Park Slope Living at Manhattan Rents!

And Williamsburg’s pricier than the Lower East Side, too

This article was published in the February 4, 2008, edition of The New York Observer.

Nigel Holmes; Source: Real Estate Group

For over a decade now, Manhattan and Brooklyn have competed for the affections of younger or first-time renters. Manhattan was Manhattan, the gentrifying New Rome with all the amenities and nightlife one could want, often with shorter work commutes. Brooklyn was ever-emergent, the cool capital with reservations—longer commutes and sparser retail, plus the burden of pioneering in neighborhoods that didn’t always welcome newcomers.

But, oh, Brooklyn! What deals! Compared to Manhattan, Brooklyn apartments in the brownstone satellites like Carroll Gardens and Park Slope seemed—in fact, were—so cheap. And yet the neighborhoods looked and felt like nascent versions of SoHo or the West Village.

The latest numbers suggest this trend is ending. It’s not just that Brooklyn brownstone neighborhoods are getting comparably expensive to Manhattan; it’s that they’re getting a lot more expensive at a time when Manhattan seems to have topped out.

While the Manhattan apartment market did scale tremendous heights in 2007, it also exhibited signs of softening. And some neighborhoods like Hell’s Kitchen and the Lower East Side slipped below Brooklyn locales like Park Slope and Williamsburg in rent medians.

In 2007, through January of this year, rents increased in almost all parts of Manhattan. The average rent on a two-bedroom in a non-doorman building below 100th Street increased 14.2 percent from January to December, to $3,949, according to brokerage the Real Estate Group New York. For a non-doorman one-bedroom, it was up nearly 3 percent, to $2,919.

New numbers out for this January show that rents kept increasing after December. The average two-bedroom rent in a non-doorman building was $3,919 this month, up from $3,459 last January, according to the Real Estate Group, which incorporated Harlem into its monthly reports for the first time this January.

Of course, divining the rental market in any borough remains a frustratingly inexact science. Subleases almost never make it into the calculations of the brokerages that produce rental data; and, to say the very least, Gotham has spawned some of civilization’s most creative living situations.

And Manhattan has long grappled with (or long benefited from, depending on perspective) an absurdly low vacancy rate. The investment-sales firm Marcus & Millichap, which does not broker apartment leases, estimated the Manhattan vacancy rate at under 3 percent by the end of 2007.

But the dimly lit signs of softening are there this month: “Layoffs and reported losses at some of the country’s largest financial institutions sent the stock market and the value of Manhattan apartments lower in January,” the Real Estate Group’s report concluded.

Average rents dropped from December of 2007 to January for non-doorman studios, one-bedrooms and two-bedrooms; and for one-bedrooms in doorman buildings. The gulf, too, between the most expensive neighborhood surveyed of Tribeca and the least expensive of Harlem was relatively narrow in January. A mere (by Manhattan standards) $1,572 a month separated the two neighborhoods’ non-doorman studio averages.

More startling: Parts of brownstone Brooklyn now appear much more expensive than Manhattan.

In 2005, the median monthly rent for Park Slope and Carroll Gardens in Brooklyn was $1,090, according to the Furman Center for Real Estate & Urban Policy at New York University. Now, barely two years later, the Park Slope median is $3,050, according to an analysis of apartment listings for The Observer by research firm StreetEasy.com, and the Lower East Side’s median is $2,700.

Williamsburg, the beachhead 15 years ago of Manhattan migration to Brooklyn, has a median rent of around $2,900, according to the StreetEasy’s analysis, which included over 100 apartment listings in Williamsburg. That would make Williamsburg pricier than not only the Lower East Side, but also Hell’s Kitchen in Manhattan.

Will the Williamsburg-Greenpoint apartment hunter soon look to Hell’s Kitchen and the Lower East Side for deals? Maybe. And maybe soon.

While Manhattan overall does remain more expensive than brownstone Brooklyn—with a median rent in mid-January of around $3,100 versus $2,050—the intimation is there: Manhattan’s rental market likely peaked in 2007, and parts of it will descend (or continue to descend) below parts of Brooklyn. Queens, anyone?

  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Newsvine
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Facebook
  • Stumble Upon
  • Netvibes
  • Windows Live

Comments
Post a comment

Anonymous (not verified) says:

the Brooklyn - Manhattan comparison is not "startling" -- with the maturation of cultural and retail amenities, it is now simply more desirable to live in Park Slope and many areas of Brownstone Brooklyn than it is to live in Hells Kitchen or the Lower East Side.

garbageface (not verified) says:

i would like to see a per-square foot comparison; i would be surprised if the conclusions are the same.

doldrums (not verified) says:

How can this study be taken serioulsy without square foot and outside space comparisons? So if someone rents a townhouse for $7,000 in Brooklyn, the study could compare that to a studio in Hells Kitchen.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

Exactly, we're comparing apples to oranges here (sqft, outdoor space, etc.). Seriously now, who would prefer to live in Brooklyn Vs Manhattan?

Writer's note: I should have included this in my column--the median size of the Manhattan apartments used in the column's median-rent comparison was 900 square feet, and the median size of the Brooklyn apartments used was 920 square feet. So the apartments are comparable in size. - Tom Acitelli

Anonymous (not verified) says:

Stay tuned....Hells Kitchen is still transforming before your eyes. Rents there will continue to escalate well beyond rents in Brooklyn.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

Are you kidding? I'd MUCH rather live in Brownstone Brooklyn than Hells Kitchen (ugh! all those hideous hi-rises) or the LES (ugh! all those douchey bars). Of course it's more expensive.

HMS (not verified) says:

Frankly your comparisons are, for the most part, not valid. The Furman Center numbers for median rent come from the New York City Housing and Vacancy Survey and include all rented apartments. As your report states, the 2008 numbers come from a listing that only includes apartment that are being advertised for rent. So, using your Carroll Gardens/Park Slope example, the median for all apartments that were occupied is $1,090. This includes rent stabilized tenants who have been there for years. It does not include any apartments that are available for rent at current market prices.

Your StreetEasy.com analysis only includes apartments that are vacant and currently available for rent. This group of apartments is always much higher in cost than apartments that have been occupied.

The Furman Center number does not tell you what apartments in Park Slope/Carroll Gardens rented for in 2005. Thus there is no basis for comparison.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

i decided on carroll gardens brooklyn to pay for tranquility, yet quicker access to below 14th street than the UES/UWS/Hell's/Shitdown/etc...

ellen sande (not verified) says:

"Seriously now, who would prefer to live in Brooklyn Vs Manhattan?"

that's what i used to think... *before* i moved to brooklyn.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

Wow, this comments section must be filled with real estate brokers or something. I think the points are valid; if he's talking about young people looking for cheaper rents, square footage means nothing. absolutely. noooooothing. Young people look at $$$, and that's it. They'll live in a shelf with no window for cheap if they have to.

If they can get a cheaper deal in Manhattan they'll take it. and after living in Williamsburg for a few years, trust me, everyone there wanted to stay in Manhattan before they were priced out. Most of the original Williamsburg types moved to Greenpoint, were priced out, and now live in Bushwick. So the point might be moot anyway.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

HMS really seems to know what s/he is talking about. This article is clearly not valid. Of course average Park Slope rents didn't go up from $1k to $3k in two years....the fact that the author used different sets of data for comparison was the tip off that something was wrong, and then HMS filled in the details. Since the author is reading these comments, I'd like to see him respond to that, and maybe try to go back and re-report the story comparing apples to apples.

Anonymous (not verified) says:

A friend of mine decided to move to Manhattan because she couldn't afford the rent in Park Slope!

Post a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.