Why is Brooklyn/Queens Rated Ahead of Jersey City/Hoboken?

....OK I stopped reading when you said the West Village looks crappy.

Sorry.

I must also say that I know many people (and I am among them) who consider that NYC is not really as beautiful as it should be given the fact that this is one of the most important cities in the most powerful country in the world. It is sad that we are entering into a huge crisis because many new developments were really starting to make the city look better. There are old buildings that are really beautiful and bring a lot to the look and feel of the city but some places are just crappy that's true (I am thinking of some parts of Lower East side and Chelsea notably).
I was also very disappointed when I went to West village for the first time because my broker was always telling me how nice it was and how European it looked... so when I went there I was just like : this is it? I would not say however that it is crappy or dirty. It's just that one who is not from the US could expect something better...
I have also been to Pavonia/Newport but I did not find it way better than New York. I think that every area has its own things and for a foreigner you simply need to get used to it. The only thing I can say is Manhattan skyline is the most beautiful skyline I have never seen, and when I went to Jersey city to visit some new developments, it was all about view. What I loved was the views of Manhattan that you could get from some buildings.
At the end of the day, I think this is all a matter of tastes but there is no excuse for dirt... Maybe I am too demanding but I love NYC so much that I would love it to continue improving like it did over the past years. And I actually have the same feeling for Paris.

hitmanb...I agree with you...for the past few years i've been dividing my time between fla and nyc and the difference is amazing regarding the bldgs. streets and overall appearance...Manhattan is a dirty mess...but it's also vibrant and exciting so I guess we put up with it.

Ugh, Florida cities are ugly.

Some people just have inferior taste though, so I don't think much of it. To some, older buildings = ugly (London, Paris, NYC) and new office parks = beautiful (Houston, Orlando, Dallas....which I think are the ugliest cities in the country) When I lived in Paris, my friends would come over from Houston and tell me how ugly, run-down and unpleasant it was in comparison to Houston. LOL.

I honestly don't get it.

LOL @ Florida having nicer buildings and than Manhattan. Yea, strip malls are so gorgeous!

I'm just shaking my head and laughing....but I was raised in S. Fla so I can do that! Just don't say that around any architecture people or they'll probably drop dead from a heart attack.

Paris is beautiful, I am from Paris and have always lived in Paris so I don't think it's only a matter of old vs. modern but more a matter of cleanliness and estheticism...

Well, it's more of a United States problem, not a New York problem.

really? I don't know the US very well, only NYC in Miami.

sorry I meant NYC AND Miami (NY and FL)

what is it about JC you find so appealing? Just curious...NYC is(was) about a lifestyle or perhaps a way of life. People used to come here to invent or re-invent themselves without the worry of being judged etc.... Unlike the (beautiful) cities of Europe, we had no "caste" system or 1000 years of a social structure that frowned upon dreamers, as Frenchwoman perhaps you understand this. NYC has never been so clean, in my opinion it could use a little dirtying up. I hate to sound sentimental but it was nice when each neighborhood had a distinct flavor not a homogenized white wash measured in price per square foot.

New York is a cascading poem, a dream....and this banking/real estate boom ripped the soul right out of it. Yes I do miss the New York that I grew up in...It has become a bit more like the representations of cities at EPCOT center. And if you weren't here in the 70's and 80's even with all the grime, bankruptcy you really missed something special.

Yes, I've been to all the large United States cities and the only other nice one was San Francisco.

I also think Miami is a dump. The only nice parts were directly on the beach.

I'm from LA and have been to all of them (SF, Miami, Atlanta, Paris, London, Tokyo) and I never went around the other boroughs, but think Manhattan is beautiful and thought it was clean in comparison to the population, so I'm always so confused when people like Julia say it's dirty. I live in a spotless suburb (Brentwood), and hate excessive dirt and I seriously don't understand the talk about the filth. The only dirt I remember was trash flying around Times Square at night and and a horrible stench/grime in Chinatown. I guess it's dirty if you're from small town, but compared to every other city I've been to, it's clean.

The only thing I thought was truly dirty were most of the subway stations, compared to the the tube in London or the Metro in Paris and Tokyo. Seriously, NYC needs to revamp those tired looking stations. The subway cars I went into were new, but the stations itself are a mess! Chicago's trains are also ghetto.

To the OP, I think your wife would love Battery Park City which is very modern and very landscaped. It seemed so suburban to me...like a vertical suburb. I would never live there, because it's way to quiet and removed, but it looked modern and pretty with great views.

I think noone can discuss the fact that NYC is the place for anyone who wants to reinvent himself. This is the reason why I actually leave Paris. I believe in the American dream and in the NYC dream even more and even though many people think we're crazy to move during this downturn. I also think that what makes NYC so wonderful is the fact that it is diverse and immigrants have largely contributed to this diversity.
Anyway, JC has nothing special in my opinion. It does not compare to NYC. However, the new JC neighborhoods of Paulus Hook and Pavonia are quite nice esthetically. But beautiful buildings don't mean great city. I prefer NYC 1000 times because of culture, restaurants, lifestyle, opportunities...

theburkhardtgroup, I'm with you 100%. NYC has always been about the grit and grime. It's one of the few places in the world where living in a small crappy apartment is, in a way, considered cool. It's the energy that makes this city great, not the buildings. It's the fact that the city seems to be a complete disaster yet still manages to function very efficiently. No real New Yorker has a vision of a city filled with glass towers and streamlined cookie cutter apartments. Realizing that many people do come to this city because their job brings them here, it is understandable that not everyone will want that lifestyle ... that's what the Jersey Citys and Battery Parks are for. So, to answer the original question, that's why "Brooklyn/Queens Rated Ahead of Jersey City/Hoboken" - it's mixed in with that grit and grime in queens that you can find some of the greatest food from all over the world. It's in those crappy lofts that haven't been done-up yet that all of the up-and-coming artists live in ... etc. etc.

I'm not saying that you have to love it, but that's what makes NY, NY ... and that's what the people that love it, love about it.

I agree with you too FrenchandUSA, it's not about the beautiful buildings " prefer NYC 1000 times because of culture, restaurants, lifestyle, opportunities..." --- to your point, comparing Brooklyn/Queens to JC/Hoboken is like saying that someone can't understand why the Bastille area is rated ahead of la defense.

net-net, JC and Hoboken are not NYC, they are suburbs. And there is nothing wrong with that if that's what you like - but it is what it is.

"I was also very disappointed when I went to West village for the first time because my broker was always telling me how nice it was and how European it looked".

LOL. The closest your broker has been to Europe is that mock Eiffel tower in Vegas.

"for the past few years i've been dividing my time between fla and nyc and the difference is amazing regarding the bldgs. streets and overall appearance...Manhattan is a dirty mess..."

Holy crap, Julia - something we agree upon! I also split my time between South Florida and NYC and the difference is startling. It's not just a new/old thing - the cities I lived in in Europe were far older, but far more charming, than NYC. A lot of it has to do with DIRT - we have too much of it and we are too tolerant of dirty streets, dirty buildings, and dirty people. Also, a lot of NYC's residential bldgs were constructed in the 1950's-1970's, and those fugly "mid-century" monsters need to GO. The lovely beaux arts bldgs can stay, the stunningly modern glass towers can stay, the fugly mid-century crap with window AC units should be torn down, forthwith!

"LOL @ Florida having nicer buildings and than Manhattan. Yea, strip malls are so gorgeous!"

Maybe you just grew up in a low rent, white trash part of Florida. Sorry to hear. I didn't see any strip malls on Key Biscayne, or on Star Island, or Fisher Island, or in Coconut Grove. I saw STUNNING new condos surrounded by the loveliest natural beauty in the U.S. I don't see many royal palms, coconut palms, mango trees, banana trees, pineapple plants or avocado trees in NYC, but i had all of these in the backyard of my So. Fla condo, plus an olympic sized pool, hot tub, resistance pool, reflecting pool, spa, sauna, steam room, entertainment lounge, year round sunshine, warm weather etc. I know of no buildings in NY that have this, and if there are any only Angelina and Brad could afford to live there. For my money, nothing in the U.S. is as pretty as parts of Miami. I've lived in Europe and that was charming in a different sense - truly an old world, baroque feel to it. But NYC? A dirty, cock-roach infested feel! DOn't get me wrong - i love NYC for the attitude, the fine restaurants, and the many conveniences (try getting someone in S. Fla to deliver your dry-cleaning!). But pretty? Like your momma, it ain't pretty!

Admiral, I agree entirely. NYC is an awesome city with lots going for it, but it's aesthetically one of the ugliest cities I've been to. The square boxy apartment buildings, old grimy buildings, and dirty streets can't compare to the natural beauty and stunning condos in southern florida, san francisco, san diego, los angeles.

Admiral, I think Floridian cities (Miami, Orlando and Tallahassee) are very ugly and "plain" looking. I can't stand that kind of ugly sprawl. Miami also has some of the worst areas I've ever driven though.

But I don't know how anyone, but a moron, could compare a hugely dense city center like Manhattan to freaking Fisher Island and Key Biscayne. Makes absolutely no sense. That's like me comparing London to St. Barths. The New York's equivalent to those areas would be The Hamptons.

DivineComedy, we hardly have any stunning condos in Los Angeles so I have no idea what you're talking about.

When it comes to condos, Miami has us beat for sure.

lany3, I agree that comparing manhattan to fisher island or key biscane is asinine. However, my assertion stands that compared to other major cities, NYC is very dirty, grimy, and mediocre when it comes to architecture.

lany3, I think you're probably more used to driving and not taking the subways. I honestly do not have problems with NYC subway. The trains are mostly new, and there's probably no other city that has a better public transportation than NYC. I've never taken the tube in London because when I visited there it was just a few weeks after the train bombing and we preferred their double-decker bus. Paris I did not think it was all that either. I thought their subways weren't new and then you had to push that button to open the door. Madrid, pretty much the same thing. Barcelona, they definitely have new trains where there's no door in between cars and you can pretty much see from one end to another but some of the stops are just pretty far from the sights. Zurich trains they're okay. Considering how many subway lines NYC have and considering the number of commuters who take the subway, I think it's pretty impressive and I don't even think the stations are very dirty. And I refuse to talk about other US cities. :)

"The New York's equivalent to those areas would be The Hamptons."

I didn't realize you could be in NY's downtown financial center, or its city hall, in 15 minutes from the Hamptons. Because that's what I can do from Key Biscayne.

I left out Coral Gables - not part of the city of miami, but beautiful. The idea that you can live in a condo on the Key, or Coconut Grove, and be at work in downtown Miami or Coral Gables with just a 15 minute drive through palm-lined streets is amazing to me. No comparison at all. New York is a dog's breakfast in comparison. Look, I love New York for it's great museums, diversity, restaurants, hipness, its deep job base, and a dozen other reasons. But aesthetically, it's fuggly. It lacks the old world charm of Paris or Prague or Vienna or London, and lacks the beauty of newer sunbelt cities. Its like your sister - really nice in its own way, but fuggly!

^^^

From Paris and I don't agree with a thing above poster said (except for the part about Paris, Vienna, Prague, London). I'm surprised you put London on list, seeing the type of person who finds London beautiful usually finds New York beautiful.

NY has many beautiful areas but beautiful is so subjective anyway. Some Americans find sunbelt cities beautiful, but they're almost all ugly. Just awful and offensive. The largest sunbelt city, Los Angeles is an ugly looking city. Las Vegas, Pheonix, Houston, Dallas are ugly. You Americans lack taste when it comes to cities (or city planning or whatever.)

Original Poster, your wife brings as a reference point Shanghai, a chaotic third-world city that has only three forms of housing:
1. shiny new high-rises with modern conveniences that work
2. squalid crowded traditional housing (possibly lacking indoor plumbing; but I'm thinking of Beijing, and not sure the hutangs still exist in Shanghai)
3. mid-20th century concrete brutalist government-built housing with outdated and malfunctioning systems

With that as a guide to good and bad, it's not surprising that Newport, etc., caters largely to professionals who moved from big cities in China, India, etc. It's harder them to see the beauty in Victorian brownstones and the like, especially if they're not over-restored, because there's an automatic association with decrepitude and squalor.

Same thing with retail -- it's either shopping malls (cloistered escapes from the street chaos, congestion, car fumes) or crumbling storefronts in big China cities, so that makes it hard to appreciate storefront retail in NY.

"From Paris and I don't agree with a thing above poster said (except for the part about Paris, Vienna, Prague, London)."

Thanks, Froggie. Agree that most continental European cities have an architecural charm that far outweighs what we have in the U.S. Pockets of Philadelphia and NYC have some lovley beaux arts buildings, but the composition is over-whelmed by the mid-century crap that is far more prevalent. In Wien, Praha and Paris the barocco, beaux arts and/or second empire dominates the less attractive styles, rather than the other way around. In my mind, these styles represent the peak of 2nd millenium architecural aesthetics.

Now, as to your comment "Some Americans find sunbelt cities beautiful, but they're almost all ugly. Just awful and offensive.... You Americans lack taste". Well. I agree that Phoenix and Dallas and Houston aren't attractive downturns, but I'd take a year-round sunny beach-front condo in Santa Monica or Malibu over just about any congested apt in a smoggy downtown, but that's just me. And Miami, and to a lesser extent San Diego, incorporates its waterfront into the downtown in a way NYC will never be able to, the natural beauty just isn't there. That's the real advantage of South Florida over any of the other cities we've named - you simply can't duplicate the environment. Otherwise, go build me a palm tree, froggie. But even as to architecture, i'll flying over miami and coral gables and seeing the blood-orange terra cotta roofs of the spanish style homes is far more lovely than the coal-black pitch roofs of NYC or Paris.

Finally, if you're going to make comments like "you americans lack taste", I just know you won't be offended by me calling you a cheese-eating surrender monkey, or reminding you that were it not for these tasteless americans, you'd now be speaking deutsche.

Have a nice day, froggie.

How can anyone in their right mind actually argue that NYC is an attractive city? It makes no sense at all.

Agree completely w/ Alanhart re:. coming from Shanghai, I can see why she'd like Newport over Manhattan. Alan, thought you'd give us a chorus of 'I happen to like NY".

French&US: I've read that part of the national budget of France goes to the upkeep of Paris, including street cleaning. Not so for NY: street cleaning in NY is paid by local NY taxes, not federal US tax.

South Forida? Hate it. Wish I liked it since it's a short plane ride, but to me, it's an air conditioned nightmare. There's no there there. Ticky tacky suburban strip mall sprawl with some gorgeous condos thrown in. Quel domage.

Paris metro is gorgeous. There's art reproductions at the Louvre stop. If we had that in NY, it's be stolen w/in the first 15 minutes.

I seriously think hitmanb is just expressing his frustration at the negative stigma from living in NJ (I seriously doubt he lives in BK). He lost all credibility, as pointed out, when he said that the West Village is a dump.

If NYC is not for you, then go to NJ. No problems, and you can love Jersey City if it suits you well. But there is definetly a higherarchy to living in NYC than NJ, even if it is the less than desirable areas of Queens or Bklyn. NYC is NYC. NJ is completely different. That's why it's a different state altogether.

I really don't see the point. It's one guys view, based on his wife's opinion in comparison to her experiences living in a third world country.

Paris is lovely but it is largely because tall buildings are limited. And many buildings are 18th and 19th century gaudy buildings. New York has its own charms, which vary greatly by neighborhood. If "beauty" means "homogeneous," New York will certainly never fit many people's tastes. But it is undoubtedly an attractive city.

"There's no there there. Ticky tacky suburban strip mall sprawl with some gorgeous condos thrown in. Quel domage."

I suspect the people who write this can't afford to spend much time in Florida and base their opinion on their spring break in South Beach. SoBe is not Miami. It's full of pasty mid-western tourists, hip-hoppers, transients, and gays. South Florida is Coral Gables, Key Biscayne, Star Island, Coconut Grove, Hibiscus Island, and a thousand similar lush tropical paradises with charming mediterranean architecture and terra cotta roofs. It's stunning. You can argue that the quality of life is eroded by the increasingly third-world "manana" mentality of the people, or the petty crime, but as a place of beauty you can not compare it to NYC. You know, they have no state or city income tax in Florida for a reason: The TONS of tourist dollars make it unnecessary. How many people vacation in NY from November through March? How many tourists want to flock to Jones beach or Rockaway. Ugly skanky dirty beaches with hyperdermics washing up.

OK, admiral, so, where should I holiday in Fla?

oldbuyers, living in a nice condo in hoboken is preferable to living in a filthy walkup in east village or lower east side.

Eli Manning lives in the teapot building in hoboken.

"OK, admiral, so, where should I holiday in Fla?"

You? Liberty City. You'll fit right in.

I strongly suspect that DivineComedy is yet another pseudonym that rufus uses. I noticed the writing style and vocabulary are the same. notice how he uses the words filty and doesn't capitalize names of neighborhoods, and replies with the persons name then comma. That is a unique rufus writing style: exmaple:
_______

oldbuyers, living in a nice condo in hoboken...

_______

definetly is rufus aka JohnAnthony aka quantum.

How many screen names does this guy have?

"Eli Manning lives in the teapot building in hoboken."

I think you mean Hudson Tea bldg. And its a DUMP. IMO. Dont understand why he'd do that to his new wife instead of a sweet manhattan place; you know he can afford it. We're a long way from Broadway Joe Namath.

Yeah, it's the Hudson Tea building. His actual apartment is pretty sweet; everything is automated. I think GQ did a story on it.

My guess is he's not a city boy. He grew up in Mississippi, after all.

For celebrities like Eli, there are only about 5 condos in Manhattan that are nice enough to suit him.

Yeah but he can afford any one of them.

It just shows the pathetic nature of NYC real estate, that such a big city only has a few world-class condos: 15 central park west, time warner, and maybe 1 or 2 others.

quantum. wtf is a "world-class condo". something you read about in cigar aficionado or the robb report?! does one of these come with a parking space for a yacht, are there lot of these in south florida and dubai, and none in europe?

nyc is a beautiful city, where many people feel very lucky to live and a good number of them live in condos. the best part about nyc is that 90% of people just don't get it. it's not a criticism, just a stat. but it's a great thing, because if people did get it, even fewer of us would be able to afford it!

shit. just realized i fell for rufus trolling!

What is a "world-class condo?" Buildings that are wel-designed, offers great amenities, and attract wealthy people. NYC architecture is mediocre; just take a look at the residential buildings in manhattan; they are bland and have no originality. In battery park city, for example, every apartment building looks the same. NYC has a lot of good things about it, but real estate is not one of them.

"OK, admiral, so, where should I holiday in Fla?"
You? Liberty City. You'll fit right in."

Great answer. Like I said, Fla is a dump & you belong among the ticky tacky, last chance losers.

Alanhart:

In China, the resale market is extremely small compared to new constructions, so all of her friends pretty much lived in brand new constructions, many of which are high rises. That is why when she moved into my coop built in 1965, surrounded by houses/apartment buildings even older, she was not impressed, at all. We do live in a doorman building that is very well maintained, but it still doesn't change the fact that it was built in 1960's.

The subway is a disaster: rats, water leaks, homeless, dirt/trash everywhere, compared to the one in Shanghai and Hong Kong (where she got her Master's from), it is hard to believe that this is the backbone of one of the best cities in the world. I took her to Macy's and Bloomingdale's, again they are way behind similar shopping malls in China. The Macy on 34th is really showing its age. Sure, New Yorkers shop in stores, but she prefers centralized malls where she can browse all brands on top of a quality food court etc. Manhattan Mall would have been decent but it was under renovations.

Anyway, I am not comparing the location of Hoboken/Newport Pavonia to Manhattan as they are completely different price points (although location wise, I personally would still take Newport over anything above 100th street, Chinatown, Lower East Side and most of East Village, those are fugly neighborhoods, sorry). However if you are talking about the quality of the apartment and building amenities, I am 100% sure there is nothing I can afford in Manhattan that will come even close to Newport.

The real comparison would be Brooklyn/Queens vs Newport/Hoboken as I mentioned in the title. As much as outer borough folks who glorify themselves as living in New York, sorry, no one come to New York for Brooklyn or Queens, they are here for New York, New York. There is no prestige whatsoever about Brooklyn/Queens/Staten Island/Bronx compared to Jersey City, the commute time is very similar, the lack of city tax more than pays for the PATH cards, and I would actually like to live in neighborhoods that were built after the 80's, you know? Is it too much to ask for nice and clean streets, fresh new apartment buildings? Newport (07310) is a higher income zip code according to city data than anywhere in Brooklyn except Brooklyn Heights (and it is very close, 90K vs 100K). I was surprised how many Chinese/Indian people were there very similar to our background/social stature. I am just surprised that the area gets so little attention compared to Long Island City or Williamsburg.

Hitman,

I think you're overlooking the fact that NY's infrastructure is much older than that of Shanghai. Shanghai's modern infrastructure is aprox 10-20 yrs old, where as the NYC subway & Macy's date back to the turn of the 20th century. Kinda apples & oranges.

"I would actually like to live in neighborhoods that were built after the 80's, you know? Is it too much to ask for nice and clean streets, fresh new apartment buildings? "

Don't think you'll find this in NY.

And just to clarify, I understand 100% that the average quality of life in China is nowhere near U.S.

But we are not comparing average quality of life, we are comparing white collar middle class vs white collar middle class. Moving from Shanghai to New York was a huge hit in living standard for her, despite me making more American dollars than she did in RMB (that is a 7:1 ratio). She had clean subways, could get a cab anywhere, and had a very pleasant, clean and new neighborhood with great shopping malls. Our current neighborhood is nowhere near the standard she was expecting from a major city.

We will probably make a change after our first baby sometimes in August, also hoping to take advantage of the declining real estate market (and I am SINCERELY hoping Brooklyn will hold up better than Jersey City as I plan to sell my junior four here and buy there).

I guess I am just glad after taking her to most neighborhoods, she finally found something she really likes (heck she said she likes Newport better than Midtown Manhattan, I guess the water front was really appealing), and it is affordable, possibly even more affordable than the fab-four (Park Slope, Downtown Brooklyn including Heights/Dumbo, Williamsburg and Long Island City). Of course in this economy no one is 100% immune from a lay off, so we have to wait and see.

Yeah, dwell is right. It's nearly impossible to find a nice clean modern neighborhood in NYC that is safe and offers nice apartment buildings. Most of the city's real estate stock is old walkups and boxy buildings from the mid-century that all look the same.

Hitmanb: it's a cultural difference. Asians, in general (huge generalization, of course), like everything "brand-new". If you google Vancouver, Kerrisdale/West Vancouver and Asians - you will find an interesting story about what what happened when rich HKers moved to Vancouver in the mid-late 80s ahead of the handover.

No prewar building, no matter how many original Emery Roth tiled bathrooms, really satisfies the need for "brand new".

There was a huge uproar when rich HKers came into what had previously been a leafy neighborhood with older "character" homes (think Tudors and the like) and started chopping all the trees down and building stucco palaces that you would find on the Peak.

Public infrastructure in Sin, HK, Japan and the coastal cities of China is fantastic - but it's all new. With the exception of Japan, give it another 20 years - think about the state of public toilets and what will eventually happen.

Also, a lot of Asians are drawn to Battery Park City (all new construction) and the Trump development on the West Side for the same reason. They love new construction, and the lack of street life or any charm in the development is not as much a concern.

Hitmanb: some advice - from the sound of your domestic setup, I feel that your wife may be far happier if you could find a job in HK/Shanghai/Sin. Expat life is sweet there (domestic help, great cheap food, etc.) and it sounds as if NYC will ALWAYS suffer in comparison to the Far East.

Hitman, "The real comparison would be Brooklyn/Queens vs Newport/Hoboken as I mentioned in the title. As much as outer borough folks who glorify themselves as living in New York, sorry, no one come to New York for Brooklyn or Queens, they are here for New York, New York." -- this is a very ignorant comment.

I'm not sure where you are from originally, but no real New Yorker would share your point of view. New Yorkers don't care what people come to New York to see. In fact, they don't actually want to see most of those people.

Second, "Sure, New Yorkers shop in stores, but she prefers centralized malls where she can browse all brands on top of a quality food court etc. Manhattan Mall would have been decent but it was under renovations." -- you answered your question "Sure, New Yorkers shop in stores", it's New York, that's the way it is. When people move to Shanghai, they need to get used to the differences over there. Same thing over here.

Anyhow, not trying to argue, just trying to answer the original question: "Why is Brooklyn/Queens Rated Ahead of Jersey City/Hoboken?", because that is where New Yorkers would prefer to live.

New Yorkers don't try to "glorify themselves" by living in the outer boroughs - those are the real New Yorkers that are the backbone of this city that "people come to see". You seem to be the one that is trying to Justify your potential decision to move to JC: "There is no prestige whatsoever about Brooklyn/Queens/Staten Island/Bronx compared to Jersey City, the commute time is very similar, the lack of city tax more than pays for the PATH cards, and I would actually like to live in neighborhoods that were built after the 80's, you know?" --- Yes, there is a difference, it's not NYC. Don't get me wrong, feel free to live in JC or Hoboken, you shouldn't care what other people think, but stop trying to justify your decision by trying to compare to Queens/Brooklyn. Move to NJ if that's what you want to do. You are the one trying to glorify yourself, otherwise you wouldn't care what everyone else thinks.

Your opinion is clear - you won't change the world by commenting on a message board, so just go ahead and move to Jersey!!

NYC will not satisfy what you're looking for, hitmanb. The city is old, and its infrastructure and residential buildings are subpar at best. And it's easily one of the dirtiest major cities in the world.

coral gables, victoria park in ft. lauderdale are historic areas with beautiful homes. Nothing could ever take the place of Manhattan but it's a tough city, dirty, expensive and hard...I'm thinking of North Carolina.

rufus, why don't you just post under one name. I hope you are enjoying Chicago.

DivineComedy
about 6 hours ago
ignore this person
report abuse
Yeah, it's the Hudson Tea building. His actual apartment is pretty sweet; everything is automated. I think GQ did a story on it.
My guess is he's not a city boy. He grew up in Mississippi, after all.
For celebrities like Eli, there are only about 5 condos in Manhattan that are nice enough to suit him.
______________________________________________________

Um, Tom Cruise's apartment is in the East Village.

Actually, A-List celebrities don't even live in "sleek glass condos" Rufus, and they certainly don't live in Chicago.

quant,

Hitman said neighborhoods blt after the 80s. You may find bldgs blt after the 80s, but not entire neighborhoods. Also, I think hitman's interpretaion of 'clean streets' are not the level of cleanliness of ny streets.

One more thing Rufus, what the hell is your obsession with condos? It's like your entire life revolves around high-rise condos and New York. Can you live in all of them at once?

How the hell do you find time to whack off to condo magazines in between your free time when you're busy making your rounds on NY blogs and posting as DivineComedy, Rufus, Quantum and JohnAnthony?

quell, it's called Battery Park City but I'm guessing hitman can't afford it.

I'm from out of state, lived in multiple cities and I know that NYC is an attractive city but not exactly new. There are new pockets here and there, but your best bet would be the suburbs or BPC like mentioned earlier.

And I never want to hear the words Florida mentioned on this thread again. I would rather just move back to Chic or move to somewhere like New Jersey than live to that hurricane ridden, bland, dumpy third-world city like Miami. Just the word Florida drives me crazy. Very strange comparison of Coral Gables to Manhattan. Compare it to Alpine, NJ or Greenwich, but Manhattan? Huh????

Again, New York is not homogeneous; if that is your definition look elsewhere. Give it a little time, and you might see what all the fuss is about, hitman. In the interim there are pockets of homogeneity that will serve your needs.

Sorry, should have said: "if that is not your definition of livability, look elsewhere."

michaelkyleh moved to NYC because he couldn't hack it in Chicago. Your ignorance of both cities is really amusing. NYC is attractive? LOL. Very few people honestly believe that, dude.

Chicago has the ideal combination of old and new. You can find gorgeous townhomes in the gold coast and amazing condos in streeterville and lakeshore east. NYC has nothing like it.

Your ignorance of both cities is amusing. Chicago is attractive? LOL. Very few people honestly believe that, dude. New York has the ideal combination of old and new. You can find gorgeous townhomes on the upper east side and amazing condos in Midtown. Chicago has nothing like that.

Wow, I read this thread with great interest as i myself am a Jersey City condo owner (new construction loft ~1000 sq. foot, purchased in oct '07 for a ridiculously good price at about $490psf).

hitmanb - I understand where your wife is coming from, having also spent time working abroad and traveling in Asia. however, give your wife some time to adjust. with time, she will realize that there is a far greater variety and quality of restaurants, shopping, activities in manhattan (or even parts of brooklyn) than jersey city. yes, jersey city / newport is a nice clean area to live but honestly it's a bit sterile. but it's a great compromise for new construction / views / space and still being close to nyc. personally i don't live in newport, i live near grove street where it's more similar to nyc in feel (brownstones, row houses, van vorst park etc)

anyway, time will tell... sounds like you are having a baby (and as proud parents of a 3 week newborn here), we definitely think that living in jersey city is more convenient than the city (don't know about kensington brooklyn though), not as hectic, and there are nice parks here too. it's a different quality of life, a little more suburban but yet close enough to nyc. yes sometimes we do miss the city, being able to step outside and be in the midst of everything. funny enough, my wife's family owns a small condo in union square, and so we stay there occasionally. after about a week or so though, i start feeling a little cramped ('course it is only a studio) and since i can't get the same amount of new construction space / amenities in nyc without selling a kidney, jc is a viable place for us to live. i think it's the perfect blend of nyc/non-nyc for me.

btw hitmanb: here's a good, completely civil read from last year on LIC vs. JC (i also looked at LIC before deciding on JC, and there's some good stuff here that might help in your decision... admittedly good stuff is biased because i wrote it, but ;) )

so, stand by your decision, if you like jc, go for it... prices are definitely negotiable. different strokes for different people.

admiral,

did you really just use the word barroco? that must be a style i am unfamiliar with. your understanding of art and architectural terms is so hilariously impoverished that i can barely read through it. you enjoy philadelphia's beaux arts buildings? which buildings in philadelphia are beaux arts? very few. philadelphia is famous for its colonial, federal, and greek revival buildings. as for 'midcentury crap,' i guess by that you mean rockefeller center, the most highly respected sky scraper complex in the world, the empire state building, the greatest skyscraper icon since the eiffel tower, or perhaps you mean postwar? that would include the seagrams building, right? largely considered the masterpiece of perhaps the greatest post-war sky-scraper architect. or maybe you mean the lever house?

if it is prewar apartment tours that you consider beautiful, almost none of those are "beaux arts." Vienna is generally considered a bland, unattractive town, and it does indeed have a lot of overblown late-19th century architecture (as does London) that would appeal to a person who considers Fisher Island architecturally compelling. But Prague has almost no beaux-arts or second empire architecture at all (do you even know what the second empire refers to). Paris has great buildings from many periods.

there is not one way for a city to be beautiful, and there is not one way for a city to be ugly. new york is less about great architecture (for that, go to chicago) than it is about compelling combinations that work. los angeles has some spectacular modernist houses--neutra in particular--but overall the city is just appalling in its unremitting ugliness. as for dirt, i just don't know what to say. the city is completely sanitary, and somewhat gritty. that's what it is, and it works fine.

someone criticized it for lacking malls. if you like malls, by all means you should live in north jersey, not in manhattan.

You crack me up dude. The townhomes in gold coast are way better than upper east side or west village.

Midtown condos? Buildings like metropolitan, museum tower, olympic tower, cityspire, galleria, etc., are shit compared to Chicago's premier buildings like the elysian, park hyatt, water tower, aqua, lincoln park 2520. If you knew anything about real estate, you would know this.

the terra cotta spanish style roofs of coral gables? i mean, this has got to be a joke. mcmansion architecture is now the standard of beauty, admiral? as for natural beauty, new york harbor is one of the great natural locations in the united states. have you ever taken the staten island ferry, or sailed through the verazano narrows? if you think some crappy beach littered with boring high-rises, looking the same as a hundred other beaches, is natural beauty, then you need to develop your eye.

too funny. this thread has morphed into chicago vs. nyc

I have friends that have always lived in Hoboken. There was a significant tax benefit (4% nyc tax) saved at one point, not sure that still stands. people like it as they can have a car - get to the city by bus, train, path or ferry. If you like it -- that is what counts.

admiral,

if you think it is classy to extoll the beauty of "barroco" architecture, the glories of the philadelphia beaux-arts movement, and the blossoming of the 2nd empire in prague, while simultaneously lauding 'mediterranean' architecture in mcmansion-infested florida swamps, while at the same time deriding miami because it is visited by gays, it is no wonder you don't fit in in nyc. just buy yourself a spanish-roofed tuscan villa with a disappearing edge pool and a twelve car garage in a gated community in naples overlooking a golf course and be done with it.

manhattanfox - you are correct. tax benefit of 4%. and ease of having a car is superbly convenient. plus easy access to newark airport (considerably less crazy than jfk). and finally, you are correct. different strokes, different people!

oops hitmanb: here is the link to the streeteasy thread that i wrote about a few posts up. neglected to paste it in.

http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/3182-long-island-city

hitman,

new york is not for you. your wife likes malls and everything new. new york is the only big city in america without malls, and it is anything but brand new. when i visited shanghai as a child in the 80s, i loved it: so many atmospheric old neighborhoods. when i went back last year, i couldn't stand it. everything had been torn down and replaced by cheap looking, gimmicky buildings that i doubt will last for forty years. we each have our own taste. if you don't value diversity, energy, a little chaos, and cultural frisson, there is just no reason for you to live in or around new york city. forget jersey city. move back to asia, or at least to houston.

new york city remains the premier city in the world, and it can't be broken down into its parts. it is greater than the sum of its parts. it is like rome and istanbul and paris and bombay--cities that just have it. enjoy it if you can, and if you can't, then why in the world would you pay what it costs to live here or even in the burbs?

happyrenter, please STFU. NYC is NOT the premier city in the world. Only elitist new yorkers like yourself think that. The financial crisis has exposed how weak and vulnerable NYC is. The city put all its eggs into finance, and now it's paying the price. NYC has fallen behind in architecture, real estate, quality of life, economic clout, nightlife, and virtually every other measure of a great city.

^^^^

New York along with Paris, London, Tokyo and Hong Kong will always be the premier and most prestigious cities in World. Shanghai, Houston, Chicago, Dallas, Las Vegas are all one in the same are several classes below.

Hell would freeze over before Chicago would ever be added to that list.

And Quantumn/DivineComedy/Rufus, there are more beautiful mansions in Manhattan than in the Gold Coast.

And that entire New York, midtown-upper-east-west side area is more beautiful.

michaelkyleh said "Just the word Florida drives me crazy"

FLORIDA! FLORIDA! FLORIDA! FLORIDA! FLORIDA! FLORIDA! FLORIDA! FLORIDA!

happyrenter said "did you really just use the word barroco? that must be a style i am unfamiliar with."

Ummm, did you think the word "baroque" was an english word? Has it entered your mind that some european styles were named in italian first, and then translated to english. Was your last international experience at the IHOP? Why do i waste my time...

"which buildings in philadelphia are beaux arts? very few. philadelphia is famous for its colonial, federal, and greek revival buildings"

Dozens of them, you retard. Have you lived there? I have Start with the Philadelphia Trust Building. Then there's the City Hall, which is more second empire but has elements of Beaux arts. Rittenhouse Square, and the surrounding streets, have several lovely examples as well. Then there's Memorial Hall, the Children's Museum, well...you get the idea. Retard.

"Vienna is generally considered a bland, unattractive town"

You've been there then, right? I have. About 100 hundred times. I lived not far from there once. Unlike you, i'm mostly speaking about cities i've lived in. Again, you're a complete retard - Vienna is a STUNNING city and there is nothing in the U.S. that resembles the masterpieces on Kartnerstrasse, especially the Hofburg.

Here, i've made your life easier. Retard.
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barocco

"But Prague has almost no beaux-arts or second empire architecture at all (do you even know what the second empire refers to)."

Who said that it did? Do you always extrapolate every comment to every city I mention? BTW, I took one architectural course in Praha, that studied the art of that ciy. Did you? Nearly every city I've mentioned, except for Paris and London, i've lived in or near. Where have you lived, renter?

" the terra cotta spanish style roofs of coral gables? i mean, this has got to be a joke. mcmansion architecture is now the standard of beauty, admiral?"

LOL. Very little new construction in Coral Cables, except for Condos. The terra cotta roofs on spanish-style homes go back to Merrick's early design for the city in the 20's and 30's. Once again, you babble about things you do not know and places you've not been. Is your mother embarrassed to have raised a border-line retarded child?

"have you ever taken the staten island ferry...if you think some crappy beach ... is natural beauty, then you need to develop your eye.". This comment requires no reply; it embarrasses the writer better when left standing on its own.

You strike me as a very provincial person, likely born and raised in NYC, and so in your narrow world view it simply must be "da best" in all things. Fine, have it your way. Now let the adult, educated, well-travelled, successful, professional adults resume their discussions. It's time for adult swim on Streeteasy, renter-boy!

Midtown is beautiful? You're joking, right? It's mainly drab office buildings and unoriginal residental highrises. Upper west side is nice along central park west, but that's about it. There's a massive housing project near lincoln center, and the west 70's and 80's are dirty and ugly.

P.s. renter - rococco must be a word i made up too, right? For some reason, the architectural style known as "barocco" for centures before there even WAS an America was anglicized into the word "baroque". The style rococco, for some reason, was not. I have no idea why. Maybe they figured that provincial, poorly educated slobs who called themselves "happy renters", and who don't appear to have lived abroad or travelled well, could not handle too many foreign words.

Please do not breed.

admiral:

rococco is a word in the english language. barocco is not. i'm glad that a person sophisticated enough to rely on the insult 'retard' confuses the words baroque and rococco, then googles the made up combination english word barocco and comes up with the italian definition from wikipedia. then he continues his google hunt and discovers that at some point in the past barocco was an english word, and adds that to the conversation for no apparent reason. it would have been a lot classier to simply admit your mistake, retard. :).

philadelphia has beaux arts buildings, as i said, but it is known for its rich legacy of colonial, federal, and greek revival buildings. chicago, for instance, has much more in the way of beaux arts. as for where i've lived and traveled, suffice it to say that i would never comment on a city i did not know well. where i come from, "olympic sized pool, hot tub, resistance pool, reflecting pool, spa, sauna, steam room, entertainment lounge" are not the hallmarks of great architecture. they are terms used to advertise a week at a cheesy resort--probably not unlike the tacky condo complexes in south florida that you love so much--or, for that matter, the tacky condo buildings that we unfortunately have in nyc (and chicago, and most anywhere else young professionals congregate).

new york does not have the best of everything, nor does it have 'da best' of everything. it doesn't have the most interesting modern architecture (chicago) or the greatest examples of art moderne (brussels and riga) or the greatest painting collections (madrid, florence, vienna, paris, london, berlin, not to mention secondary cities like dresden), or the best restaurants (tokyo), or the wildest nightlife (berlin, madrid), or the most spectacular setting (capetown, rio, istanbul), or the best travel connections (london) or the liveliest street scene (bombay, calcutta) etc. etc. etc. as i pointed out, every great city is made great, in the end, by an ineffable quality that must result from the mix of its parts, but can't really be found in the parts.

finally, you consider this to have been a discussion between 'adult, educaded, well-travelled, successful, professional adults.' no matter how many times you use the word 'adult' in one sentence, it won't change the hilariously juvenile level of your conversation (retard).

i better be over my flu by tomorrow. i can't make the reeducation of the american illiterati my new calling.

oh i love that little ps in which you flex that wikipedia knowledge. here's a little tip for ya:

the europeans started to colonize the americas at the end of the 15th century and beginning of the 16 the century. the baroque movement in art and architecture began at the very end of the 16th century. but the use of the term--either baroque(french and then english) or barocco (portuguese, not italian, just so you know)--to designate a movement in art did not begin until later. So you say "For some reason, the architectural style known as "barocco" for centures before there even WAS an America was anglicized into the word "baroque". that's, well, impossible, given that centuries did not elapse between the naming of the movement and the founding of the USA (i can only assume that you are using the founding of the USA as your beginning point for 'america' since in fact 'america' was named as such before the style of the baroque even existed, let alone was given a name).

lastly--and this really is lastly i'm done with this thread--everyone is entitled to his own taste. so if you love the hofburg more power to you. but it is an architectural masterpiece in your mind only. the critical consensus is that it is an uninteresting, overblown melange of mediocre elements. if you like it, that's fine, you should own your taste. but to throw it out there as some renowned masterpiece is just ridiculous.

"it would have been a lot classier to simply admit your mistake, retard. :)."

WHAT MISTAKE?? The word you know as "baroque" was used for hundreds of years in europe as "barocco"; it is ORIGINALLY AN ITALIAN WORD! That is primarily the word they use in Europe, where the style predominates. Remember we were talking about Paris, Wien, Praha, etc? What word do you think THEY use in those countries, the English word?? What. A. Retard!

"as for where i've lived and traveled, suffice it to say that i would never comment on a city i did not know well."

So, you've lived in Philadelphia, Miami, and Europe too? Cool. I'm speaking from first hand experiences over many years of living in these places. Now I know that you are, too. What years did you live in Europe, for example? Or Miami? Or Philly? Because you talk like someone who just did a google search, or maybe road the tourist bus, but never really got to walk these streets as a resident.

"or the most spectacular setting (...istanbul)" BWAHAHAHA! Been to Istanbul twice, two weeks each. Exciting place. But spectacular setting? It's a dog's breakfast compared to Miami. Now, the Architecture, I grant you, in IStanbul is stunning b/c it is so unique from what we have in the west. But the scenery? LEt's just say i don't know anyone who went to Istanbul to see natural beauty.

As for your rant about the word barocco, it's nice that you now acknowledge it is a european word...earlier you said it WAS. NOT. A. WORD. But in fact, most of Europe uses it to describe that European style than your english word. You really need to get out more. You never did tell us where you've lived, outside of NYC, and particularly where in Europe you've lived. My guess is you were born in NJ and lived here all your life. Or maybe,born in rural Michigan and came to NYC as a waiter. Either way, you are still Streeteasy's favorite little retard :)

> nothing in the U.S. is as pretty as parts of Miami.

What parts would those be? 98% of the florida coastline is absolutely cheesy. What's left, in Miami, is mostly ugly high-rises.

Malibu, La Jolla, coastline of Oregon, Pacific Heights, all significantly nicer than all of Florida.

"What parts would those be? "

See above. Hibiscus Island, Coconut Grove, Fisher Island (no more expensive than Malibu) and Key Biscayne, among others, are stunning. The fact that you can live there, and be a short boat ride from Nassau or Bimini, is stunning. That is, if you can afford a boat. If you can't, live elsewhere! (I didn't say these were the most AFFORDABLE places in the U.S., I said they were among the NICEST).

"Malibu, La Jolla, coastline of Oregon, Pacific Heights, all significantly nicer than all of Florida."

Well, Malibu and Ja Jolla are certainly stunning. I could live there in a minute! I haven't been to Pacific Heights. Oregon? Too chilly for me. In Florida, I can wear shorts and a tee shirt on the beach at 9PM in January. Try that in Oregon! If the place ain't warm, I don't consider it paradise!

The other thing I like about So. Fla is that I can be home for family events and emergencies in 3 hrs flat, w/ no jet lag. I can't do that from Southern California.

So Cal has earthquakes; So. Fla has hurricanes. Either one will ruin your day so i'm not sure it much matters.