What would this apartment sell for now?

You looking at 161W86? Been to visit a few times. IMO, offer 2.2m. Place needs a lot of work.

Yes - that's the one. Agree needs a lot of work. Thanks for taking the time to respond.

lp: I saw this apt last spring/summer at an open house....front is ok, but back is downright nasty. I think we threaded this one 2-3 months ago. west81 has some insight I think. This is a total gut job. Some other issue next door or building behind..something, can't remember. This is a major project...will trade real cheap.

The other thing to consider (151 doesn't have this problem) is that this line might lose most of their western light & views. Church next door is not landmarked and wants to sell (though maybe the slump will affect any deals going forward).

It needs a lot of work to bring up to the standard of the apartment that closed 2 years ago.

Also, while it has a lot of rooms, the split 2bed-2bed layout isn't great. And, are you really going to use the dining room as such, given the distance from LR and kitchen.

one sidenote, that broker, kristina has game, maybe she comes with the deal.

K looks better in the airbrushed pic than in real-life. V. pretty and fresh 5 years ago, not so much now.

Aaaaaaahhhhhh . . . .

Finally the inside griff I've been waiting for . . . will try to find the earlier thread you mentioned

10023 seems to have it...It is the Church from memory..You don't want to spend serious scratch and have a bunch of view and light eliminated by some nasty ass Extell building.

What you should really ask yourself is whether a 10-room without threatened views and light in a comparable location can be had for what you are willing to pay for this apartment (add in renovation costs if appropriate)?

nyc123, how do you know that church wants to sell?

I also know the church wants to sell. I grew up on 87th around the corner and have lived w/in 10 or so blocks my whole life. They have been very close to a deal at least once and it has been litigated and argued against but when the financing loosens up, eventually that church will go away. nyc10023 - that's the kind of thing I've been trying to do, and am continuing to evaluate, now with some help from this board.

Many thanks all

http://www.plannyc.org/taxonomy/term/769
http://www.nycago.org/Organs/NYC/html/WestParkPres.html
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E0DE1639F937A15752C0A9659C8B63&fta=y

http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4879

always: I got no skin in this dump, but I think the broker on site at the open house may have told this to me. Wine plays games on memory, but somebody told me the same story 6 months ago

Church has wanted to raze the building for over a decade. The latest version is that there will be a slender 21-storey building on part of the site, right next to 161.

If you have 3m to play with, you want a 4-5 bedroom and it sounds like you don't much care about the school district, there are a TON of choices without the issues of 161.

The LPC has always wanted to landmark the church, and it's a race against time. Given the economy, the church buildings might just be saved. They did vote to preserve one of the 2 stables on Amsterdam Ave. in the 70s (which are far less arch. distinguished than the West Park church). BTW, it doesn't matter if the church has made a deal with developers. LPC trumps all.

Thank you.
A question: what else is NOT landmarked between WEA-Riverside, 86 to 96 streets?

http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/downloads/pdf/maps/riverside_w_end.pdf
http://www.nyc.gov/html/lpc/downloads/pdf/maps/upper_west_side.pdf

combine these 2 maps

There's a narrow strip that kind of runs bet. Columbus & Bway that is not landmarked - that's why they were able to build the Linden (tore down a couple of brownstones) & Harrison (tore down a garage) and also the development on the garage on Bway & 76th. Also note that individual buildings may be landmarked outside the district. Google.

I wrote up 161 West 86th here: http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/3576-open-house-report-5408

We definitely discussed in more depth a few months later, but I'm not sure of the thread.

West81st nailed the real issue with the apartment: "I don’t know how many buyers with this kind of money want to live on this block." As the link liquidpaper provided shows, even at the peak, and even in perfectly-renovated condition, apartments in this building and the identical building next door didn't trade for much. If this were 86th and West and or 86th between Columbus and Central Park it would be a different story--even that small a move would make a big difference. Amsterdam from 86th North is just not attractive.

If you don't mind that location, you still need to consider it deeply for eventual resale value. Take a look at the combination that just went to contract at 50 Riverside. Let's assume it sells for the asking price of $3.6. Combining those two units, both in great shape and a very easy combination, will cost less than renovating 161 West 86th. The apartments will be about the same size. But one of them is in one of the top buildings on the west side, and in an utterly ideal location, while the other is at 86th and Amsterdam.

If you want to renovate that place nicely you are looking at 500k minimum. In this market I don't know if that place sells over $2 million. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, but my suggestion is only buy it if you can get an amazing deal.

happyrenter - I think the renovation costs more than that - I'm using $300/ square foot as an estimate & hoping to bring the job in cheaper than that, but unwilling to be surprised to the upside.

I had always had my eye on 50 RSD as well as a comp. I agree is a better building though I personally don't love the walk to & from RSD in the winter & it was 2nd floor and light is important to us. That said, I recognize it's a useful data point. Assume they wind up moving into that combination for $4.25mn all in. What ought 161 to cost in comparison is how I'm trying to think about it.

If 161 sells for $2mn + $900k to renovate it winds up being +/-30% cheaper. And it also then winds up being +/-15% cheaper than that similar apartment that sold in 151 West 86th that I mentioned when I started this thread.

The comp to 50 RSD sounds pretty comforting to me, the one to 151 bothers me a bit, but I think that $2mn isn't a bad level to be considering 161 seriously. Thanks to all who have helped me along in this process, I gladly welcome everyone's input who's willing to throw it in

I was very interested in the combo at 50 SD (btw, it was the 4th floor, not 2nd). At 11 rooms (with only one of those a maid's) and bigger living and dining rooms, it had 2 more usable large rooms than 161W86. Don't see it as a real comp for 161 - not to mention the level of service, blabla. 161 is simply not priced low enough to have multiple bidders which was the scenario once 50 RSD got chopped to 3.65m.

While the combo at 50RSD was on the 4th floor, the views to the south of brownstones is protected.

nyc 10023 - I agree that $3mn for 161 is not a compelling price. But if it was asking $2mn would you be interested (no I am not the seller)? I think 50 is a good comp in that it should clearly command a premium to 161. 30% sounded like it might be enough to me, but I'm happy to listen, and it sounds like you think perhaps that discount ought to be greater?

liquid,

i agree that $2 million would not be a bad place to consider 161 seriously. but it is asking $3 million right now. if they would take $2 million i don't think you'd be crazy to go for it, but i also don't think it would be a slam-dunk great deal either.

50 RSD was 4th floor as nyc10023 points out, with perfectly lovely brownstone views and a very long southern frontage on a side street. i think it is a great comp for 161 only in the sense that, being the exact same size, somewhat similar layout, and also UWS prewar, it demonstrates how far down 161 needs to go to be a good deal.

nyc10023,

you seem to know a bit about 50 RSD. did it close above the asking price with those multiple bidders?

From Millersamuel - all UWS 4+ bedrooms avg px per square foot since 1989 - and I realize that the category takes into account true luxury (CPW etc) building as well -

$2mn / 3100 would equal $645 per square foot. Back to '96-'97 levels . . . another way I've been trying to get comfortable is with whatever historical data I've been able to come up with.

$3mn / 3100 would equal $967 per square foot. Back to '99 - '00 levels

2007 $2,281.00
2006 $2,170.00
2005 $2,056.00
2004 $1,772.00
20003 $1,412.00
2002 $1,412.00
2001 $1,303.00
2000 $1,199.00
1999 $825.00
1998 $839.00
1997 $699.00
1996 $526.00
1995 $457.00
1994 $633.00
1993 $508.00
1992 $363.00
1991 $427.00
1990 $666.00
1989 $643.00

I don't know where the accepted offer was. I suspect it was close to ask, and I also think the sellers were eager to sell (one was an estate). My feeling is that they just took the strongest bid and ran with as opposed to a "best and final" bidding war scenario. I would have put it an offer at ask, but it wouldn't have been as strong because it would have contained a couple of contingencies.

The main negative for me is that it didn't have the perfect layout as a combo - I don't like having 2 bedroom wings with equal numbers of bedrooms on both ends. I would rather have the master in one corner and 5 bedrooms in the other plus a library + office (2nd kitchen) + eat in kitchen. 161W86 yields only 5 large bedrooms (if you convert 2 maid's into 1 bedroom), no library, no den. Square footage wise, they may be the same size, but 50RSD has 2.5 more rooms.

I suspect that 161W86 would always trade at a discount to the median price/foot whatever timeframe you're looking at. So 2m is more like '00 levels. But never, ever discount the mental and financial costs of doing a gut reno. I've done a few, and it's always exponentially more annoying than you think (and I'm a very mellow type).

I would pay up to 2.5m for 161 if and only if you will not regret it if a better apartment with the same room count in the same neighborhood came on the market at the same price point.

I'm pretty mellow also but not mellow enough not to have those regrets. Re: reno, I never have but have wanted to all my adult life at some point. Interesting point about 161 always trading at discount - I assume thhat means you are taking into account the "niceness" of the building/block etc compared to where the other 4+b/r's were located in a given year. Had not considered that - tku.

If you're truly very mellow and patient, the best way to do a reno is to live in the apartment more or less as is. Then figure out what you want to do. So many times things I considered essential or good turned out to be less optimal because I hadn't lived in the space. And if you are cost-conscious, you have to be on top of the contractor at each and every single step and learn exactly what needs to be done. I've continually been disappointed when I've asked the contractor if XYZ is possible, had agreement (to the point where I was annoying) and then had to change course mid-stream. If only I had done thorough research on every point.

This thread provides telling insight into the emotional agony of bidding. You can spend weeks deciding if the apartment is worth $2M to you, and after all that, once you bid, the owner will probably tell you to go jump in a lake.

a little off topic, but the apartment used belonged to Carolyn Goodman before she passed away. NYers of a certain age will remember her as Andrew Goodman's mother. He grew up in that apartment.

http://www.andrewgoodman.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Goodman

A million stories in this city...