Sketchy area in Chelsea?

that area of chelsea has always been sketchy. this is what happens when the city allows housing projects in manhattan. the thugs and homeless bums will walk around "prime" areas and make the neighborhood less desirable. if you have to live in chelsea, i suggest you look at the area from 15th-23rd, east of 9th avenue. personally, i hate chelsea because it's still too grimy for my tastes, but to each his own.

You can find a map of all NYC projects by going to http://www.nyc.gov/html/nycha/html/home/home.shtml and by clicking NYCHA Housing Developments. Pretty useful stuff for knowing what to avoid.

So I already knew that there are two main projects in West Chelsea: Fulton (btw 16th and 20th Streets, 9th and 10th Ave.) and Eliott Chelsea (btw 25th and 26th St and 9th and 10th Ave.) but those are further West... There are three Avenues in between. Still doesn't explain why that area is so underdeveloped commercially.

This is the wholesale district. Here are 2 articles that describe the area.
http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/buffing-a-shabby-strip-of-broadway
http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/bloom-is-off-the-rose-in-flower-district-2

Thanks masterd, that was extremely useful. I noticed the "human hair wigs" store myself!? So wholesale district -- explains the shabby look. I'm looking at a doorman building right between 27th and 28th Streets on 6th Ave., so I'm wondering if should I be concerned with safety, i.e. walking alone from the subway at night.

The rent is high, so sucks the area isn't tops, but I love the building and the apartment itself. Awesome open views... However, feeling safe in the neighbourhood is extremely important to me. I'm planning to take a look at the area at night to see how I feel, but I need further opinions from people who know the neighbourhood.

why do you have to live in this area? it's total crap.

it is a shame that NYC is not more gentrified. still having projects in manhattan is unacceptable.

where do you live now?

I'm trying to decide between that and one on 38th and 6th. Why is it crap?

jinglingtribeca: Ignore rufus, he thinks everything outside of Fifth/Park Aves and Columbus Circle are "crap"...basically 99% of the city isn't good enough for him.

Yes, I can tell. S/he's sparked quite a bit of excitement on the forums as far as I can see. We all just love controversy, don't we? Still, I need advice. So if Rufus wants to spice up the discussion, s/he should feel welcome.

Rufus, I actually have a few questions for you if you don't mind:
1)Can you name your top five neighbourhoods in Manhattan?
2)What is one neighbourhood you wouldn't live in now, but can see yourself considering in the next five years?
3)Your top three rental buildings w/doorman that have great locations and, say, have studios and/or 1 bedrooms around low 3,000$ rent.
Thanks!

1. prime upper east side (fifth, madison, park), lincoln center/columbus circle, gramercy, tribeca, battery park city. i'm not that excited about the last 2 neighborhoods on that list, because frankly, most of manhattan doesn't do it for me, but you told me to list 5, so there you have it.

2. i guess financial district is possible once the construction is all done, and more quality retail moves in.

3. quite frankly, low 3K is tough for the really quality rental buildings. my favorite 3 rental buildings in NYC are grand tier, madison belvedere, and 88 leonard.

what are your favorite rental buildings currently?

I saw two apts in 88 leonard, the views of the 3100-3200$ studios were pretty horrible. I saw madison belvedere as well, apparently it's a really well managed building but I hate parquet floors and I was disappointed to find them once again in this building. If they're charging so much for their apartments, they should at least install some plank hardwood floors. I only have time to look at apt.s within my price range so I clearly don't have any favorites as of now, for I still haven't found what I really am looking for. One thing that looked promising was 1 brooklyn bridge, one owner had a listing on craigslist she was renting out her new condo but there are only about a few dozen ppl living in the building right now and half of it is still under construction, so it's kind of creepy to live there at the moment. But it's in an amazing neighbourhood, the walk down Brooklyn Heights is charming, but it's right by a highway... Still, some of those apartments have ridiculous views of Manhattan. I liked the Armani building in the financial district, but still under construction and nothing is there yet. 15 broad was fancy but too much -- even though it's right next to hermes, so location's not bad at all. It has one of the most beautiful common terraces I've seen in the city -- amazing landscaping. I saw one studio on 240 Central Park South that had a direct view of the park, and a wood burning fire place-- but too small. What do you think of the Atlas vs. Archstone Chelsea vs. 88 Leonard in terms of the buildings? You see, I've been to more than 40 rental buildings around the city, and most of their locations suck, they're either in sketchy areas or far from the metro, most of them have cheap finishes, parquet floors, no light or closed views -- or at the other extreme, way above for my budget. I guess my standards are too high for what I can afford, since, as you said, low 3K is tough for high quality rental buildings, especially if you insist on a one bedroom.

Btw how come you don't like soho?

Wow! you definitely saw a lot of buildings. but yeah, i agree that the vast majority of NYC apartment buildings are total crap. they're either poorly built, in awful locations, or in many cases, both.

for your budget, you might have to settle for a studio in a decent building. have you looked at olivia? it's a fairly new high-rise building near penn station. i heard good things about it, and i believe studios there are going for around $2800. you should also check out epic, which is in that area as well.

archstone chelsea is the best building among those 3, but i think it's overpriced. 88 leonard is in the best location, while atlas just sucks.

why does atlas suck? it's right north of herald square, crowded but safe area. You were saying you thought archstone chelsea was terrible location before??
penn station is so nasty! but less so than port authority.

yo this has terrible reviews: http://www.apartmentratings.com/rate/NY-New-York-The-Olivia-formerly-PennMark.html

rufus! why would you recommend this terrible building to me??

i have to go to bed now, but i recommended olivia because it's within your price range, and the actual building is really nice. yes, the area sucks, but given your budget, you're going to have to make sacrifices.

i don't like atlas. i visited a friend there and didn't like the layout and the interior. i'm also not a fan of the area either.

archstone chelsea is in a decent area, although as i said before, chelsea isn't my cup of tea. but more importantly, all the archstone apartments are grossly overpriced. for example, i believe a studio at archstone in midtown west is at around $4K! that's just ridiculous.

Jingling - we lived in 777 6th - hated the area. We were there for 2 years when the building first opened. I don't see much improvement since we moved from there in 2002. The building itself is Macklowe and built very sturdy. Heavy doors, nice bathrooms and kitchens. Love that part but not the area. We moved across town to E 31. Like it much much better. They are very expensive apartments bc they are new - that is the only reason.

rufus
about 9 hours ago
ignore this person
report abuse
that area of chelsea has always been sketchy. this is what happens when the city allows housing projects in manhattan. the thugs and homeless bums will walk around "prime" areas and make the neighborhood less desirable.

Are you freakin serious rufass? First of all bums are people you know, not all of them are going to mug you in the middle of the night and drink your blood. Second of all...god forbid they WALK AROUND "prime areas". Are you suggesting the city erect barriers to keep "bums" from entering "prime areas"? If a homeless person WALKS down a street is that street no longer acceptable to live on? You know if you replaced Bums with Jews you would kind of sound like Hitler.

Sizzlack, the original poster asked a serious question about that area. I can't believe you're actually denying that the presence of housing projects hurts gentrification and positive growth. Please take your liberal whining elsewhere. That area just sucks monkeys' balls. And compared to Chicago, most of Manhattan looks like absolute shit.

Telling you that bums are human beings is "liberal whining". Okay. If Chelsea is too scary for you heres an idea...don't go there. You are the biggest pansy ass on this board, running away from the straw man "bums" you create to try and scare people who aren't scared. If this place scares you please do us all a favor and move to Chicago already.
I walk around Chelsea everyday with my dog, for the last 2 years, and I have never been mugged, harassed, bothered or even talked to by any of these people you suggest are out to get you at every corner. Grow the F up already.

and no where did I mention anything about projects. Obviously projects do not make things nicer, but not everyone in the projects is a thug looking to shoot you.

whatever Sizzlack. i'm just trying to be helpful to the OP; apparently, he agrees with almost everything i say. you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that the vast majority of NYC apartment buildings are extremely low-quality and in poor locations.

Calling 28th Street and Broadway "Chelsea" is a bit of a stretch. It's kind of Flatiron/Garment District. I think the area is "sketchy" because it's mainly commercial/industrial/warehouses and not really residential.

Are there really projects in this area? I know there are several in Chelsea proper, but they are pretty far away.

Ive been to Chicago several times. BOR-ING! Midwesterners and fugly women. How exciting...

Admiral, staying in your airport hotel at O'Hare doesn't really count as "visiting" Chicago.

And regarding women, every guy i know thinks Chicago girls are hotter than NYC's.

I have worked 3 blocks from 28th and Broadway for over 11 years and I can confidently say that:

1. the area is totally safe
2. there are not homeless people wandering the streets
3. that part of broadway has a lot of street vendors, much like in SOHO, except they are selling crappier stuff.
4. It is not Chelsea. It is the garment district if anything, as it is in a bit of a no-name zone.
5. The area is not too residential, but that is changing. It will never be GV or the UES, but it will get a bit better than it is now as more restaurants and residential-necessary busineses move in and the crap-stores move out.

On the other stuff:

1. 40 apartment buildings is not the vast majority of apartment buildings in NYC. You may need some serious help with math if that is what you think.
2. You say you don't like the neighborhood at 28th & Broadway, yet you recommend an apartment near Penn Station. You are either dumb or you've never been to NYC because that is further east and even less of a neighborhood location.
3. Homeless people are in every major city and your views on them are quite clear. Ignorance and hate are pretty offensive qualities. It's your right to be a bigot, but don't spew your vile here.

false choice: "You are either dumb or you've never been to NYC"

I vote both.

waverly, i see that reading comprehension is not your strong suit. The OP specifically stated that his budget is no more than around $3K and was asking me what his options were regarding doormen buildings. I recommended olivia because i heard the building itself is quite nice, even though the area sucks.

of course, 40 buildings are not the vast majority of buildings in NYC. But given that the OP has already gone to some of the most upscale rental buildings in the city and wasn't too impressed with them, it is safe to say that NYC rental buildings in general are pretty crappy. But since logical reasoning is not your strength, i don't expect you to get that.

"every guy i know thinks Chicago girls are hotter than NYC's."

LOL. Yeah, supermodels flock to Chicago, not NYC/LA/Miami.

You're funny. I was going to say you're an idiot, but i really think you say the stuff you say just to get a laugh. Very good stuff.

Did I mention that the condo's in Cleveland are MUCH better than New York? The girls are hotter too. Everyone I know thinks so! Of course, everyone I know is institutionalized for dementia...

Admiral, good lord, you're an idiot. Yeah, NYC has some supermodels, but they're a miniscule percentage of the overall female population. the vast majority of NYC women are not very attractive: too pale, out of shape, smoke too much, don't have nice bodies, etc.

I have some advice for you. Why don't you leave your cockroach infested NYC apartment and actually do some travelling. You'll come to realize that NYC is indeed overrated.

There you go again, little W, with your fuzzy numbers and non-logic. 40 buildings is a timy piece of the rental market. "Some" of the most upscale rental buildings does not mean that "it is safe to say that NYC rental buildings are pretty crappy."

Try to bring some dignitude to the discussion, like your hero has brought to the White House.

You just don't like NYC, so you will dump on everything about it. We get it. You moved here for some girl and she started banging your friend and now you hate everything having to do with NYC. That's cool. We get it. You couldn't cut it here. It's easier for you to say that NYC is all bad than to look in the mirror and see what a d-bag you've been.

You may want to stay in NYC because the therapists are top-shelf and you clearly some issues that you need to work out.

> the vast majority of NYC women are not very attractive: too pale, out of shape,

Actually, check the stats... NYC is one of the least fat cities in the country.
Chicago is one of the fatter ones, just not as bad as Texas. They're all pretty much cow city.

And are you really claiming Chicago girls are less Pale? Jesus, its fucking sweater city out there.

Chicago girls: http://www.illinoislivestock.org/

lol

> way above for my budget

The source of rufus' frustration. He just can't afford anything nice.

it's hilarious that you are actually bashing texas. that state is known for having some of the hottest girls in the country. when people talk about NYC, you almost never hear them talk about it having a lot of gorgeous women. there is a very good reason for that.

"I have some advice for you. Why don't you leave your cockroach infested NYC apartment and actually do some travelling. You'll come to realize that NYC is indeed overrated."

LOL. Again, you're too funny! In reality, i have lived all over the world but only recently returned to NYC after a 20 yr absence. I have also lived in LA, Miami, other cities and spent many business trips to Chicago and other mid-western cities. No, i did not stay at the O'Hare Marriot! Northeast girls are in fact by and large pale and pasty; NY still has more eastern european and other immigrants and more models than most cities in the world. LA and Miami (and, surprisingly, Dallas) are at the top of the list in terms of percentage of hot chicks to the overall chick population. Chicago and other mid-west cities? Absolute crap...the fat and the fugly. No offense; i'm sure your sister is a nice girl and all...

I'm disappointed that racists like Rufus aren't ignored by more people.

rufie, how funny that you should mention Texas. Isn't that where all of Chicago's jobs went?

"rufie, how funny that you should mention Texas"

Rufie is not his nickname. It's how he gets laid...

Claro.

Admiral, i'm glad we both agree that NYC is full of pale, pasty, and ugly women.

i also agree and admit that LA, Miami, and Dallas, have the most gorgeous women among all the major U.S. cities. After those 3, i would put San Diego, Austin, Chicago, and Atlanta. In terms of pure looks, NYC women come nowhere close to all those cities.

Texas and even Atlanta have taken thousands of jobs from NYC, and things will only get worse, with the financial meltdown and NYC's insane tax rate. Chicago has lost some jobs but not that much.

Y'all would be so bored if Rufus wasn't in these forums. Anyhow, back to my question: Has anyone lived in Archstone Chelsea(800 6th ave, 27th street) or the Atlas (66 West 38th Street at 6th Ave.) which is managed by Gotham NY?

So apparently "Archstone Chelsea" should be renamed as "Archstone Garment" but I'm still wondering how that wholesalers' stretch of Broadway gets at night. Is it deserted and sketchy? Loud? Crowded? I don't mind the rundown look as long as I know it's safe, for I can say that looks can be deceiving in NY. The best looking street, when empty at night, can be dangerous. Meanwhile, I've lived in Soho, Gramercy and in Midtown West a few blocks near the Sheraton, even though I didn't like the commercial and touristy character of MW, I realized in time that this is where I felt safest walking alone at night, because it's always full of people and of course there are thieves looking to steal but you'll never get that spooky-empty-dark-street feeling you can get in certain parts of Gramercy, and, many streets in Soho are deserted at weekday nights. So, any thoughts on these two apartments and their locations?

I lived in Texas for a year. In several cities. And anybody claiming it is filled with hot women is INSANE. There are some hot chicks everywhere, and Texa has some, but you are talking about cities that are the fattest in the nation. Most of the chicks look like Chicago cows with tans and more makeup.

the neighborhood is safe, despite the shabby appearance. i've lived in the area for about 8 years.

that being said, if you're willing to shell out 3k for a studio, then the whole 'shabby chic' environment may not be for you. the area is rough around the edges, but is in close proximity to lots of great areas-- madison square park has cleaned up really nicely, union square/chelsea walking distance, and easy access to trains.

i will admit that the immediate neighborhood lacks a lot in charm due to the wholesalers/street vendors though.. but i wouldn't worry too much about safety there..

the neighborhood is safe, despite the shabby appearance. i've lived in the area for about 8 years.

that being said, if you're willing to shell out 3k for a studio, then the whole 'shabby chic' environment may not be for you. the area is rough around the edges, but is in close proximity to lots of great areas-- madison square park has cleaned up really nicely, union square/chelsea walking distance, and easy access to trains.

i will admit that the immediate neighborhood lacks a lot in charm due to the wholesalers/street vendors though.. but i wouldn't worry too much about safety there..

I lived in Texas for a year. In several cities. And anybody claiming it is filled with hot women is INSANE. There are some everywhere, but you are talking about cities that are the fattest in the nation. Most of the chicks look like Chicago cows with tans and more makeup.

It's not entirely deserted, but definitely quiet and a little sketchy. The sixth avenue side is somewhat better in that it is well-lit and there's more traffic at night. Never seen either on the interior, but from a location perspective, I would much rather live at Archstone Chelsea than Atlas. You are close to midtown either way, and with the Archstone, you are a quick walk to Chelsea which is much more of a neighborhood.

The neighborhood is safe. At night there are a lot of people out at the Korean restaurants and karaoke places. There are definitely more residnetial buildings and restaurants/bars than there were 5 years ago. You should be fine.

i live in 777 Sixth Ave... studios start under 3K... the building is built pretty well compared to other rental buildings in the area, though i would imagine landmark is the best. my friend used to live in archstone and I think it's just fine. i think you decision should be more of a call on the area, not the bldg. i agree 27th and 6th is not ideal, but if you stay on 6th and are below the 27th street "line" it's actually not that bad... and its very convenient to get to other areas in the city... way better than the olivia (area wise that is).

it sucks that in NYC you have to draw lines of demarcation between nice and unpleasant areas. i guess that's what happens when the city is not gentrified. In Chicago, you can walk for blocks around gold coast, river north, lincoln park, streeterville, and be surrounded by prime retail, nice restaurants, and luxury apartments.

too bad no one here gives a sh*t

Streeterville is a completely crime-ridden neighborhood! Only walk around there if you want to get mugged or murdered. You need to check the crime statistics before you say things that are untrue. Didn't you learn anything yesterday?

LOL! no one in prime chicago neighborhoods say shit like, "yeah, the next 2 blocks are nice, but once you cross over, it gets sketchy, and there is no prime retail."

NYC still has low-class street vendors in areas like soho! No wonder people visiting from other cities think NYC is grimy and shitty. You expect that in cities like calcutta.

Rufus is having too much fun with the New Yorkers.

Fun? Or is this what happens when a guy in the psych ward of the U of C hospital gets access to the internet?

> it sucks that in NYC you have to draw lines of demarcation between nice and unpleasant areas.

Better to have a city like Chicago that just sucks completely through and through. Lousy food, fat women, no culture, and filled with lower class people who can't afford to be anywhere else... who instead post on NYC bulletin boards from their parents' basement.

I still take any insult from rufus as a compliment. To him "high class" is wearing dockers without a baseball cap...

Oh, so all these people who are taking him seriously are normal? He is having a s...load of fun indeed!I personally have been having a blast following all this hype he's created and cracking up whenever he says LOL! and then rants about Chicago. He's so hilarious! I think he's a comedian undercover, and he's going to go and write a story out of his experience driving these StreetEasy New Yorkers crazy.

nyc10022, chicago has lousy food? maybe you should tell that to all the food critics who ranked alinea as the best restaurant in the country. You should also check out the latest edition of Trader Monthly. They featured the Chicago Spire as the hottest upcoming condo. It looks awesome and will make the Chicago skyline look even better. The stretch of downtown Chicago along Lake Michigan looks so much nicer than NYC. The buildings are new while NYC is full of ugly brown boxes.

What does Chelsea have to do with Chicago?

Welcome to the world of Rufus

it's just sad that in manhattan people have to pay $3K/month to live in a poorly built apartment in a shady area next to low-class street vendors and other crappy retail.

New York lacks the plethora of fine dining alternatives Chicago offers....like Pizzeria Uno.

rufie, do I have to post another devastating article about "The City That Doesn't Work?" Do you have an ample supply of anti-anxiety meds on hand?

And advance apologies to everyone else: I reserve the right to re-post the same shocking crime stats on Chicago's white strip.

Not just Pizzeria Oh-No. Also, they're such avid consumers of McDonalds that McD plopped their HQ just outside Chicago. Might as well bring the fat right near where it's going.

alanhart, thanks once again for conveniently ignoring the long list of world-class restaurants in Chicago, like alinea, charlie trotter's, moto, everest, tru, blackbird.

even when it comes to hotels, chicago's peninsula was ranked as one of the top 5 hotels in the country, higher than any NYC hotel.

Hey, rufie, we're still waiting to hear -- for what job did you move from Southern Illinois University to NYC? And what food stores are near your West 60s home?

rufus
26 minutes ago
ignore this person
report abuse
it's just sad that in manhattan people have to pay $3K/month to live in a poorly built apartment in a shady area next to low-class street vendors and other crappy retail.

Rufus its a tad bizarre you make a claim like this. The only one complaining about having to pay 3K a month to live next to the projects is you. Why are you so upset that there are actually some people that WANT to be here? We get it, Chicago in your opinion is a better place to be. But if any of us actually agreed well guess what...we'd be living in fu*king Chicago. But no we don't we live here in NYC and don't complain about it. Actually we write about how much we love it. Why does this bother you so much? Why can't you just let us love the city where we CHOSE to live. No one is being forced at gunpoint to pay 3K a month to live here.

Sizz, I think probably rufie sees your point and will stop posting the same irrelevant and incorrect crap again and again.

Yea I know its a waste of breath but I would like him to answer what he has against people who willingly chose to make NYC their home. I mean I couldn't give a crap if someone wanted to live in NYC over Chicago, that's their prerogative...but Rufus has this clear hatred for people who decide to live here instead of Chicago...it's actually quite interesting.

I meant live in Chicago over NYC

Sketchy is 22nd Street between 6th and 7th avenue

^ Yea that's probably the sketchiest area in NYC...I mean between the projects, the homeless shelter, the meth clinic, the abortion clinic, the mental hospital and the Best Western, they sure did fit a lot of terrible things onto that block.

Some people bought at 133 W 22.

And the Clement

jinglingtribeca, if you don't want to be bothered with the projects don't move to or remain in NYC. You can't and won't escape it. On the train, on the bus, cab, grocery store, department store, bank, any of the 3 levels of gov't offices and where ever you can think of someone from the projects will be there to snatch your empty wallet.

NYC is a shithole. It's a city where you spend seven figures to live in a condo next to the projects. It has not gentrified like Chicago has. If you want to be away from projects and want to live in a clean city with other affluent professionals, Chicago is the city to be at.

Never wrestle with a pig - you get dirty and the pig likes it.

i agree with rufus. we should shoot or gas anyone that makes less than $120K. then it will be a happy world for us affluents.

rufus
about 2 hours ago
ignore this person
report abuse
NYC is a shithole. It's a city where you spend seven figures to live in a condo next to the projects. It has not gentrified like Chicago has. If you want to be away from projects and want to live in a clean city with other affluent professionals, Chicago is the city to be at.

How do you really feel Rufass? I'm having a hard time telling...

Chicago Garbage Workers Caught Sitting On the Job - $14 Million Lost - October 9th, 2008
http://www.lockergnome.com/oztech/2008/10/09/chicago-garbage-workers-caught-sitting-on-the-job-14-million-lost/

"There is a big story in Chicago this week about the city’s garbage workers that were caught loafing around on the job. An investigation found that the average garbage worker wastes about 2 hours per day amounting to about a $14 million loss for the city. This story has sparked debate about whether or not spending time doing other things than work on the job is acceptable."

"The problem with the garbage workers was that they were found drinking, urinating in the street, sleeping in their cars, and in some cases, just going home for a few hours all while clocked in."

Yea that sure sounds like a way to keep Chicago clean. Garbage men pissing in the street...do they piss soap and water?

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2008/10/chicago-inspect.html

"Workers on Chicago’s garbage pick-up crews spend about two hours a day loafing on the clock, according to a report released today by the city’s inspector general.
Between May and September, investigators for Inspector General David Hoffman spied on 77 garbage truck drivers and 145 laborers in 10 wards. They reported what they called "systemic, pervasive" waste and fraud.
In 10 weeks of surveillance, they "did not see a single laborer doing a full day's work," according to the report."

""Any supervisor even mildly interested in ensuring that the truck crews ... were working full-time jobs would have noticed that employees were absent for long periods of time while swiped in, or were hanging around the ward yards or truck checkpoints without working—sometimes sleeping in their cars, sometimes loitering, sometimes taking long, leisurely lunches," the report said.""