3 ms·

There are still neighborhoods in Queens, Jersey, and Brooklyn that are under 20m from Manhattan and still woefully underdeveloped. Also, that article was specif

by ng12 10y ago

There are still neighborhoods in Queens, Jersey, and Brooklyn that are under 20m from Manhattan and still woefully underdeveloped. Also, that article was specifically about FiDi which is like that because it's so old so the streets aren't wide enough.

wcummings 10y ago
I lived in a 1 bdrm in a nice neighborhood in Queens walking distance from the subway, <20m to Manhattan, for quite a bit less than I would pay for a 1 bdrm in Boston. NYC's extensive housing stock and transit network do yield results.
evanelias 10y ago
"Woefully underdeveloped" is an exaggeration though. There aren't many underdeveloped neighborhoods under 20min from Manhattan, and even then, they're still denser than just about anywhere else in the US. On the NJ side, Hudson County is very high-density, aside from the Meadowlands which aren't suitable for construction. For one extreme example, Guttenberg NJ technically is the municipality with highest population density in the entire US! Or for a more mundane example, Newport in Jersey City is pretty much all high-rises. Similar story in Brooklyn for the parts closest by subway to Manhattan. Downtown Brooklyn added so many new giant rental towers that rents actually dropped the past year. Williamsburg got a bunch of waterfront towers last decade and now doesn't have the infrastructure to support more housing. DUMBO is all large buildings that have been converted to lofts. Brooklyn Heights is lower in density, still very few single-family buildings in the first place, and largely landmarked/historic. Queens is the one place where I'd partially agree with you, but even then, Long Island City has a ton of high-rises. Slightly further out, Sunnyside, Woodside, and Jackson Heights are relatively lower density, yes. But still denser than many major US cities.

3 ms·

There are still neighborhoods in Queens, Jersey, and Brooklyn that are under 20m from Manhattan and still woefully underdeveloped. Also, that article was specif

by ng12 10y ago

wcummings 10y ago
I lived in a 1 bdrm in a nice neighborhood in Queens walking distance from the subway, <20m to Manhattan, for quite a bit less than I would pay for a 1 bdrm in Boston. NYC's extensive housing stock and transit network do yield results.
evanelias 10y ago
"Woefully underdeveloped" is an exaggeration though. There aren't many underdeveloped neighborhoods under 20min from Manhattan, and even then, they're still denser than just about anywhere else in the US. On the NJ side, Hudson County is very high-density, aside from the Meadowlands which aren't suitable for construction. For one extreme example, Guttenberg NJ technically is the municipality with highest population density in the entire US! Or for a more mundane example, Newport in Jersey City is pretty much all high-rises. Similar story in Brooklyn for the parts closest by subway to Manhattan. Downtown Brooklyn added so many new giant rental towers that rents actually dropped the past year. Williamsburg got a bunch of waterfront towers last decade and now doesn't have the infrastructure to support more housing. DUMBO is all large buildings that have been converted to lofts. Brooklyn Heights is lower in density, still very few single-family buildings in the first place, and largely landmarked/historic. Queens is the one place where I'd partially agree with you, but even then, Long Island City has a ton of high-rises. Slightly further out, Sunnyside, Woodside, and Jackson Heights are relatively lower density, yes. But still denser than many major US cities.