Park Avenue.  The apartment?  In the middle of August at about 1 pm, full sunshine out... I had to turn on the lights to see.  It faced the back.  The view was concrete.  I felt entombed.  Nixed that idea.  Also, one can be close to the basic amenities and a train ride away from the little luxuries.  Express train is a major plus for this area with access to the 1 and 9, too.

[maggie]

you are so right phillip, about comprimise in nyc.
always a comprimise.  if you live on the upper west side, you may have
what you want outside on the street and many conveniences , but live in a dark, small apartment with
a roomate.  in this neighborhood, you will travel to those conveniences, but can
have a beautiful, large, light apartment with a fabulous view (which i have).

i often think of those with alot of money to live where/how they want, what their
comprimises might be.  rubbing shoulders with the great unwashed??

[24 yrs in Inwood (aka 18, etc.)]

The Upper West Side does have many large, sprawling apartments with good-sized rooms -- usually in the large pre-war buildings.  But those buildings obviously tend to be the co-ops and condos now, not surpisingly.  (That's not to say that the owners aren't renting out some of the apartments.)  It's the tenements around Columbus and Amsterdam Avenues, and the brownstones on many of the sidestreets, that tend to have the smaller apartments and smaller rooms.  I don't know about the post-war buildings  (such as the Lincoln Center area buildings or the 1980's buildings on Broadway) -- but I would guess they have a lot of drywall, smaller rooms, and generally cheaper finishes and fixtures.

***

As for comparing NYC real estate prices to prices elsewhere (as people inevitably do when they grapple with their sticker shock), it's always essential to remember that the NYC prices include Manhattan -- and everything it has to offer -- while the Podunk prices include, well... Podunk.  If you forget or overlook the setting of the real estate, you're comparing apples and oranges.  So a thousand dollars worth of crappy apartment in Manhattan may indeed offer more than a thousand dollars worth of luxe in Podunk.  It's just that the "more" of the Manhattan apartment will be found OUTSIDE the apartment, not inside.

[mym175]

"So maybe by this point I've created a fictional city or place with everything that I want in an ideal place to live..."

i think that is a cool and valid statement. i think i moved to nyc because i grew up watching sesame street and i wanted to live in a city like that. now i do and i love it.

i moved to the heights cuz i could get a three bedroom for a grand a month.

[bluebaby]

If I may offer my perspective...

If I were you, I would ABSOLUTELY live in an affordable neighborhood rather than pay an arm and a leg for an apartment downtown.  I say this especially since you will be renting.  You can get a nice studio up here for around $1000-1200 (west of B'way, which is where you want to be).  Same studio downtown will cost you at least a thousand more, not a couple hundred more.  To dole out that much money for renting is, in my book, ludicrous.  Move up here, save $1000/month, put it away and then later down the road, you will have a down payment to own something. 

Yes, it will be annoying to not have NYC convenience and "buzz" along with a longer subway ride.  But if you think of your subway ride as a time to read, learn a new language (I do Spanish on the subway) or do office work, you can maximize your time and you will start to value it. 

When my husband and I moved to NYC, we were young and poor.  His salary was 35K, mine even less.  We paid very little in rent and saved, saved, saved (he gave up bar hopping, I gave up clothes shopping, we both gave up restaurants) and then three years later, we had a downpayment for an apartment up here.  Of course, now, our salaries have grown a lot, but that is not where wealth is being built... it is in our investment in our apartment.  If we choose to sell tomorrow, we will have made 200K in 1 year and 4 months. 

So, I implore you not to make some (sleezy) landlord even richer by giving him too much money for a crap apartment in a great neighborhood.  Put that money into yourself.  I strongly believe that in two years time, Inwood will be a happening place.  Who knows, but my intuition tells me so...

[pphillipp]

I know that advice is not one-size-fits-all, but I think bluebaby gave the best response of all of us - a great way to look at things.

I reiterate the advice to use subway time are reading/learning time.  You will virtually always get a seat up here (especially at the 207th stop on the A, the first/last of the line), and I can't even tell you how much work I've gotten done to/from home.

[maggie]

so true.  i actually enjoy my time going downtown on the A train (coming home is a different story!).

i love having my choice of seats, getting situated, sipping my coffee and reading the newspaper.
and it doesn't take long to get used to it. 

and once you're in an apartment that feels like a real living space rather than a serious comprimise,
the rest goes away. 

been here 25 years and going strong!

maggie 

[beth]

Most universities can cover their classes with inhouse people, or established adjuncts. However, there is almost always an opportunity to teach adjunct at City Colleges, depending on your field. Check  the CUNY website and check out the teaching  jobs. Generally you send a c.v. to the department head, who keeps you on file and tells you maybe a week before classes start that you are teaching.  You are paid a few thousand dollars, but as I am sure you know, the time involved is far greater than the few hours spent teaching.  Count on 3-4 hours of prep time per hour of lecture for your first time teaching, then add in office hours, emails from students, etc. and you'll probably find that Starbucks is a better option. It does get easier with time.  But you should definitely give it a shot, if for no other reason than to  appreciate your college profs! PERsonally I have been lucky with tenure track and haven't had to do the adjunct dance but from what I hear it's generally abusive in terms of pay and of course, no benefits!

[Wolfster]

Beth,

Hey thanks for the supplementary info (which places will hire if I look into it next summmer).

I know the pay etc is horrible for the effort. I already have classes I have done in the past (similarly, up till now I have never had to adjunct). If I do adjunct, my goal will be to have additional income (cost of living is much higher in NYC) - and in the past I have really enjoyed teaching and working with uni students - helps keep me up to date with the field. As I've taught some classes now a couple times, hopefully prep time will decrease significantly.

However, I agree in terms of adjunct treatment - I may look into other things like tutoring or - like you said starbucks may be hiring!

Seriously, though, thanks for the info. I'll keep it in mind next summer if I decide to go that route.

[beth]

Wolfster,
As long as you know what you are getting in to, go for it.  It's a great gig, despite the pay. Corny as it sounds, it is a truly fulfilliing job, esp when you can get someone who never even thought about the physical world to actually understand how it works. 
I forgot to tell you about a primary job hunting source- the Chronicle of Higher Education. They have a free job listing online, and most adjunct positions get a posting there (except for CUNY jobs). I see lots, and I am in science. Art doesn't show up as much and besides there is no hope in hades for landing one of those positions in NYC!  Patterson College always seems to be hiring adjuncts as well.
Good luck!

[24 yrs in Inwood (aka 18, etc.)]

...Patterson College always seems to be hiring adjuncts as well.

You mean William Paterson University Of New Jersey, located in Wayne (about 20 or 25 miles west of WaHI) -- right?  (That is, Paterson spelled with one 't.')

http://www.wpunj.edu

[Wolfster]

Beth,

Odd I 've always been a Chronicle addict - and have never seen them post advertisement for adjuncts. They must do that in that part of the country, though - I just went there and you are right, there is even one posted for CUNY right now that for material I've taught before. I don't know why they are posting this job this early though - they are looking for someone now to teach a course in the spring!

You are right though I see lots of jobs - and between NJ to NYC and what seems  to be a shortage of bio adjuncts there,  I'm sure I can talk my way into something next summer.

"Corny as it sounds, it is a truly fulfilliing job, esp when you can get someone who never even thought about the physical world to actually understand how it works.  "

(sorry I don't know how to quote that's the best I can do).

I understand what you mean - that is part of why I don't want to let it go.- it is a lot
of work, but I've enjoyed the 'really?' phenomenon and discovery, whether it be from a nonmajor, intro student, or even advanced students (when you give them journal articles to read).

Thanks for all the info again! (Even though a chronicle addict, I would have never looked for adjunct listings there).