Rank what sections of the city will FALL due to recession.

your post says "city" but you only seem to be naming Manhattan. I have to figure lots of outer-boro will take serious pain... LIC, Williamsburg, Bed-Stuy....

True I meant Manhattan

So Inwood and Washington Heights are safe?

Sorry Alan only doing "livable" sections in Manhattan.

I'd put Inwood and WH as more "livable" than most of Harlem, and some of the other neighborhoods noted...

To each his own....I guess. I would put them both up there with Chicago, but what do I know.

Interesting exercise. Why rank UE and UW above Tribeca?

I think UW will drop more than UE on only bc there are many more non doorman apts and fewer good schools. I think Chelsea will drop a lot bc it is ridiculously overpriced. Tribeca is an anomaly to me. It will either retain better than other areas or be crushed. I can't decide. It is so so expensive for pretty much an ugly area. Usually family areas remain the most stable during a recession.

Tribeca = Best Schools was my thoughts. Families will pay for that by factoring in what Private Schools cost. That was the thinking.

that would also means Upper East would hold extremely well. Tribeca has some of the best schools, but UE has more good schools... enough to at least hold the factor pretty close. And which would separate it substantially from the UWS....

I think UES has been underrated for a few years... I think Tribeca will be hit worse.

fair enough. I buy that.

nyc10022,

When you say UES, do you really mean Yorkville, or do you think the UES proper (AKA the Silk Stocking District) has been underrated?

And by underrated, do you mean undervalued?

inwood, washington heights, harlem, yorkville, hell's kitchen, chelsea, financial district, battery park city, will be hit especially hard. but the other parts of manhattan are not safe either. virtually every neighborhood is grossly overpriced.

Goingdown - Tribeca has 2 great schools but they are really overcrowded. I know they are building new schools down there but who knows how long it will take to get the quality up to 234's. I also think T will be hurt so hard is because it has risen more exponentially than even prime UES. I mean it was cheap and now it's the most expensive zip code in NYC. Kind of insane

But Tribeca is loaded with families according to city data. My guess is that families move less than single and newly married types. So less apts will open us, thus keeping supply low. Also Tribeca medium age seems to be a little higher, more money, more stability. Some Chelsea types bought too much apartment for their paycheck and might have to sell for financial reasons. Curious to see what the ranking thoughts were.

If i recall historically there was always a discount to uws compared to ues. The discount seems to have narrowed alot in the past 5 years.

Is it reasonable to expect the discount to increase back to historical norm esp IF crime picks up

bugelrex, i agree. Crime is increasing, and i think UWS will be hit especially hard by the crime spike.

"Crime is increasing" ---> the discussion is about NYC, where crime is not increasing [else prove it] -- not Chicago.

1) Lincoln Park
2) Lakeview
3) Logan Square
4) All other Chicago neighbhorhoods
5) Long Island City
6) Williamsburg
7) Washington Heights
8) Harlem
9) LES
10)Hell's Kitchen
11) FiDi

FiDi has billions of "locked in" Federal monies (i.e., they CANNOT be reallocated to other areas) dedicated for redevelopment in the next decade. I woder if those who consider FiDi to be at risk are taking that into consideration...

I think FiDi will fall because of the condo glut, but not as bad as other "up and comers" like Harlem, LES, Hell's Ktichen, partly b/c of federal monies and partly because much of it falls in the same school district as Tribeca/Battery Park

kspeaks of things he doesnt know anything about. The LES and the whole east side are in the same school district as the upper east side with all the best schools falling into the east side. NEST, Stuyvescant, etc.

TRibeca has had quick price inflation and no real amenities to support the growing community. It will crash pretty quickly. The LES will hold fine.

First, on the subject of "speaking of things we don't know about, kspeak = she.

Second, let's distinguish between Districts and Zones. It is true that much of the LES, Tribeca, Upper East Side are in District 2. But if you live in the Tribeca and parts of FiDi you are zoned for PS 234 or PS 89 in Battery Park or another excellent school whose name I forget in Upper Tribeca (granted not all parts of this area are zoned for these schools). If you live in LES, maybe you have a fighting change of getting your kid into one of these schools because you are in the "District", but it's not your neighbhorhood school. I grant there is an overcrowding issue but this is being mitigated by the construction of schools, and it's even harder to get into PS 234 if it is not your neighbhorhood school.

Third, Stuyvessant is on the West Side in Tribeca.

I think the ability to attract families is crucial to holding real estate values. For this reason, I think the UES will hold value very wel - even better than Tribeca since values didn't spike as much and it has public schools options AND private school options AND is near the park where kids have soccer games, etc.. The West Village will do okay too for the same reason (PS 41), but it got really expensive, even more than Tribeca (well aware Tribeca is the most expensive zip code but the apartments there are bigger than the West Village). The UWS will do decentely but has less consistent schools.

Personally, I think the LES will do worse than most of Manhattan. I don't think it has the physical beauty of Tribeca (that old industrial warehouse feel), the West Village's quaintness, or the established nature of the Upper East Side ... I grant this is my opinion but I am not alone in this. I recentely walked the neighborhood with an old family friend who grew up in a tenement there when it was truly an immigrant neighbhorhood; he said he loved the neighbhorhood's history but didn't see the appeal given it's lack of physical beauty. Sure, it's a trendy spot right now, but lacks the number of public or private school options (and I don't think that situation changes for a while because of the amount of low-income housing there). The housing stock is mostly tenemants or new glass buildings that I think will look terrible in a few years. It may continue being a "hot" nightlife spot for a few more years, but not sure this will help it's real estate values. Young single types tend to only buy when they thing the market is going up; many more will choose to rent now. It won't become a crack den I don't think, but I think values will fall. Granted I think the whole city falls but I think LES and Harlem do the worst of everything south of 125th street.

kspeak - i guess that you havent noticed all the multi million dollar price chops that are now as prevalent in Tribeca as out of work wall streeters are.....

Timber!

Everything is falling - just talking in relative terms. Tribeca gets hit too. The LES has fewer multi-million price chops than Tribeca because they are smaller apartments. On a percentage basis, it will do worse.

Guess you had nothing to say when you realized that you were indeed wrong that Stuyvessant is not in Stuyvessant anymore.

Everything will decline but I think UES and Yorkville will hold up better than most because of 3 solid public schools and already relatively cheaper valuations. They are a lot less "trendy" than downtown but offer more value for the money on a relative basis.

I also think that Carnegie Hill, Fifth Avenue, CPW and similar neighbourhoods will hold up better as a flight to quality takes place. We're holding out for the best apartment we can afford in a traditionally (not faddish or trendy) top NYC neighbourhood so that we can sell in any environment should we ever need to. One thing this market has taught us it to prepare for the unexpected!

"Everything will decline but I think UES and Yorkville will hold up better than most because of 3 solid public schools and already relatively cheaper valuations. They are a lot less "trendy" than downtown but offer more value for the money on a relative basis."

.. I completely agree about UES/Yorkville. I think this area will do by far the best. It didn't go up as much - so much cheaper to buy uptown (east of park) than downtown. Tribeca is somewhat faddy but it's not really a nightlife center and has great stuff for familes (schools, parks) so I think it will do okay too. West Village sort of similar to Tribeca, and UWS to UES, although schools lest consistent.

> When you say UES, do you really mean Yorkville, or do you think the UES proper (AKA the Silk
> Stocking District) has been underrated?
> And by underrated, do you mean undervalued

Kspeak actually answered a lot of this pretty well...

I wouldn't say undervalued, because I think everything is going down. But I do mean underrated, and I actually mean all of the UES. I can't tell you how many people have said to me "eew, I'd NEVER live on the Upper East Side" in the last few years, and I've heard only a few say anything positive about it. First year banking analysts make fun of it. To me, its as "unhip" as possible, and I think that has lead to price growth slower than other areas. And, knowing how these cycles work, I'm pretty sure than in 5-10 years the UES will get "discovered" again when something stupid like Madonna moving back happens.

> kspeak - i guess that you havent noticed all the multi million dollar price chops that are now as
> prevalent in Tribeca as out of work wall streeters are.....
> Timber!

So, perfitz, does this mean you're now admitting your "now is a great time to buy" in *January* was an absolutely horrible recommendation?

I still want to know how "the LES will hold on fine" ... I think all neighbhorhoods get hit but Harlem (although I long-term bullish for reasons I have outline before) and LES get hit the worst. I am not saying I am right just want to understand the argument for the LES. To me it's just too overly trendy (trendy never lasts - Meatpacking district has other things going for it, namely that it is basically an extension of the West Village), has bad infrastructure (there is a Whole Foods but this is closer to my home in the East Village than the heart of the LES), no parks (unless you go WAY over to FDR, far from the subway), and generally crappy housing stock (with some notable exceptions). It's fun to go out there sometimes, I admit, just not sure it will stay the "in" spot for long ...

the LES has significantly less super high end units than Tribeca. It is the super high end units that are and will continue to get massacered. The LES will do better than Tribeca on price drops and percentage drops just because it has less super high end. It is the super high end whose days are done, but mid to low priced 1 and 2 bedrooms will not get killed.

You are delirious if you think that Tribeca's ultra lux is not getting crushed.

not to mention that the LES is currently much less depenedent on financial, lawyer, insurance industries than Tribeca.

Also Tribeca has a serious amenities issue that will not get resolved in this recession, whilst the LES has loads of amenities including a brand spanking new Whole Foods.

The LEs has significantly more parks than Tribeca - there are loads of co-op privately owned parks, the East River Park that is almost done a complete rennovation.

The LES will do better than other neighborhoods because of its moderate prices, good amenities, small population of financial and insurance types and its diversity.

Besides Tribeca sucks, there is nothing to do there, and the residents are a bunch of financial wankers.

petrfitz, it's actually Tribeca that has the "brand spanking new Whole Foods." The one in the LES is great, but it's quite literally on the border of the LES, Nolita, and the East Village. It's a bit of walk from the heart of the LES, not to mention the distant areas (Pitt St, Henry St, etc.) that you love so much. Tribeca also has Washington Market Park and the Hudson River Park. Don't know what your beef with Tribeca is. Are you also implying that the places you own (and more specifically, where you live) are not "super high end"? I'd say any place with TEN parking spots in Manhattan qualifies as such.

I don't agree WH will get beaten up any worse than other parts pf Manhattan - it didn't rise in price in any insane way. i think ks is correct that most areas will show some type a correction in relative sense.

kspeak & NYC10021, I totally agree w you about the UES. The past few years it's been more affordable because it's not considered as trendy or hip as downtown, but over time it will hold its value better because of the schools, families, etc.

I think Tribeca will continue to hold its value for the same reasons the W village will - because it has limited inventory and it attracts residents beyond the IB crowd.

1. First and most importantly, I would say that no area is immune. The tide is going to fall in general. I would also say that the tide will fall but the bottom will not fall out. 10-20% correction followed by some stagnation followed by slow appreciation followed by the usual upwards insanity around 2015-2020.

2. I would say that there has bean a narrowing of pricing across the city and there are certain areas which have seen greater appreciation in recent years in the hope that "emerging locations" would become established. I'm not sure apartments in FiDi or Hell's Kitchen can continue to sell for $1,100+ psf for apartments where comparables in the UES or UWS would sell for $1,200 psf. These spreads have got to widen even if it's means that they revert to $900 psf c/w $1,050 psf. I would also put LIC squarely in this category. No way is this worth so close to $1,000 psf. Again, I'm not suggesting that they will retract back to $400. They have improved, they're just not all the way there and in times of recession, the pace of change slows to a crawl.

3. Micro-Districts. Emerging areas within established areas. In my opinion these are likely to be hit as hard if not harder than emerging districts. People have convinced themselves that living in the 90s near 1st is the same UES as living in the 70s near 3rd. As it turns into a buyers market, the better location will continue to see purchasers.

4. Ultra-lux. While 15 CPW may continue to defy gravity, it can only be justified in the same way as high value art. It is a very limited supply prestige location. However, pretty much any building other than 15 CPW pitching itself in this market is going to struggle. The former townhouse of P-Diddy is a good example where celling 3 quadruplexes in this market just wasn't going to happen. The Russians have retreated and are tending their wounds as are the hedgies, private equity barrons and investment bankers. This is an areas where I would predict that anywhere trying to justify more than $3,000 psf without park views is going to struggle. No matter how nice the kitchen is, you can't justify a premium of 200% simply because it has a designer architect!

5. Glass-houses. So over. Whilst there are a few who prefer to be exhibitionists, the majority have woken to the fact that they prefer walls below waist height for both modesty and to ensure that the property is neither an oven in summer nor a freezer in winter.

6. Petrfitz. Who do you think it paying $1,000 psf in the LES? I think it was the young financial wankers you seem to adore. I agree that the douche per square mile ratio is still fairly low but unfortunately that can't justify the elevated pricing if the demand isn't there from the financial folks who aspire to the bohemian feel of these neighborhoods.

Smallmj - exactly right. Love the bit about glass houses! Those places will look like crap in 5 years and like Rufus' mom in 15 years. Ultraluxury will get slammed I just don't think is all of Tribeca. Also agree about lesser locations in the same general neighbhorhoods.

The other point I would add is that Studios, 1BR, and smaller 2BRs will do worse too - many of these buyers will need to sell in the near term for various reasons (switching jobs to a new city, moving in with a significant other/getting married, have a kid a need more space. The people buying bigger places generally will have less need to sell, although this obviously is not always too.

If you think Inwood is an 'uninhabitable' neighborhood, you clearly haven't been there. Parts of Inwood (west of Broadway) are absolutely beautiful. The architecture is gorgeous (almost all pre-war housing stock, including a smattering of single family homes) and the streets are quiet and safe. And the parks up there are absolutely spectacular - including the only primeval forest left in Manhattan.
If you were dropped off there without knowing where you were, you'd be forgiven for thinking you were on the UWS, without the bevy of Starbucks and Duane Reades.

Agreed on LES. I think its gonna get hit the worst.

The "hip" factor on the LES has worn off, and when mom and dad aren't buying you an apartment, its gonna be a hard sell to get good neighborhood prices in 5th floor walkups far from the subway. Tribeca buyers will hurt, but they'll still be buyers somewhere. LES is filled with the "marginal" buyers who will end up at best renting and worst case moving back in with mommy and daddy.

The idea of bohemians paying $1k psf to be near the projects..... i think that day is long over.

UWS median will hold value the best because it has tons of families, easy access to two parks, better subway access and it's geographically much smaller than UES with fewer new developments. Traditionally UWS prices per sqft have been higher than UES. That gap has narrowed recently but I think it's because of the new luxury developments, which are more plentiful in UES and are more at risk of substantial price cuts.

"People have convinced themselves that living in the 90s near 1st is the same UES as living in the 70s near 3rd. As it turns into a buyers market, the better location will continue to see purchasers."

Completely agree here. The northern and eastern parts of Yorkville will get hit very hard because they share more with other emerging neighborhoods than with other parts of UES. The public school up there is not good. Transportation is not very good and the projects are right there. The area is also not as well developed as the other parts of the upper eastside and the housing stock is not as impressive.
I do think that psf's will be significantly below $1000psf.

> Traditionally UWS prices per sqft have been higher than UES.

Yeah, thats not at all correct. Per Trulia, UES average psf is about $1500, UWS is closer to $1300
In 2005, it was $1k UES vs. $700 upper west.

UES has some cheaper than UW, but it has a *lot* more significantly more expensive stuff...

Is that average PSF? How about median? Averages are distorted by the high end along Park Ave, Madison and Fifth. In my experience if you take a similar apartment that's moderate in size and amenities, it costs more on the UWS than the UES because the UWS is smaller and more desirable for the median homeowner. Also just about every UWS avenue is desirable and centrally located, whereas once you get to 1st, York and East End you are really far from the subway, Central Park and the services that you apparently would be trying to take advantage of. Those are long cross-town blocks. Anywhere on the UWS, you are no more than two or 3 short crosstown blocks from Broadway or from either park. For the median buyer, it's a more valuable location.

nyc1002, your 2005 comps for UES vs UWS don't sound right. In my experience the UWS has been pricier during the past few years.

I believe Trulia hasn't always been accurate. Can you verify which exact neighborhoods they're comparing?

I think you guys are basically saying the same thing - nyc10022 tends to enjoy telling people they're "wrong," but when people talk about the UES here, they usually mean apartments east of Park. The townhouse and co-op stock on 5th, Madison, and Park, are usually untouchable stuff for those of us not making millions, and they do distort overall averages. Even though there was a time when Verdi Sq had its share of drug deals, for the most part, prime UWS (66th-86th) RE has been more desirable/valuable than much of the UES east of Park.

I agree with uptowngal...UWS has always been more expensive.

Say "Yorkville"

alanhart, I'm not oppposed to that, except most people are far more familiar with the term UES, and what actually constitutes Yorkville has changed over the years. I don't imagine there's a consensus now either.

bjw2103, I'm sure you already know all of this, but:

That's because of brokerspeak, which is to be resisted. They started calling former working-class Yorkville "the Upper East Side", thus diluting the Upper East Side's brand equity, making it simply "Park Avenue."

[Then in an exceptionally stupid move they started trying to transfer the UES designation to Yorkville altogether, replacing it with "Gold Coast", which didn't stick there (nor in the Village), possibly because it's a landlocked neighborhood and nobody's THAT stupid. Aside from a certain African nation, the only place I know of that possibly warrants the name Gold Coast is the north shore of LI, but I don't think sounds have coasts. Lakes certainly don't.]

I also have to admit that I don't know the real name for the E. 60s and 70s, east of the Upper East Side. Is it all Lenox Hill? Is it "That Weird Hospital District"?

> I agree with uptowngal...UWS has always been more expensive.

You are both wrong, unfortunately. There was a time that UWS was considered the "wrong side of the park". UES was so far ahead, it wasn't even close. Watch the movie Metropolitain, and it might give you a flavor. Anyone saying "UWS has always" is clearly a newcomer. Hell, I remember when Madonna and a couple others went west side and folks were like "huh". That began a catch up perdiod.

That being said, bjw's sentiment is right. UES includes more of the SUPER expensive apartments and superprime blocks. Of course, with success comes brokers expanding the boundaries of your neighborhood. "Upper East Side" does not include a lot of lesser value apartments. I think the UWS is more consistent, there is more "in the middle".

UES has a wider range with the new geography. There is inventory very far east cheaper than UES - mainly because there is a "trainless" section, unlike the UWS.... although this will be ending in 2012 - but the rest of the UES shifts the averages FAR in UWS favor.

But, if you really want cheapest, UWS has it I believe... all the Lincoln Towers stuff.

Yorkville at its northern and eastern parts is a different animal than Lenox or Carnegie hill. It will remain trainless well past 2012.

UWS is a terrific neighborhood feel to it.

alanhart, totally. "Brokerspeak" however unpleasant, does end up having a real effect on neighborhood terminology and boundaries, and that's probably a prime example. I'm not 100% sure about the eastern reaches of the 60s and 70s - my first apartment here was on 78th/Madison, which is Lenox Hill, but most people tended to go with UES. I would still call the area around 1st, York, etc. the UES, though there may be other names for it.

nyc10022, I saw an MTA advert in the subway saying the 2nd Ave Subway won't be ready until 2015, unfortunately. Knowing them, it'll probably be even later than that.

I agree, absolutely... BUT, once stuff is "visible" I think it will start affecting prices. Brokers will pitch it, I'm sure....

As for your post before, the east 70s, I actually just helped a person with a recent search. And the north/south designation is still pretty clear (saying 70s or 80s), but the BIGGEST descriptor used by far is the "far east stuff" and similar.

20 years ago it was "west of lex" as prime. The wording has changed slightly, but amongst the RE set, there is still a very understandable difference of being west of lex, or even 3rd and maybe even 2nd at this point, and being in the "east" parts. Even car schurtz park area, which is super pretty, is noted for being 30% cheaper than equivalents on 3rd/lex in the last NYTimes roundup...

absolutely-no way the subway gets done by proposed time (2015) with the coming recession and the state of federal, state and city finances and without this, there is no way northern and particularly eastern yorkville are comparable to the rest of the UES or the UWS

I lived on the UWS and disliked it. Will never move back. Moved there from the Village and then back to the Village and now in Kips Bay. I will probably end up in Yorkville. I like it better. I think the restaurants are much better and the schools.

I agree with ccc. The schools aren't there yet, and the restaurant options are *way* inferior on the UWS. UES no longer has as many "name" spots, but the quality of the "local" spots seems to be a couple notches higher than west.

It might have something to do with the age factor... still a *lot* of 20s bars and places like that on the west side, where they've been dying out on the east side for years. There used to be far more. Where the east side still has a lot of the pretty good family places that folks have been going to for years. Geography might have something to do with that, too... just more options, more competition.

1. Harlem
2. Financial District
3. LES
4. Chelsea
5. Murray Hill
6. Lincoln Square

thats not a bad start.

I'd throw Riverside Trump garbage in there as well. Those things started tanking a year ago...

NYC and BJW - I can definitely tell you that there is a clear east/west line on the UES. When I was looking to buy in '06/'07 you could see the buildings change as you got closer to the park, from less than 20% down, to 20% down, to 25% down, to 30% down to your first born child down and then the park.

I lived off Fifth in the 60's from the late 70's through early 90's and RSD until recently. My father practically forced me to move to the East Side as he loved it. I ended up loving the East Side but only west of Third

Verdi Square was called Needle Park then--Panic in Needle Park is one of my favorite drug movies. Though the UWS in the 70's and 80's has been Duane Readed and Starbucked to death it's still an amazing place.

My father was absolutely wrong in his belief. It was much better to be young on the UWS then, but where I lived was so central I could walk anywhere in Manhattan easily. At first it was a neighborhood for old people--you had to give your shopping order to the clerks in Gristedes. This was in the late 70's not the 50's. Duane Reade changed everything for the better. I know I'm alone in thinking that but it was difficult to shop for many things Except Madison became Eurotrash (remember that?) central

I have always loved both Amsterdam and Lexington and thought them similar in character.

I think the UWS has come too far to go back down. During the "good" times buildings such as mine raised maintenance added assessments and paid down the underlying mortgages. It's kind of amazing when
realtors send people to the basement as a selling point

nyc10022 I go into the Trump area constantly and am always amazed by how dull and boring it is. I think it's overbuilt, not statusy except to a certain kind of person who is too easily impressed by the wrong kind of things. Lincoln Square will do much better as there's so much around. I have never liked Lincoln Towers but that's personal--I'm a renovated pre-war person

I'm not sure if I made the biggest mistake of my life in selling or the smartest thing. I have to get away from StreetEasy and well Rufus is making that easier

Would the proposed 2nd ave subway bring value to UES property east of 2nd Ave?

BWC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_East_Side

waverly, completely agree. The feel of the neighborhood noticeably changes around Lex. I think it's a stretch to say 3rd and 2nd are "prime." They may get there, but the housing stock just doesn't match up, mostly because a lot of the western stuff is ridiculous.

I have to disagree on the UWS assessment here though - the 70s and 80s are really great compared to most of the UES. There are certainly bars and spots for non 20-year-olds to go to. The only "frat-boy" bars on the handful packed together on Amsterdam. Compared to the many "frat-boy" bars on the UES, it's hardly noticeable. The restaurants aren't anything to write home about, but there are some pretty good, reasonably-priced spots here and there.

I could be wrong, and I know the same names are often given to different areas, but I always knew USQ Park as Needle Park in the 80's and into early 90's.

Panic in Needle Park with Al Pacino directed by Jerry Schatzberg takes place in Verdi Square, and was called that by local residents--I had friends in their 30's when I was in college who lived on West 72nd Bryant Park was the worst of all parks--it had no neighborhood influence at all

It is amazing to see the city now and remember what it was like in the 70's and 80's. I worked on Madison in the 20's and watched it turn into one gigantic welfare hotel

The LES has a history of going back and forth. I don't know. I have a hard time picturing Manhattan becoming as it was because too many people have invested too much time effort energy and money. I can see it having hard times but becoming the way it was in the mid late 70's is beyond my comprehension. Of course so is the stock market so

> I think it's a stretch to say 3rd and 2nd are "prime."

It really depends where you are. You've now got two AM Stern buildings on 3rd. The 60s are almost all luxury towers. Once completely, pretty much all of it would be above average for the UWS. And much of it nicer than much of lex.

2nd ave is much more spotty, but there has been e tremendous amount of development going on.... we'll clearly see changes around the subway building.

> I have to disagree on the UWS assessment here though - the 70s and 80s are really great compared to
> most of the UES. There are certainly bars and spots for non 20-year-olds to go to. The only "frat-
> boy" bars on the handful packed together on Amsterdam. Compared to the many "frat-boy" bars on the
> UES, it's hardly noticeable.

The problem is, UWS only HAS two streets for bars to be on. So to say its "only" Amsterdam is saying its "only" half the upper west side. There really isn't a good variety up there, and food option are very limited.

The UES has *much* more variety, and frat bars (which have been closing for years) are a MUCH smaller share. Hell, I used to play in the old upper east side bar softball league... and its basically dead at this point because those bars are gone.

Sherman Square

I mean it's called Sherman Square, not Verdi Square. I hate place renaming.

nyc10022, I agree - there is and will be a lot of change along 3rd and 2nd, but I don't think these new condo developments will carry the same prestige of the co-ops and townhouses around 5th, Madison, and Park. As for the UWS, I think you should do some exploring in terms of nightlife out there. It's not just two streets for the bars - just off the top of my head, 420, Shalel, Dive75, Westside Brewery are all good bars. I don't love Prohibition, but it's definitely a more "adult" vibe. I don't frequent the UES as much as I used to, but there are still tons of those fratty bars from what I see.

I think we agree on 5th vs. 2nd and 3rd. I was just making the comparison in the light of what will "hold"... in terms of UES doing better than UWS. 5th will do best, but I still thing 3rd has it over most of UWS as well.

Aa for the bar scence, you're not going to change my mind. I was *specifically* thinking about that 420 place. Like Prohibition, they're the "exceptions" that prove the rule, they attempt to be adult, but just show how young and fratty the neighborhood scene is.

> I don't frequent the UES as much as I used to,

Yeah, I think you're going off outdated memories. The sports bar die-out started years ago.

> As for the UWS, I think you should do some exploring in terms of nightlife out there

I think I know more than you think... and maybe more than you. I've been to all but Shalel in the last 6 months. A couple, I have friends that work at.

I've spent, for better or worse - a good amount of time on both sides of the park lately, and I stand by what I said. UWS just doesn't have it. Particularly when you start talking about food.

Fair enough, I'm not going to argue endlessly about bars on here. I just disagree based on having lived in both neighborhoods (UWS more recently). For me, the fratty bars are Jake's Dilemma, Gin Mill, Brother Jimmy's (which is also on the UES), Bourbon Street, and Time Out. That's really it. They're pretty miserable, but I've always thought those were a dime a dozen on the UES (and I have been there recently, just don't go that often). All in all though, I just found living in the UWS to be a better experience, and think there's a lot of stability in that neighborhood that should bode well in this economy, all things considered.

The Upper West Side has always lagged Yorkville on restaurants, probably because it has larger kitchens (fewer postwar buildings), and great food stores (rather than the prissy boutiquey ones of Yorkville & the UES). [Cracker Boy can name them for you.]

> I just disagree based on having lived in both neighborhoods (UWS more recently).

I have lived in both as well, and I'm still going to both. I think you moved twice since UES, so your experience might be outdated.

You also can't leave out the sheer volume... UES has more of everything. So even if you could do a straight comparison, the UES also has more of everything else. Just more retail / bar areas....

The decent restaurant count just doesn't compare.

> I just found living in the UWS to be a better experience.

We all have our preferences, but I figure better food and nightlife makes for a better experience... same park, though UWS has better transportation for now. I'll give UES cleaner, and the cultural lead as well... from museums to the 92nd street ys of this world (vs. natural history and beacon, and then a big dropoff). And schools, oh the schools. Folks will have their preferences, but in terms of pieces that will attract buyers long term, I think its UES by a landslide once the crash is over.

> and think there's a lot of stability in that neighborhood

I think UWS falls off dramatically there. A TON of empty retail storefronts (anecdotally, and NYMag even did a piece). Too much construction, and then pull back in this market.

At this point, given that it hasn't been "hot" in years and superoverinflated (just regular inflated), I think the UES is several times more stable at this point. It didn't have the blowup and the crazy jump in retail rents, and I see much fewer retail spots close shop.

UWS is the area most dense with co-op owners who own FOREVER, meaning no mortgages, and the apts. are grand. It never fell in previous dips.
UES, on the other hand, is a mix and match. The demarcation line on the UES is extreme. Foodshops — UWS is inbeatable.

yes, I agree on food shops. Definitely UWS. Eli isn't his brother, and no fairway. But Fresh Direct did change a lot of things... and I think UES is getting Whole Foods first (CC doesn't count)

nyc10022, I've actually moved 3 times since the UES (!) so you may be right about my memories of the UES, though I was there last night, interestingly enough. I agree there's more of everything (normal since it's physically larger), but overall I found the nightlife, foodshops (don't know why you say Whole Foods in Columbus Circle doesn't count, but most people don't need it if they're close to Fairway, Citarella, and Westside Market, all of which are awesome), and transportation to make for a better experience. I also preferred the people, in general. But lots of people love the UES too. Time will obviously tell in terms of pricing. I'd be really surprised to see it "fall dramatically." Too many families, too much work put in to make it one of the most neighborhoody areas in the city, IMHO.

Well, because I think everything will fall dramatically.... I just figure UES has a little less to fall...

> don't know why you say Whole Foods in Columbus Circle doesn't count,

Because 99.9% of the folks I know who say they live on the "Upper West Side" live 68 or higher. For the vast majority, that is a hiiiiiike. I think the southern portion is its own neighborhood, especially given that Lincon Center cuts much of it off. Thats what I was saying. Hell, even if just technically, whole foods is below the park... I don't say the upper east side has a home depot...

There's a new Whole Foods opening on Columbus @98.

NYC and BJW - I think that both the UES and UWS are unique and interesting in their own way, which is backed-up by points that you both brought up. That is part of what makes NYC such a great place to be. I think our friend in Hammond fails to grasp this. The neighborhoods are distinct and connect with different people...and I think that is a good thing.

I think its interesting that so much of this "neighborhoods that will fall" thread has been devoted to a discussion of UES vs UWS, two neighborhoods that will maintain as much as is possibly maintainably in what I am increasingly fearful will be dark days. Having grown up in (downtown) Manhattan, so long ago that downtown was TOTALLY unfashionable, I do remember when CPW was a Potemkin Village for what was otherwise a pretty nasty UWS but you'd have to have had a B&W TV and a "phonograph" to recall that.
The real question is which of neighborhoods that have transitioned more recently will revert to being less desirable. The good news, if you wait long enough.... When I was looking for a place to rent in the early 80s places like the East Village, Washington Heights and Hell's Kitchen were begginning to look like they would become nice residential areas. Then came the 1987 stock market crash and the crack epidemic and all the optimism disappeared for a while. Today you have million dollar properties in all those areas (I recently saw a million dollar one (10x 10) bedroom in a no-doorman building near 10th avenue and 53rd Street..wonder how that's selling now?).
The UES and UWS will continue to have their pros and cons and people who would rather DIE (or move to some design challenged exurban subdivision where the only restaurants are Applebees and Domino's Pizza...kind of the same thing) than move to the other side of the park, but my guess is they will survive...if anything does.

> And, knowing how these cycles work, I'm pretty sure than in 5-10 years the UES will get "discovered"
> again when something stupid like Madonna moving back happens.

Wow, did I call it or what...

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/03/08/2009-03-08_side_dish_cnns_jeffrey_toobin_in_baby_ba.html

my vote is on this one
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/357298-townhouse-152-east-81st-street-upper-east-side-new-york

I actually think this was recently featured on Open House NYC ;)

"I also have to admit that I don't know the real name for the E. 60s and 70s, east of the Upper East Side. Is it all Lenox Hill? Is it "That Weird Hospital District"?"

You will feel different in the 'futune NYC'. When all social services are gone and the city has closed the last firehouse and ambulence corp. those of us who live in the "That Weird Hospital District"?" will be able to recieve emergency medical services on foot! Assuming we are ambulatory.

Lenox Hill is the WEST part of the east 60s and 70s. Lenox Hill hospital's original buildings were closer to the park. The borders I'm used to are 5th and Lex.

As far as the east part goes.... don't know... Queensboro Bridge adjacent?
Hospital Hill?

LOL @ nyc10022

"I'm pretty sure than in 5-10 years the UES will get "discovered"
again when something stupid like Madonna moving back happens".

Its a cycle and lots of folks don't realize that when I say it I'm incorrect according to bjw2103.

Like Nora Ephron, Madonna is moving east so she can be closer to her doctors. LOL As impressed as I am with her career, I don't think Madonna's life has very much impact on the public at this stage.

The UWS is for relaxed people, artists or liberals many of whom may have moved to the neighborhood when it was dodgy. The UES offers far more for the Gossip Girl community, as it should, since that is where The Establishment resides.

Its been a LONG time since I've seen an artist on the UWS. And, if thats your take on the UES, I'm wondering if you've actually been there.

> Its a cycle and lots of folks don't realize that when I say it I'm incorrect according to bjw2103.

We're 100% agreed... been saying it for a while. Neighborhoods cycle. UES just has too much of a permanent foundation to work from, and its never been more "out".... that even just returning to "normal" expectation should represent a large relative gain.

There certainly are artists on the UWS. I almost lived with one actually!

PMG is right about the UES, though I think that really only applies to the area west of Lex. East of there is a bit more diverse, though there's a lot of post-college kids living there.

"UES just has too much of a permanent foundation to work from, and its never been more "out".... that even just returning to "normal" expectation should represent a large relative gain."

I wouldn't say it's ever really been "out." It just doesn't get talked about as much as some of the downtown or "up and coming" neighborhoods, but neither does the UWS or Midtown really, though this largely depends on which circles you travel in as well. And if I read what you're saying correctly, you're interpreting this feeling of being "out" as a reason for a "large relative gain"? I don't see it.

Apparently you all almost all wrong, as there is no way to predict:

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20090311/FREE/903119970/1059

> There certainly are artists on the UWS. I almost lived with one actually!

LOL. So we've got one. You once almost knew one several years ago. Case closed. The UWS is full of artists.

> I wouldn't say it's ever really been "out." It just doesn't get talked about as much as some of the
> downtown or "up and coming" neighborhoods, but neither does the UWS or Midtown really, though this
> largely depends on which circles you travel in as well.

I'm not sure how valid your outer borough views are here.

UWS has been getting an infinite more press than UES in the last 5 years. And Midtown? Did that suddenly go residential? There has simply been more anti-UES sentiment than anything else in recent years. I've seen more folks go "uh, I would never live there" than about any other hood ever in the last few. And we aren't just talking hipsters, I'm taking about the finance grads that hit the city every year. Even they won't consider the uES.

And, prices have followed. The east, east 70s are dirt cheap relative to most of manhattan. Even the new construction seems to land less than comparable places a bit south or west.

On the flip, Brooklyn is toast (at least the off-Manhattan parts. It has reached the end of its hot cycle, and the inventory exploded beyond reason. Just the new apartments on 4th avenue could take care of the next 10 years of demand. I'll throw LIC into this boat as well.

"LOL. So we've got one. You once almost knew one several years ago. Case closed. The UWS is full of artists."

I didn't say that there are artists BECAUSE I almost lived with one, but this is pretty typical from you. You don't want to believe there are artists there? Fine, but doesn't really change the fact that they exist.

"UWS has been getting an infinite more press than UES in the last 5 years. And Midtown? Did that suddenly go residential? There has simply been more anti-UES sentiment than anything else in recent years. I've seen more folks go "uh, I would never live there" than about any other hood ever in the last few. And we aren't just talking hipsters, I'm taking about the finance grads that hit the city every year. Even they won't consider the uES."

I disagree about the UWS - much of the talk has been around the Lincoln Center area. I've heard just as much chatter about the traditional UWS (70s and up) as I have about the UES. Again, I think this has a lot to do with the circles you're in. I think you've got a bit of a complex re: the UES. Sure, some people really don't want to live there, but I don't think that amounts to a sudden, hip resurgence in the near future. When the SAS is done, that will change the complexion of the neighborhood a bit, but that's years away. I also think your handle also does little to belie a little bias in favor of this area, no?

"relaxed people, artists or liberals"

nyc10022, Please look at how I used the word in context. I used the term artist broadly to refer to musicians, entertainers, performing artists, writers etc.--people with creative personalities or livelihoods. Where are Carnegie Hall, Lincoln Center and the Theater District located--the west side of course. It is where the straight-laced east siders go to be entertained. When was the last time you saw someone commuting with their tuba on the Lexington subway line?

Wow, you are *really* streteching here.

Check a map... carnegie hall and theater district are not on the UWS. Lincoln Center got built to reclaim a slum, not because it was a cultural center before that.

You also conveniently missed that the UES blows away everywhere else in town for museums.

> It is where the straight-laced east siders go to be entertained.

Nope, that would be downtown.

> Again, I think this has a lot to do with the circles you're in.

Yes, tell me what circles I'm in bjw!

> Sure, some people really don't want to live there, but I don't think that amounts to a sudden, hip
> resurgence in the near future.

No, of course it does not.... and don't set up straw man arguments and waste everyone's time.

> When was the last time you saw someone commuting with their tuba on the Lexington subway line?

So, artists live on the UWS because folks have to commute to the UWS to play lincoln center?

Or did you miss your own contradiction?

BTW, since when were UWS liberals "relaxed"? Some of the most neurotic folks I've ever known...

"artists" types live on the UWS because it is a quick commute to these performing arts centers. I know plenty of creative types, like singing instructors. dancers, actors or musicians that live on the UWS because of its convenient west side commute.

The reason these performing arts and cultural centers got built where they are is no relevance to the point that they are all west side institutions. And they are all above 34th Street--not downtown.

If you go avoid high culture locals for the nightclubs or off broadway theaters of downtown, that is your choice.

"The reason these performing arts and cultural centers got built where they are is no relevance to the point that they are all west side institutions. And they are all above 34th Street--not downtown."

Did you just claim that all the performing arts and cultural centers are above 34th street?

(and you still conveniently exclude museums!)