If you can't have it all

And to add one of my favorite comments from some very trendy designers - it's not WHERE you live, it's HOW you live.

It depends on the individual. If someone is in a really great public school zone like PS6 and does not want or cannot pay for private school, then they will need to stay in that area at all cost. But for someone like you or for someone who is single, then compromising on area is not a bad idea.

location, building quality, views/light, space (SF) , other tangibles (high ceilings, condition, etc.)....

pick 3 out of 5.

ph41, odd question since often your dream apartment is in an "marginal" area. In short, to your question, yes I would (and did) go for my dream apartment in my less than ideal neighborhood. And to clarify, we moved from our dream neighborhood (Bank St between Bleecker and West 4th) to 157th St. Obviously not our dream 'hood. But, it really is amazing to not sweat your mortgage or college savings or job loss. For that, we have a 30 min subway ride downtown. Not for everyone, of curse, and I would encourage people to live in their dream neighborhood and then expand as their life gets "older"...so, I am by no means, encouraging people to move to "marginal" areas until they're ready.

I chose a dream apartment over a dream neighborhood. The neighborhood is okay, and convenient enough, the apartment is a dream, and the price was divine.

I originally posed this question because it seemed to me that people were focusing so intensely on neighborhood, UWS sneering at UES, Village sneering at Murray Hill, Tribeca sneering at anything else. (and president, I specifically omitted parents having to buy into a good public school). Just seemed to me that concessions usually have to be made, unless one's budget is unlimited (i.e. we always want JUST a little more than we can afford), and that many people on SE haven't really thought that through.
And yes, I live in Murray Hill (which I do not consider a "marginal" neighborhood). Not one of the most picturesque blocks,but very convenient for work, and for theater, (go sometimes twice a week),restaurants, in a spectacular apartment (I call it an "unclassic postwar 6" - the size of a 9, (3,000 sf) with fireplace and wrap terraces. BUT, couldn't afford this apartment in my other preferred neighborhoods, and having lived here now for 10 years, can't look at "regular" apartments in those neighborhoods and see myself living in them.

Just trying to get people, new buyers, and buyers looking to move up, to open their minds to alternative possibilities.

I'm moving for neighborhood. My apartment is somebody's dream (classic uws 7) but now that we're not working full time, it's boring here. We want to be where there's life in the street, like there was in the Village when I lived in Grove Street in the 70's and there were people out there at any hour of the day or night, interesting little shops etc. We're looking in Williamsburg. Don't need it in the apartment. At this stage (kids gone) I'm totally willing to sacrifice sf and quality of building for a sense of adventure. One kid lives in the city and the other in Indonesia, so they're not coming for the weekend. Expat son can sleep on the floor when he comes - it'll be nicer than where he lives.

This is so to the point- we made the same compromise, 3000sqf, loft off PAS/20's. Moved from UES etc. all of the discussions are so hypothetical they neglect the emotional realities of space, light, location and price.

Public school zoning aside - given enough space & light, neighborhood trumps everything for me.

trinity parent - interesting point, but, more to the point is that it would seem you do not have to sacrifice anything to move where you want. (UWS to Williamsburg - should be able to have just about anything you want). nyc10023 - "given enough space and light, neighborhood trumps everything for me". Again, if you can't get the "space and light" you want, will you change neighborhoods? And do you have the space and light you want at this time, or did you sacrifice for neighborhood?

Ph: 10 years ago, when we looked to buy for the first time, we considered Murray Hill. Large 1br condos (with DR) in full service bldgs were selling for 300k. On the UWS, the cheapest condo we saw (excluding the Bel Canto) in our then-preferred stretch of UWS were small 350k 1-beds in the first Trump bldg.

We visited Murray Hill on weekends, ate there, went to the movies, etc. but just felt that it didn't feel right.

Ph: I was about to expand on this point. How much space is sufficient is a very personal thing, and I suppose if it were a choice between cramming X kids into a 1 bedroom and moving to MH, absolutely I would move to Murray Hill from the UWS. But that's not my situation. I am okay with being on a B block on the UWS, with some noise, light, no views, no doorman, sufficient space (probably too much given my packrat tendencies) and I would not trade that for an A+ block on MH, full services, 2x space, helicopter views, and zero noise.

trinpar--heartening to hear youre doin it--i live ues within 3 blox of both daughter's schools--cant wait (3 more years) til theyre launched so i can move downtown or to b'klyn--zip cultural undercurrent on ues--has been great for child-rearing and easy exit to CT but cant wait for a neighborhood with some energy

Also, there are numerous neighborhoods I could trade for a bigger place, more light, views, less noise, more services and no insult to MH, Murray Hill would not be where I would make the trade.

I would certainly trade W70s for W100s w. of Bway (you said assuming school not an issue), W70s for UES (assuming we could get pass the board, prices are lower).

Another point, Ph41 - forget about trading across. The % of our equity tied up in real estate is probably the highest allocation I feel comfortable with. So yes, it is tempting to reduce that % for the same size place in a cheaper neighborhood - but again, I would probably choose uptown or crosstown versus midtown east.

nyc10023 - didn't mean to put you on the defensive (though that is where you seem to be) - very few people "trade across" - they usually try to trade UP, and there you go again, bashing Murray Hill, where you can't afford to trade UP.

I amend that comment slightly - usually one does not "trade across" unless there has been an economic reversal of fortune.

And ubottom and trinity parent- Diane Von Furstenberg made that move a number of years ago - probably for the same reasons you want to.

And nyc10023 - at least you very deliberately made a choice - looked at your economic options and decided what was most important to you. I just don't know how many people posting to SE actually do that- many seem to to unwilling to make any "tradeoffs".

"they usually try to trade UP, and there you go again, bashing Murray Hill, where you can't afford to trade UP."

Not sure what you mean by this, ph41.

You sound way more defensive than me. I'm not blind to the faults of our neighborhood. I'm also not getting the sense that people are not willing to make tradeoffs, in fact, I sense the opposite.

The other thing - which is important to an floorplan/prewar bldg -worshipper like me is that you can't divorce dream apt from dream building. The # of "dream" buildings happens (for me) to be higher in UWS, UES, 5th Ave Gold Coast.

If you're talking townhouses, I would say that the vast majority of them (with intact and interesting detail) happen to lie in Brooklyn and to a lesser extent in Harlem & H. Heights (did you see that Nicholas Ave Barnum/Bailey house?) So maybe that dovetails more with your original question - would I move to Bk/Harlem/H Heights for that perfect specimen of a townhouse?

Another tradeoff issue. When comparing neighborhoods, many people would consider moving out of the city (and in some cases, countries) altogether if it meant they couldn't stay in their preferred neighborhood and get sufficient space. So it's not necessarily UWS vs. UES vs. Village vs. Murray Hill but UWS vs. Montclair vs. Westchster - you get the picture.

Ick! Suburbs combine the worst of all worlds - all the disadvantages of the country (need 45 minutes in car to do anything, have to shovel snow, nothing to do, see or eat, without any real open space and nature you'd get in the country) plus the disadvantages of the city (noise, nosy neighbors, crime, mediocre schools, without aforesaid anything to do/eat.)

"In other words, if you could have your dream apartment, but it was not in your "favorite" neighborhood, would you go for it?"

Depends on how inferior the neighborhood.

To me, its like saying, which is more important... tires or a steering wheel. Having them at all is clearly important. But if its the difference between cheap tires and great tires... or a busted tire and great tires...

The amount of the differential is important.

I'd definitely take the inferior apartment to stay in prime manhattan. If its moving to say west side, I'd consider it, but would have to be a GREAT apartment. I wouldn't move too far from key subways, no matter how nice.

my entire living situation is a compromise. don't have the neighborhood i want (but am close, and it is convenient enough for everything else), don't have the apartment i want (but it is close enough, and more to the point cheap enough, and has what i NEED).

funny, 007 compromised by moving to what is close to my dream apartment.

i'm not sure my dream apartment exists, an 1800+ sf apartment in the East Village, not new construction.

The dream apartment is always the one just out of reach. It's just simple human nature.
The moment you can afford it your "dream apartment" is the next tier up.

ph41, I have found nyc10023 to be one of the most courteous and informative posters here on SE. I did not read any defensiveness in her posts. I think you are reading too much into it.

As for me, it's hard to ignore the school zoning so I would say location over everthing else wins.
After that, there has to be a sufficient number of bedrooms and bathrooms plus storage.
Light and views are not critical.

truthskr, i may be an exception to that rule. as i can afford more i seem to want less.

aboutready

Ha.....au contraire. You simply just have inner wisdom, subconsciously recognize this trait and realize the futility. :)

aboutready - you just seem more able to keep your desires in check - you still obviously want.

of course. lovely things are lovely things.

You can't have everything. Where would you put it?

TP: some "burbs" or towns in the metro NYC area have surprisingly good ethnic food served in clean, not "hole in the wall" places. Edison comes to mind, as does the Brunswick(s) area. Hmm, make that NJ. NJ has some very good ethnic restaurants (Indian, Chinese, Italian come to mind).

there are always solutions...
I have the largest collection of sea shells in the world.

I keep them scattered on the beaches of the earth so all may enjoy.
If you hold one of my conches up to your ear you can hear what RE brokers are thinking.

Location, high ceiling and space....Building quality can be dealt with. Even light, within reason. Very nice ground floor apartments are out there.

"i'm not sure my dream apartment exists, an 1800+ sf apartment in the East Village, not new construction. "

Depending on what you consider "new construction" they do (well, even if you don't). Maybe you should hire a broker who knows the East Villge for long enough that they've seen these things over, say the last 30 years or so (yes I'm being snarky as usual, but you know I can't help myself, it's a character defect).

oh 30yrs, you silly billy. you know i always use a broker. and i like your snarkiness.

but there's not a lot, and you'll have to admit that. noho, nolita, more.

aboutready - the buildings are old, the interiors are new- wouldn't that qualify. After all, in those neighborhoods, it was either heavy duty commercial, or tenements (as was Tribeca)

AR;you know I like to be silly. But do you know there are 3,000 to 5,000 Sf lofts on alphabet city? Which have been Coop for a substantial amount of time? Do you know there are buildings on 7th between C and D which have a half decent stock of units sized like you are looking for?

Bad joke for drunk male to play on female RE broker in some bar:

Guy:"So you are in real estate?"

Female RE Broker:"Why, yes"

Guy: pulls down his fly and asks "Is this a lot?"

Nice!

30 years...wouldn't it work just as well (or just as obnoxiously as the case may be) if the broker were a gay man? just saying....

really? interesting. and possibly fascinating to us in a year or so. i saw one building that seemed interesting but still hugely overpriced.

"30 years...wouldn't it work just as well (or just as obnoxiously as the case may be) if the broker were a gay man? just saying...."

No, it would be very different. In one case the teller gets slapped, in the other he ends up in the tea room.

30years - so a coop in alphabet city is more than an really badly re-constructed tenement? PLEASE!!

30oyrs - don't know if I consider Alphabet City really in same category as East Village (though now, with the heroin, drug dealers mostly gone, other people might).

"30years - so a coop in alphabet city is more than an really badly re-constructed tenement? PLEASE!!"

If you are claiming that the ONLY residential buildings in Alphabet city are either new construction or "badly re-constructed tenements", you are incorrect.

30yrs- I don't walk around there a lot, when I have I don't remember seeing a lot of brownstone (original single family) buildings, or commercial buildings as there were in Tribeca and Soho.
So, elucidate and enlighten me.

30yrs - seruiously would like your input

Responding to OP: yes, we've done this and are happy with our choice. I think you have to be honest with yourself about what your priorities are to be happy with your tradeoff. We are house people -- love original detail, think working fireplaces are a necessity of life, love to cook and often have people over. Could care less about prestige. Have a child with special needs who gets expensive therapies that insurance companies refuse to reimburse. For us, taking all those elements together, decamping from the UES to a restored row house in Harlem has been a great move. We have other spending priorities and we love our home. While it might not be someone else's dream location, we love our neigborhood and neighbors (although we would like for the serial rapist to be caught). For a twenty-something who goes out to eat every night, it would not be a good move. She'd probably be happier in a smaller place in a trendier neighborhood.

Ballsy choice...and the long term view will probably work for you there because the space will always be enough for you.

Back to defending the Female RE broker at the bar...

sure, she tells you how big it is but, she also tells yo that the actual measurement is talken from the 'outside tip' of the extra-large reservoir tiped prophylactic. Now, squeeze back the testies....there, you see...hidden value!

"size don't matter" kind of brokers all around....
that's like in the car industry=> top speed don't matter
in medicine=> maybe cancerous, but don't really matter, no further testing required
in accounting => legal in the eyes of IRS?, don't matter
in construction => might be 90 degrees of 88 degrees, the bldg won't fall
in banking => aaa or ccc, don't matter

30yrs, still disagree w/ measuring... "an industry" standard measurment endorsed and followed by all major brokerages in NYC "wouldn't" hurt its image. All other things are "subjective"= > but measurements?, I mean just on a valuation for the bank aren't measurements "required?"

"30yrs, still disagree w/ measuring... "an industry" standard measurment endorsed and followed by all major brokerages in NYC "wouldn't" hurt its image. All other things are "subjective"= > but measurements?, I mean just on a valuation for the bank aren't measurements "required?""

Not sure what you are asking, but I'll throw out this tidbit: since Coop SF isn't "listed" anywhere a classic appraiser trick has always been to diminish the SF of comps to raise teh $PSF of comps and thus the target property becomes "more valuable" as a result. And if appraisers are doing it, what do you think brokers are gonna do? And one reason you're never gonna see an industry standard measurement (in Manhattan) is that the single biggest source of new exclusives for most brokers is that they sold the guy/gal the place. How are they going to explain to them that it was 2200SF when they sold it to them, but now that they are selling it, it's 1567SF? No way, no how, never gonna happen. Plus the $PSF asking price of every unit would instantaneously go up 10% to 20%. How do you think that would go over in this market?

Plus no commercial deals would get done for 3 years while everyone tried to adjust to the new "truth".

What I'm trying to say is that it's not just the brokers who are guilty: it's everyone. Are we saying that every buyer was so dumb that they were incapable of measuring units for the last 40 years? BS - they went along, as did appraisers, etc.

ph41 - Ageloff towers (both of them), Christadora House (condo, though, as is) 240 East Houston, 131 Avenue B, The converted Synagogue on the South side of 7th between C and D and the 6 story Victorian apt building right across the street from it, 160 East 3rd St, this is just off the top of my head without thinking and sticking to Alphabet City and not places in the EV like 111 East 10th, etc.

30yrs - looked at those and really don't understand - Ageloff towers - not much better than an UES standard apartment. Except for Avenue B (only one sale showing) the others are not great- relatively small spaces - not much bigger than conventional apartments. Trendies might go for it but really don't see fabulous spaces here.

Frankly, aboutready would be better off staying in PCV

ph41, sadly (on some levels) true. some nice stuff in the flatiron, but still hugely overpriced and not really my favorite location.

i do know a couple of people who have lived in large coops in the east village forever. but i never see that type of unit come on the market.

IMHO, no matter how great the neighborhood is, you still have to go home to sleep! If you hate your living quarters, I don't care how much you love the block eventually you'll want to scream.

Arlodog - but a lot of people on this thread seem to think that the surrounding streets are more important than their living space.

ph412 - now you're changing the argument. You said that they were all "badly re-constructed tenement"s. Whether you love Ageloff or not, would you stick by your description that it is a badly re-constructed tenement?

bump

my answer then i'll read the thread (not sure how i missed this one first time around): i don't think my "dream" apartment could exist independent of the "right" neighborhood. so, for me, neighborhood is probably the #1 factor, then factors specific to bldg and unit weigh in.

i'm not very trendy; i think it is WHERE you live over what you live in, at leaast in manhattan.

I say hold out for it all.

I made an offer today on a dream apartment I first saw 2 years ago, in a great building, on the best street in a fabulous area. I passed on it then, now it is back at a million+ less. Sure, it is missing a few of the things I would like, but hey, it has an undercounter ice maker, so I am all set!

to amend a bit: if we could only afford a studio or 1 br for 2 adults and 2 kids in our preferred neighborhood i would certainly "compromise" to a less preferred, more affordable location. but, do people really have "dream" apartments? you certainly have much more control over the apartment (in terms of modifications, upgrades, etc) than you do the neighborhood.

I say pick better apartment over better neighborhood (within reason, obviously). I lived in an amazing apartment in an "up and coming" neighborhood when I first moved to New York and stayed there for years. Then I moved to a tiny, broke-down (and more expensive) apartment in a great neighborhood. Within weeks, I regretted leaving my first place. Now we're buying and going back to an awesome apartment in a fringe hood. I couldn't be more excited.

The only way to know is to try both scenarios - 1) less than ideal apt and ideal nabe 2) ideal apt and less-ideal nabe.

do you really need to try 10023? i think i know my answer w/o trying both scenarios.

funny, this thread has slightly digressed into a "dream apartment in less than dreamy neighborhood" vs. "crappy apartment in dreamy neighborhood". I don't think that's what OP was proposing but i do think that's the trade-off that many would make (apartment would have to lean towards the crappy side to give up prime location). Again, do people have "dream" apartments (layout,special features, etc) independent of location? And if you do, couldn't you come pretty close in your preferred location? You can do a lot with a gut reno (so i've heard).

ph41, you've given us a difficult question here. I think that both an apartment and neighborhood are very important. What uwsmom says is true, that you can modify your apartment but you can't turn a cookie cutter style apartment into a prewar. While it's important to feel at home when inside your apartment since most of us don't just close the front door and hop into our cars, it's also important to feel at home in your neighborhood. If I hate to choose, I'd probably go with the neighborhood over the apartment but just barely. But I'm going to think about your interesting question for a while longer and read any further comments on this thread.

Correction- if I had to choose, but I guess I'm also thinking that I'd hate to choose.

very true lobster and i think my perspective is limited. in my mind i'm comparing all the large prewar apartments that i've seen and i assume that the layout could be easily changed in most. you certainly can't change amount of light or views and you definitely can't turn a 2br condo into a townhouse. BUT, if what you want is prewar, why would you buy a cookie-cutter apartment? Unless there are no prewars in your desired neighborhood (is that the case anywhere?). Similarly, if you want a townhouse, you aren't going to "settle" for a 2br new construction. My point is the "trade-offs" need not be so drastic.

and, of course, when i say "dream" and "want" i'm assuming that we're referring to what is fiscally attainable.

I'm actually going back and forth on this question. I think that many people find a great deal of pleasure in having their ideal home as mommyesq has posted above and that's an important consideration. Likewise many people derive pleasure from being out in their neighborhoods and their apartment is perhaps not their real sanctuary. It's a very tough call and I would think a decision has to be made on a case by case basis. Good question though.

You have to know where you want to live first, then figure out how to live there.

Maybe that's the problemo. Ive got this wanderlust, maybe I oughta just do an oyster 66. Now that's a heavy boat that'll get you from tahiti to Honolulu wo getting ya seasick.

Now that the turkey is stuffed, and in the oven...

One thing that people haven't mentioned is the issue of tradeoffs within the same neighborhood. I live on a B block (good school zone, good access to parks, bearable traffic, okay street views). But I don't live on an A block in the neighborhood (matter of debate, but say 74th bet. CPW & Col. or 67th bet. CPW & Col. or the best stretch of CPW). For the same $, I would only be able to buy 2/3rd the space at best (assuming we could get past the board) on a better block. I know some people who would NEVER live on my block and would rather pay the same and live with less space on a better block.

spin - exactly
10023 - given that it's Thanksgiving, shouldn't you be done baking?
We kind of compromised on our current location (mid-80's instead of mid-70's) w/in the neighborhood simply due to the fact that it is great space (imo) for the money. is this really a trade-off? i guess a small one. I'm just happy to be reaping the benefits of unrandom genetic predetermination, personal drive, and good decision-making ;)

As my wife and I watch the places and things we like (and that includes vacation condos in Miami, boats, international spots where developers are overleveraged) we tend to think of the neighborhoods we go to on a regular basis. If we found the dream apartment on the Upper East, would we ever move there? No. I can go an entire calender year not visiting that neighborhood, except to visit a client at his home for an hour. We eat at Time Warner restaurants a lot, but we've also been to David Chang's empire well over 100 times. I guess for us it comes down to where we spend our time. We'll find something when we're ready (when prices are at reality).

uwsmom: 2 more days and she's officially overdue. Yes, it's really a tradeoff if you compromise location within a neighborhood for price/space. My partner would not really want to move north of 81st. We came close (accepted offer) twice on places north of 81st but offer #1 fell through because the sellers were extremely rich and were too attached to sell (hasn't been on market since AND they don't live there) and offer #2 resulted in a contract that was clearly designed to shop the bid (though I don't know why they didn't just ask us for more $).

i also think having children dictates how much one values location. Even if you exclude school zone, parents typically want a kid-friendly neighborhood. Do you have kids ph41? This may not seem obvious to those w/o little ones.

UWSmom - if you look at my initial post I wrote that if public schools are a highly important factor - then that influences many choices. Though, many parents, as AR does, live in one area and send their child to a private school in another area.

Also, don't know what happens when children reach middle school and high school age.ARe there that many good public schools for children that age? (Stuyvesant being highly competitive, so can't count on that).

Have also noted how many areas not previously considered "

I just know that after having lived in a 1500 sf duplex with great views though somewhoat cookie cutter layout, for about 8 years, I was in Tribeca a lot, and got used to seeing large spaces. Looked at lots of places, loft, postwar,prewar (which didn't always seem that grand, because we couldnt' afford the REALLY grand ones)

My husband wouldn't live in Tribeca under any circumstances. So UES, Chelsea, Flatiron,Village, Murray Hill (which worked for us personally). Apartment we wound up with is in what NYC10023 would probably call a B building with an apartment that is A++ in terms of space, grace, amenities. At the time didn't see nything that approached it within our price range so apartment won out over neigbhorood (UES, Village being favorites, as schizo as that sounds)

bump

When I was looking I had a bunch of neighborhoods I considered acceptable and looked for the best apartment within any of them. Not having to consider school district makes it alot easier (although I happened to end up in a great school area) to be geographically flexible. Transportation access is vital to me which eliminated the UES (refuse to deal with downtown Lex mess) and EV and I wasn't interested in paying for the "cachet" of WV, Tribeca or Soho. Happenstance, and the best apartment brought me to an area I hadn't proactively considered but turned out to be perfect!

Living in a good school zone buys you 6 years - now that sibling pref. for non-zoned kids is questionable, you can't move until all your kids have started K. After that, it depends. If your eldest gets into a good local middle in your area, then you're set for another 3 years or until your next kid is ready for middle. If not, then you have to scramble for a private spot somewhere while figuring out if you can afford it long-term for more than 1 kid...

That's the thinking of most of the parents I know at our local public. I can't speak for everyone, but most families can spring for 1 year of private tuition for one kid while they put their apt on the market, figure out where to move, etc. if the eldest doesn't get into one of the more acceptable middle schools.

There is a growing grassroots movement by the parents on the UWS to get some kind of decent zoned middle school going. And beyond that, a zoned high school. In terms of demographics, I think we've hit a sweet spot in terms of people starting to get organized about things like this.

And btw, I know that people are always talking about the growth of "large" families on the UWS and in Manhattan, but when I looked through the school directory, it seems to me that a very large proportion of families are one-child families and likely to remain so. Very few families had multiple sibs enrolled at the same school (yes, I know some families split up their kids with G&T/citywide/private options and of course, some could be in middle already or younger) but I feel like a majority of families with 2+ kids do end up moving out of the city eventually (after K).

Another factor is that people get tired of living in (relatively) small spaces with 2+ kids after a decade. It is fine when the kids are little, but I'm hearing lots of playground talk about how people (okay, generally women) are done with the city and this is after they've lived here for 8+ years with kids.

sorry, my point must not have been clear. i was suggesting that people with children may prefer certain locations over "dream apartments" b/c those locations are very kid-friendly (UWS, for example). I think this is the case WITHOUT considering schools (although schools certainly are a factor).

In our case, we didn't pick UWS due to child-friendliness. It was kinda random that our first apt was here. And I think we stayed because we liked it. I'm sure if we started off in the Village (where we first looked), we probably would have stayed there and thought that it was just as child-friendly.

And is "child friendly"(toddler to 8or 9) the same as "young teenager friendly"- so that parameters change as child gets older? Or, move to suburb exactly when kids would probably really want to stay in NY in ANY neighborhood rather than the suburbs.

i was simply suggesting a reason why one might prefer a location over an apartment. it isn't a hard and fast rule for anyone with children (of any age).

ph41: of course not, but by the time you've figured out what you're doing about middle school for kid #1, you're usually too ensconced in your neighborhood. A lot of people move from UWS to UES to be closer to private school, to reduce schlep.

As an aside to what is being discussed, I'm wondering what everyone thinks about living right near a school such as a high school or university. I live not too far from Hunter College on East 68th Street and there's always alot of students hanging out in the street, especially in the spring. I actually thinks that they add a little life to the neighborhood, but many people don't like to live near schools for older students.

Did anyone ever say this? I would NEVER live in anything branded TRUMP. And preferably not even next door. The man deserves credit for only one thing: demonstrating that crass, nouveau riche status can actually last a lifetime, and into the next generation.