255 W. 84th: A line 30% price drop from 2005! !! can anyone confirm?

The sale in 2005 was 100% a fairly high-floor 8-room, definitely an A-line. I remember the listing on Corcoran (agent: Jenifer Minikes). It was a sponsor sale. As to whether it is on the 11th floor, ACRIS seems to indicate that it was.

A few factors that will throw off your 45-50% peak analogy (I am not a bull, I'd say prices are down 30%+). As West81st has mentioned, 12A is on the top floor with some roof issues. The trouble with top-floor units is that you feel the effects of roof issues BUT you can't fix it immediately as it's up to the board. And boards can work very slowly.

11A was a sponsor, no board approval sale which could have pushed up the price a little. Because it was listed in the high 2s, I suspect there was a bidding war, which is impressive for the dog days of summer.

Still, 12A is solid comp for 11A.

Link to 11A listing http://www.corcoran.com/property/listing.aspx?ListingID=783412&Region=NYC

thanks for the confirmation NYC10023.

i have to say I disagree with your analysis as to why drop from peak is only 30%

1) 11A sold in 2005 for $3.3mm. Suggests it would have sold at least 25% higher -- or closer to $4.2 million in 2007 at the peak. So 2.3 vs. $4.2 is a solid 45% drop.
2) I'm not sure why a top floor would sell for less. In fact, look at where the other 12th floor apartment sold only a few months earlier. I'm not aware of roof problems in this building. Also, roof is quiet -- nobody above!

EEEE1: I don't think #11A would ever have reached $4.2MM. For one thing, by 2007, the latent problems at 255 had turned into assessments, and the building was wrapped in a gigantic Baggie. I guess you can extrapolate a hypothetical 2007 value of $4.2MM from the 2005 sale; but you can't really use that figure as a meaningful basis for comparison with the recent sale of #12A, unless you put several asterisks on the result and limit the analysis to this narrow case.

In that narrow sense, your statements regarding the decline are absolutely correct: The "A" line at 255 is down 30% from 2005, and may very well be down 40-45% from what it would have fetched at peak, had all else remained normal. Just keep in mind that the drop is a combination of market decline and building-specific issues, accentuated by problems specific to #12A.

For what it's worth, the facade work is done and the new "green" roof is nearing completion. There's no end in sight to the assessments, because the building has undertaken more capital projects (dual-fuel boiler and elevators, at least). The Alameda Board might argue that most coops - especially pre-wars - will have to deal with these kinds of issues eventually, and 255 has the advantage of having tackled them proactively at the first sign of serious trouble. I think there's some merit to that devil-you-know argument. Good luck.

EEEE1: You also mentioned the other sale on the 12th floor last spring. I saw #12E before it sold, and it showed beautifully. I don't know whether it was directly affected by the problems upstairs - aside from the economic toll and general inconvenience, which hit the whole building. The worst of the trouble seemed to be concentrated along the south side of 255, away from the east-facing "E" line.

Baggie Smalls.

look at 8B...sold for 1.645M in May 2007, asking 1.395M now, or 15% below peak. Where does it sell?

thanks for the extremely informative comments west81st.

You are right. this isn't a perfect comp because its not the same unit, and it isn't against 2007 peak. Still, big picture, a 30% drop for a similar line against 2005 suggests to me a 40%+ decline for the same unit off of 2007 peak.

I know people who live in this building. At some point in 2006 or 2007 the building started to levy huge assessments. I can't remember exactly what the capital projects were, but I think the building needed all new plumbing. So the 2005 sales were before the buiding's problems were discovered. Anybody can clarify what some of these problems were?

I don't think that 11A would have sold for 4.2m (unrenovated estate sponsor, no park views, okay building) even at the top of the market. I remember being shocked at the 3.3m sale price, as I would have thought it to settle in the mid to high 2s. I think that Argo Residential had a another sponsor 8 on WE (West81, do you remember this?) at around the same time and I don't think it went more than mid-high 2s.

nyc10023: My memory for listings is less vivid than yours; I don't remember that particular apartment. #11A doesn't seem like such a crazy outlier if you look at the sales history for competing lines in the same school zone, like the "A" units at 473 WEA and 490 WEA - keeping in mind that, Broadway address and all, the Alameda is a more impressive building and nobody knew that it was about to start shedding chunks of masonry.

i agree with west 81st street. 11A at 3.3 isn't an outlier.

related thought: when one speaks with agents at places like 473 WEA, they generally tell you that the high-ticks for their units (eg. A line there that sold for $3.6 million) were NOT outliers, so that current price for A line should be higher.

So somebody is wrong: either market is ONLY down 30 to 35%, and those high numbers were outliers, so base for 473s and others should be lower today, OR they weren't outliers, so market should be down 45% to 50% from those numbers.

Whether it's 30-35% (what I think) or 45-50% (what you think), it's a lot. While it has high-end retail on the ground floor and a good provenance, I don't think the Alameda compares to the West End gold coast. It's a minor quibble, but I think that the A-line at the Alameda is a touch below "gold coast" West End buildings. 3 years ago, I don't think people were buying to be in PS9 (?) zone.

A clearer examples of how prices have declined: a potential combo (back to the original 10-room) was marketed fall of '05 for 3.4ish million at 270 West End, 8NE/W, sold within 4 weeks, close to ask. Same units, uncombined, unrenovated with the addition of public hallway space, sold in early '07 for just over 5m. 9N (combined, okay condition) went on market for 5m, no takers. 10NE/W is now on the market for 3.695m.