I don't love the neighborhood and don't prefer newer construction but I don't think the prices are that wildly out of whack. Under 600 sq ft is not insanity for the space. Having not seen the space, though, if the construction is crappy then disregard the statement. My assumption is that it is of solid quality.
If you have kids and space is your concern and you prefer not to leave the city then you'd be shocked at how fast your options drop if you're not very wealthy. We always lived downtown. Loved it. If we has millions of dollars we would have stayed. But, we don't and wanted to stay in the city so we headed to Washington Heights. We love it. Very different from downtown and forced us to change ceetain things. But, I'd imagine we're not al that unusual so it would not suprise me if these places sell for about 500 sq. ft. to young families who are not feaked by leaving their comfort zone.
ok, I know everyone is going to call me a racist, but, in the neighborhood pictures section, why are there so many white people? We all know there are hardly any white people up there. What did you guys do, hire a bunch of white people from downtown and bus them up there???
Give it time eliz, within the next 12/18month you'll have so much choice for Manhattan housing at $600/square feet, nobody will ever consider moving all the way up there as an option...
The census bureau stats for HH say 10030 is 16% white, and 10031 is 21% white. The first is 65% black, the second only 32% black. So yes perhaps you are a bit racist.
...and the newer developments above 96th are all, when I have toured them, more white than the surrounding areas, and in some cases most of the people I see in the lobby, gym, etc, are white.
Jason, I live in 10031. This is a matter of statistical interpretation.
The "white" percentages in the nyt profile are a reflection of census methodology, which doesn't match real-world breakdowns of ethnicity. Latinos are cut into self-determined "white" and "black" buckets ... almost all the "white" people shown in that zip are Dominican (i.e. Hispanic or Latino), while the "black" people are either African-American or Dominican.
Nowhere near 21% white by the measure the "man on the street" uses. Probably <1%.
sledgehammer. as i said, i love downtown and would have stayed. i am not implying uptown is better or that it should command downtown prices. what i am saying is from my experience in looking it is very difficult to find properties laid out for families. either they are large, but walk ups. or cheap new construction. it kind of makes sense when you read about the evolution of the city. much as i love trendy downtown, its not all that easy to raise a family in a former tenemant or buy a loft space and reconfigure it with bedrooms. if a property is large, well laid out and ina nice location it will likely always be priced quite high. again, real estate is one of the more personal decisions so i am not trying to guide anyones decision. just sharing the experience of a very comfortable but not wealthy NYer with a family looking for a home in the city and how we came to live on 157th st.
alpine292. i don't think ypu're a racist but your staement that 'hardly any white people live up there' is just ill informed. you could go up and walk around and see that many white people do live there. not even sure why this is relevant? is your real point that if the population is not white then the property values should be lower? should chelsea property values go down because a lot of homosexuals live there?
Eliz, if you're raising a family, schools are probably much better around the upper east side apt i posted than in Hamilton. I'll become a father by the summer and am on the sideline at the moment. Where ever we'll decide to buy will be based on how good are public schools in the Neighbourhood we pick as we plan to live in the apt for many years.
I agree schools are a major concern. When we picked our location we decided on private school since we didn't love the local PS. It's all been a series of tradeoffs. Our housing overhead is low so we are OK with paying tuition. But, yes, I agree totally that schools can drive housing decisions.
The borders aren't exactly clear by any standards I have seen. I am a Hamilton Heights resident- and as I understood it, Edgecombe is included in Hamilton Heights- but I am fairly certain that the southern border ends at the point where Edgecombe and Bradhurst meet- which is at 141st. Streeteasy shows Edgecombe being included as far south as 135th st. To add more confusion- Streeteasy lists the building as Central Harlem and not Hamilton Heights. This building has a zip code 10030- I thought Hamilton Heights zip codes were 10031. Propertyshark doesn't have the address listed yet- but the established building next door is listed as Central Harlem/ 32nd Police Precinct- def. not Hamilton Heights.
I think these links provide a pretty accurate map and description of the Hamilton Heights boundaries. 'Upper' Edgecombe would be considered part of Sugar Hill, not Hamilton Heights. And that is what I've heard oldtimers say as well.
Those links are accurate maps and descriptions of the Historic District of Hamilton Heights only but does nothing to describe the entire boundaries of Hamilton Heights. Hamilton Heights does extend as far West as the Hudson and as far south as 135th- it's the eastern boundary that has discrepancies everywhere. I did meet one historian that said the southern boundary is 136th St- but not only is 135th a natural boundary by it's wide 2 way street, but it's also the boundary set by the districts.
"ok, I know everyone is going to call me a racist, but, in the neighborhood pictures section, why are there so many white people? We all know there are hardly any white people up there. What did you guys do, hire a bunch of white people from downtown and bus them up there???"
Alpine, I'm glad you're the one who said it and not me! Seriously, I'm in that neighborhood quite frequently and I'm often the only white face up there. Amazing how they just happened to get so many white people in those street shots! Apparently, all 8 white residents just happened to be out at the same time ... in the same block.
The problem with saying Hamilton Heights extends as far east as Edgecombe is that you overlap into Sugar Hill, which had a long history of being the most desirable area of Harlem. Although HH is hot today, I really doubt anyone who lived north of 145th on Edgecombe or St. Nick in say, 1950, would describe the area as Ham Heights but they most certainly would have distinguished it as Sugar Hill. In the first line of the description of the property that is subject of this thread, the development location is described as "nestled between Strivers Row and Sugar Hill," which I think is accurate.
I always found the South/West borders of Ham Heights more difficult to ascertain. West of Hamilton Place and South of 140th has a look and feel that is different than the rest of Hamilton Heights, yet I don't know what other neighborhood I would have it designated.
In all fairness to the developers, the couple walking down the street looks Latino (albeit "blanco"), and the white bikers are a very common sight on RSD and the Hudson path in the 10031 -- pedaling through to the GWB and beyond. So I'm not sure they're misrepresenting the neighborhood quite so much.
Those posters who are hung up about the "whiteness" of an area are typical non-Native NYers. Perhaps you would be more comfortable in a segregated city like Chicago, where it's whites on the North and blacks on the South and West almost without exception.
This is NYC, multiculturalism and ethnicity are what make it great. All of uptown, Harlem, Northern Manhattan, whatever you call it has undergone a transformation. Whereas it was extremely rare to see a white face above 96th or 110th street before, now they are everywhere.
It amazes me the small town mentality of people. "Oh, I can't live anywhere where there's more blacks than whites." Why don't you look at the crime statistics for the area. That's a more legitimate concern. If the area is all white but has a robbery and homicide problem, I wouldn't move there.
The pictures of the neighborhood are not representative of the demographic, period. You can spout off about multiculturalism all you want, but the fact remains that the ONLY faces in the photos are white, which is an outright lie about the neighborhood's demographic makeup.
They want to get white people to feel comfortable coming to look at their apts. Simple. Its why all the marketing I have seen for most of the new condos above 96th have mostly white faces in the pics.
And amazingly, it seems to be working, as the NYT wrote about recently.
Speak to people in the neighborhood to see how you feel there, don't make assumptions based on what you see, that's where racism and classism take hold. Trust your instincts but remember to always view them through the lens of oppression, it exists and we are all taught it. Whether we have the social power to enforce it or not, it informs us.
But back to the subject that brought me to this discussion -- Does anyone know anything else about this building or the developers? Or how bad 145th St is in terms of traffic noise?
145th Street is very noisy, and I doubt that anyone with pockets deep enough to pay $620K for a two-bedroom apartment would be happy with the crappy stores and restaurants in the area. Your whole life will revolve around the A and D trains (luckily both express stops at 145th) because you'll be wanting to head downtown for everything.
This building is nearly 5 blocks from 145th St- you won't hear traffic noise from there in this building. I did attend an open house in this building. Overall I was very impressed with many of the thoughtful details in this apartment. This is Central Harlem (near the Hamilton Heights border- but not Hamilton Heights as it's promoted), and caught between nicer sections and crappy sections of the area. Personally, I believe these apartments need to come down in price substantially and I know the developer will be reluctant to do so. I am not a fan of side by side bedrooms, which is the general layout of these units and does impact my evaluation of pricing. Obviously this is a personal preference- but a lot of people do take this into consideration when considering an apartment and subsequently, the price.
eliz "If you have kids and space is your concern and you prefer not to leave the city then you'd be shocked at how fast your options drop if you're not very wealthy" If you loved your kids you wouldn't send them to public school in Harlem.
We visited a few weeks ago for an open house. There was only one apartment which was finished and could be looked at. It was very nice. There was a lot of construction going on during the open house. They told us we could move in in a couple of weeks, which seems ridiculous.
I think they are going to have a lot of trouble selling those units until they drop the prices further.
http://www.hamiltonlofts.com/residences.html
Beautiful spaces, gorgeous pictures. Terrible neighborhood.
Amazing apts but 50% overpriced.
Holy Jesus! I didn't even look at the prices!!! For $639K in that neighborhood you should get an entire townhouse.
I don't love the neighborhood and don't prefer newer construction but I don't think the prices are that wildly out of whack. Under 600 sq ft is not insanity for the space. Having not seen the space, though, if the construction is crappy then disregard the statement. My assumption is that it is of solid quality.
If you have kids and space is your concern and you prefer not to leave the city then you'd be shocked at how fast your options drop if you're not very wealthy. We always lived downtown. Loved it. If we has millions of dollars we would have stayed. But, we don't and wanted to stay in the city so we headed to Washington Heights. We love it. Very different from downtown and forced us to change ceetain things. But, I'd imagine we're not al that unusual so it would not suprise me if these places sell for about 500 sq. ft. to young families who are not feaked by leaving their comfort zone.
ok, I know everyone is going to call me a racist, but, in the neighborhood pictures section, why are there so many white people? We all know there are hardly any white people up there. What did you guys do, hire a bunch of white people from downtown and bus them up there???
Give it time eliz, within the next 12/18month you'll have so much choice for Manhattan housing at $600/square feet, nobody will ever consider moving all the way up there as an option...
The census bureau stats for HH say 10030 is 16% white, and 10031 is 21% white. The first is 65% black, the second only 32% black. So yes perhaps you are a bit racist.
http://realestate.nytimes.com/community/10031-Hamilton-Heights-New-York-NY-usa/demographics
...and the newer developments above 96th are all, when I have toured them, more white than the surrounding areas, and in some cases most of the people I see in the lobby, gym, etc, are white.
Jason, I live in 10031. This is a matter of statistical interpretation.
The "white" percentages in the nyt profile are a reflection of census methodology, which doesn't match real-world breakdowns of ethnicity. Latinos are cut into self-determined "white" and "black" buckets ... almost all the "white" people shown in that zip are Dominican (i.e. Hispanic or Latino), while the "black" people are either African-American or Dominican.
Nowhere near 21% white by the measure the "man on the street" uses. Probably <1%.
Here's an exemple that aboutready just pointed out on another thread:
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/390453-coop-222-east-80th-street-yorkville-new-york
Some Apts on the upper east side are offered at the same price than these... Gotta be stupid to pay that kind of money in Hamilton.
sledgehammer. as i said, i love downtown and would have stayed. i am not implying uptown is better or that it should command downtown prices. what i am saying is from my experience in looking it is very difficult to find properties laid out for families. either they are large, but walk ups. or cheap new construction. it kind of makes sense when you read about the evolution of the city. much as i love trendy downtown, its not all that easy to raise a family in a former tenemant or buy a loft space and reconfigure it with bedrooms. if a property is large, well laid out and ina nice location it will likely always be priced quite high. again, real estate is one of the more personal decisions so i am not trying to guide anyones decision. just sharing the experience of a very comfortable but not wealthy NYer with a family looking for a home in the city and how we came to live on 157th st.
alpine292. i don't think ypu're a racist but your staement that 'hardly any white people live up there' is just ill informed. you could go up and walk around and see that many white people do live there. not even sure why this is relevant? is your real point that if the population is not white then the property values should be lower? should chelsea property values go down because a lot of homosexuals live there?
Eliz, if you're raising a family, schools are probably much better around the upper east side apt i posted than in Hamilton. I'll become a father by the summer and am on the sideline at the moment. Where ever we'll decide to buy will be based on how good are public schools in the Neighbourhood we pick as we plan to live in the apt for many years.
I agree schools are a major concern. When we picked our location we decided on private school since we didn't love the local PS. It's all been a series of tradeoffs. Our housing overhead is low so we are OK with paying tuition. But, yes, I agree totally that schools can drive housing decisions.
Well, gay men bring up property values (all those TINKs) so no.
That location is not really part of Hamilton Heights
The borders aren't exactly clear by any standards I have seen. I am a Hamilton Heights resident- and as I understood it, Edgecombe is included in Hamilton Heights- but I am fairly certain that the southern border ends at the point where Edgecombe and Bradhurst meet- which is at 141st. Streeteasy shows Edgecombe being included as far south as 135th st. To add more confusion- Streeteasy lists the building as Central Harlem and not Hamilton Heights. This building has a zip code 10030- I thought Hamilton Heights zip codes were 10031. Propertyshark doesn't have the address listed yet- but the established building next door is listed as Central Harlem/ 32nd Police Precinct- def. not Hamilton Heights.
I think these links provide a pretty accurate map and description of the Hamilton Heights boundaries. 'Upper' Edgecombe would be considered part of Sugar Hill, not Hamilton Heights. And that is what I've heard oldtimers say as well.
http://www.hdc.org/boundarieshhshmap.htm
http://www.hdc.org/boundarieshhsh.htm
Those links are accurate maps and descriptions of the Historic District of Hamilton Heights only but does nothing to describe the entire boundaries of Hamilton Heights. Hamilton Heights does extend as far West as the Hudson and as far south as 135th- it's the eastern boundary that has discrepancies everywhere. I did meet one historian that said the southern boundary is 136th St- but not only is 135th a natural boundary by it's wide 2 way street, but it's also the boundary set by the districts.
"ok, I know everyone is going to call me a racist, but, in the neighborhood pictures section, why are there so many white people? We all know there are hardly any white people up there. What did you guys do, hire a bunch of white people from downtown and bus them up there???"
Alpine, I'm glad you're the one who said it and not me! Seriously, I'm in that neighborhood quite frequently and I'm often the only white face up there. Amazing how they just happened to get so many white people in those street shots! Apparently, all 8 white residents just happened to be out at the same time ... in the same block.
The problem with saying Hamilton Heights extends as far east as Edgecombe is that you overlap into Sugar Hill, which had a long history of being the most desirable area of Harlem. Although HH is hot today, I really doubt anyone who lived north of 145th on Edgecombe or St. Nick in say, 1950, would describe the area as Ham Heights but they most certainly would have distinguished it as Sugar Hill. In the first line of the description of the property that is subject of this thread, the development location is described as "nestled between Strivers Row and Sugar Hill," which I think is accurate.
I always found the South/West borders of Ham Heights more difficult to ascertain. West of Hamilton Place and South of 140th has a look and feel that is different than the rest of Hamilton Heights, yet I don't know what other neighborhood I would have it designated.
In all fairness to the developers, the couple walking down the street looks Latino (albeit "blanco"), and the white bikers are a very common sight on RSD and the Hudson path in the 10031 -- pedaling through to the GWB and beyond. So I'm not sure they're misrepresenting the neighborhood quite so much.
Those posters who are hung up about the "whiteness" of an area are typical non-Native NYers. Perhaps you would be more comfortable in a segregated city like Chicago, where it's whites on the North and blacks on the South and West almost without exception.
This is NYC, multiculturalism and ethnicity are what make it great. All of uptown, Harlem, Northern Manhattan, whatever you call it has undergone a transformation. Whereas it was extremely rare to see a white face above 96th or 110th street before, now they are everywhere.
It amazes me the small town mentality of people. "Oh, I can't live anywhere where there's more blacks than whites." Why don't you look at the crime statistics for the area. That's a more legitimate concern. If the area is all white but has a robbery and homicide problem, I wouldn't move there.
kingdeka, you're missing the point entirely.
The pictures of the neighborhood are not representative of the demographic, period. You can spout off about multiculturalism all you want, but the fact remains that the ONLY faces in the photos are white, which is an outright lie about the neighborhood's demographic makeup.
They want to get white people to feel comfortable coming to look at their apts. Simple. Its why all the marketing I have seen for most of the new condos above 96th have mostly white faces in the pics.
And amazingly, it seems to be working, as the NYT wrote about recently.
And why not? It worked for the University of Wisconsin:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_18_98/ai_66157053/
Speak to people in the neighborhood to see how you feel there, don't make assumptions based on what you see, that's where racism and classism take hold. Trust your instincts but remember to always view them through the lens of oppression, it exists and we are all taught it. Whether we have the social power to enforce it or not, it informs us.
But back to the subject that brought me to this discussion -- Does anyone know anything else about this building or the developers? Or how bad 145th St is in terms of traffic noise?
145th Street is very noisy, and I doubt that anyone with pockets deep enough to pay $620K for a two-bedroom apartment would be happy with the crappy stores and restaurants in the area. Your whole life will revolve around the A and D trains (luckily both express stops at 145th) because you'll be wanting to head downtown for everything.
This building is nearly 5 blocks from 145th St- you won't hear traffic noise from there in this building. I did attend an open house in this building. Overall I was very impressed with many of the thoughtful details in this apartment. This is Central Harlem (near the Hamilton Heights border- but not Hamilton Heights as it's promoted), and caught between nicer sections and crappy sections of the area. Personally, I believe these apartments need to come down in price substantially and I know the developer will be reluctant to do so. I am not a fan of side by side bedrooms, which is the general layout of these units and does impact my evaluation of pricing. Obviously this is a personal preference- but a lot of people do take this into consideration when considering an apartment and subsequently, the price.
eliz "If you have kids and space is your concern and you prefer not to leave the city then you'd be shocked at how fast your options drop if you're not very wealthy" If you loved your kids you wouldn't send them to public school in Harlem.
We visited a few weeks ago for an open house. There was only one apartment which was finished and could be looked at. It was very nice. There was a lot of construction going on during the open house. They told us we could move in in a couple of weeks, which seems ridiculous.
I think they are going to have a lot of trouble selling those units until they drop the prices further.