Ditmas Park Featured In New York Times Real Estate Video

This month the New York Times is featuring Ditmas Park as part of its ongoing Block By Block video series. We can’t help but love seeing beautiful views and hearing how great the neighborhood is. (We might be biased since we were interviewed for the video.)

What do you think of the video? Did the New York Times get Ditmas Park right?

share this story


  1. Well-done overall, and you can’t help but be reminded how wonderful this area is. Nice to see Ron Schweiger there, I’ve enjoyed his walking tours, and love the historic pictures. Quibble: The map shows an area that starts at Beverly and goes south, but features plenty of Prospect Park South shots. More serious quibble: The mention of rising rent skirts but does not mention the DISPLACEMENT of poorer, older, and less educated residents, which is surely occurring. BIG quibble: NO mention of neighborhood schools or houses of worship (why, because Times viewers/readers are presumed to go straight to private school with their young’uns and spend Sunday mornings–or Saturday mornings, if they’re Jewish–relaxing over bagels or going to soccer? Faith communities and education should be CORE to a neighborhood’s identity!) Overall it manages to dial back the very worst NYT Real Estate Section Obnoxiousness (a.k.a. “Columbussing”)…although I’d like to have seen some of the “diversity people” and older white folks on the street get INTERVIEWED, rather than cutting away to them as “local color” (ouch) to illustrate points being made by the hip folks. But then that wouldn’t be Times People Talking to Their Own…
    P.S. I love that hipster guy with his little knobby white knees, being all self-deprecating and self-aware of being a self-parody…how could you hate him, c’mon?

  2. I enjoyed the point about rent prices, they are like “Rent is increasing in the neighborhood which is a good thing…” Yea who doesn’t enjoy skyrocketing rent, paying more for the same thing is always exciting for the consumer smh. Granted rent and home prices going to the moon isn’t isolated to Ditmas Park, its all over NY, but its funny how they tried to make that a positive somehow. I’m sure its great for Realtor which my guess is a large part of their audience

  3. Brenda is right. The video “manages to dial back the very worst NYT Real Estate Section Obnoxiousness,” but that still left plenty of gag-worthy moments.

  4. dunno, find the point on houses of worship somewhat strange. And, as an atheist, quite happy to see them ignored đŸ˜‰

  5. But then I remember when the pre-war apartment buildings and private homes in Flatbush were too expensive for my family. But we visited better-off friends who had three-bedroom apartments with step-down living rooms. . . .

    Those were in what some might call better days, before the 1970s.

  6. It’s a good thing for people who made the commitment years or decades ago to buy a home here and have seen their largest asset increase in value.

  7. I’ve heard money called speech before, and that was odd, but I’ve never heard it called commitment.

  8. I tend to think steadier prices work better than boom and bust cycles but no one really knows where we are in a cycle until after its over, who knows prices could double again from here and we’ll be looking at these like the good ol’ days like I think about 2005 now.

    It’ll be interesting to follow the results of this story as foreign buyers have been generally pushing up home prices across the country in the luxury market and other homes (since homes are priced based on comparable sales) have been pulled up as well. NY Times has a story today “U.S. Will Track Secret Buyers of Luxury Real Estate”, article is worth a read:
    “It is the first time the federal government has required real estate companies to disclose names behind all-cash transactions, and it is likely to send shudders through the real estate industry, which has benefited enormously in recent years from a building boom increasingly dependent on wealthy, secretive buyers.”

    From US Treasury Department: FinCEN Takes Aim at Real Estate Secrecy in Manhattan and Miami

  9. Affluent people often don’t know that they are. Were those who were renting here when you made your “commitment” more affluent, less affluent, or about the same as you? Moreover, adjusted for inflation, would you say that the people getting priced out of the neighborhood are simply choosing not to “commit” somewhere they can afford, or is it that they can’t “commit” anywehre, because they are less affluent than you were way back then?

    I don’t begrudge you your home, as their are certainly many who are more affluent than you, and I’m sure paying off the home was a struggle, but when the median family income in this country is about 55K/year, maybe I was right to point out that your language indicates you’re a bit out of touch? You can think about that next time you walk down Cortelyou – every second person you pass lives in a household that earns less than the median. When I’m assuming that your family likely makes double or triple the median, next time you walk down Cortelyou try thinking about the fact that 9 out of 10 people you pass make less than you.

  10. If they still own a home here thirty years later, they certainly are now. That’s what happens when a large asset increases drastically in value over time.

  11. Indeed. The median US family net worth is about 110K. Own a home here and you have anywhere from 10 to 30 times that. But even if you just have enough for a down-payment on one, you’re way ahead of the median net worth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *