how important is view ? vs space

A view makes a space more valuable, but the best view cannot compensate for bad space.

Size matters of course, but it's not always about the biggest. How it's used is just as important. Anything pleasant to the eyes will add to the experience. The more senses are involved the better. ;)

The space can be reconfigured, designed, etc., while the view is forever. Protected view commands a big premium. Just check the listings. But protected is the key word.

view DEFINITELY,

it's like asking which will hold better a 1BR in Brooklyn or a studio in midtown Manhattan. You really don't need as much space as you need unless you're obese or carry spawn.

once you start living in a smaller space (with better view/location) you'll realize how much better your life is.. less clutter, shorter commute to work, MUCH easier to meet up w/ friends since you're in the thick of things (no LIRR/Astoria train, etc) and i notice views/location generally trumps space for general brief droppage.

nothing like doggy with the Hearts building as your supporting actor.

I am debating about the same thing right now. If you have one baby and buy a condo, would you choose 900sq (2B/1B) with river view or 1100sq (2B/2B) with partial river view?

Correction: 1000 sq (2B/1B) v. 1100 sq. (2B/2B)

two different units in the same building?

If you cramp yourself into an apartment with insufficient space, you will be far more miserable than living in an apartment with a bad view. Especially if you are a family with kids.

I'd say space over view, provided the apartment has light.

I'll never again live in a space where I can't look out the window and see the sky. Give me high ceilings and big windows (or, even better, skylights), and I'll happily take a 10-20% reduction in space for more light.

The view is not always guaranteed unless it's in a really high floor! Need to find out if any potential construction that could block your view.

It is a condo in Riverside Blvd. One is facing the river and the other is facing the south looking at the condo. The one facing the south has partial river view and gets lots of light (skylight). Any suggestion?

Look at ACRIS. Past price differences should hold. Square footage being the same, the better view may sell quicker, but not at the best price. Long story short, buy the one that you like most and don't worry so much what other people want. If it makes you happy, then it will most likely do the same for someone else.

Anna, if it were me i'd go with the 1100 square feet. 900 square feet is tight for a family.

You are right, Riversider. I guess I should stop worrying about the resale thing as RE is not only an investment but also my dwelling for my family. Thanks.

I agree with rs. they both have light and the larger one has at least some of the view. the second bathroom and the space might not seem like much now but if you find yourselves there for a number of years, particularly if you have another child before moving is feasible, the space will matter. of course that's assuming that the additional space does add value. some floorplans are efficient, others not so much.

Riverside, as corrected above it is between 1000sq with one bath and 1100sq with two bath. Do you still think two bath is better right? (I am planning to live at least 6/7 years with one kid now and two kids in 3/4 years).

*7 years in total (first 3 years with one kid and next 4 years with two kids)

With kids, a second bath and 10% more space wold seem to come in more handy than a picture of the river, but this is something you need to decide on your own.

Anna, One thing to watch for is junior fours being marketed as a two bedroom. Check the floorplan and make sure both are true two bedrooms. Most two bedrooms will have two baths, at least in good luxury buildings.

Becky, its a good question. For myself, the only view that I would really like is a water view as opposed to a city view or a view of the park. But moving to the Caribbean will have to wait. :)
My husband can't stand any window view where you look directly at a brick wall. Nearly every broker that I've met talks about the apartment view even if IMO there is no view. One broker told me that there was a view of Central Park and all you could see out the window were 2 trees in the distance which I'm guessing were part of Central Park. :) If you have a terrace or outdoor space, it might compensate for a poor view. I do agree with LAD on the importance of having light in the apartment. A dark apartment would be much worse than one with a poor view.

In some ways it is similar to maintenance: as long as it falls within "acceptable bounds" you don't have a huge problem. But a great space in a basement with virtually no windows or light, it's going to be hard to get rid of. Same for a pseudo penthouse (i.e. no outdoor space, just on the top floor) on the 40th floor with views in every direction: if you have a space which is just plain god awful small and poorly laid out, you're going to have a problem with that, too. Generally, there are 5 things which trade off against each other at a given price point. Sometimes you only get 2 of those 5 because both are really important to you, sometimes you get 3, rarely you get 4, and you almost never get 5 - without going up in price level. (Another way of stating it is there are 6 elements, one of them being price);
1) Location
2) Building (tenement on one end of the spectrum, posh luxury ultra-service "name" building on the other)
3) Space
4) Light/view
5) "X" factors - 14 foot ceilings, outdoor space, skylights, high end finish, etc

In the instant case, I will play Devil's advocate and say that for resale value, it depends an awful lot on what's going on in the market at that time: if there are a HUGE number of units on the market, having a poor view can really hurt you , because everyone can find another 2BR/1 BA unit (or MANY such units), and you always end up as "odd man out", whereas a 2 BR / 1 BA with really great view - odds are that even with an overstocked market, it will be the only, of one of very few such units, and you'll find that it may not be a family who buys it, but a single/couple who want a guest room, office, etc. so the 2nd bath is nice, but the spectacular view is irreplaceable. (NB: based on the description given later in the thread, the amount of space, or even the space as a whole, isn't the big plus of the inferior view apartment, it's the second bath. Similarly, it doesn't sound - the way it is being described - that there is that huge a difference in light/view).

But as far as the buyer's situation here, I find it hard to live with one bathroom as a couple. I can't imagine having ANY kids and only one bath, much less TWO. I think there is a reasonable likelihood that THIS buyer will do another sale and purchase of a new apartment well before the stated schedule if they buy a 1 bath unit for a family of 4.

Trump Place is known for over-sized windows. Most residences , even those units without Post Card views of the River or Riverside Park tend to be well lit. In Manhattan very few buildings can lay claim to that due to their proximity to other buildings.

lad said:

>> I'd say space over view, provided the apartment has light.

>> I'll never again live in a space where I can't look out the window and see the sky. Give me high ceilings and big windows (or, even better, skylights), and I'll happily take a 10-20% reduction in space for more light. <<

I think lad has it about right, and 30yrs_RE_20_in_REO's posting flushes things out a bit further analytically.

I really think there's a threshold (maybe think of a bell curve?) past which the view is "good enough" to not have it be a huge impediment to an apartment showing well. The minimum view that I would consider to be satisfactory (at least for someplace I intend to stay a while) includes either: 1) SOME glimpse of sky, or 2) no sky but a very charming view (interesting building opposite or view of some trees perhaps) plus enough reflected "light" (I use the term loosely) to keep the apartment from feeling like it is entirely within shadow.

My description above incorporates some less-than-perfect elements as acceptable. Instances include having a nice amount of sky but also having ugly roof-top stuff to look at from adjacent buildings; tiny bits of sky, ugly roof-top stuff, plus a couple of trees (my current view). My unit itself is mostly in shadow much of the day, but I usually can get the sense of a bit of light reflected off of a nearby white brick building, plus there are the trees about at my eye-level from a next-door rowhouse's tiny yard.

So, to sum up, I can overlook some negatives as long as I have at least one positive thing to hang my hat on. To my mind, climbing above the all-airshaft/brick wall threshold puts the unit into decent marketability territory for Manhattan.

P.S. It also dawns on me that there are always people in Manhattan in the "works-all-the-time" crowd whose hours are long enough that they don't spend a huge amount of time in their units in daylight. Now, the question is whether the number of those people outstrips the number of otherwise-nice but poor-light units. Not sure what the answer is on that one.

anotherguy --

Speaking as somebody who works long hours, I can say that when I am NOT in the office, I most certainly like seeing the sun. I don't want to go home only to feel that I'm in a dungeon, regardless of how beautifully the dungeon is renovated.

no offense ephraim, but as someone who gets the opportunity to appreciate the sun outside of the office, you are not in the "works-all-the-time" crowd.

"I'll never again live in a space where I can't look out the window and see the sky."

WORD.

"I'll never again live in a space where I can't look out the window and see the sky."

While I understand the sentiment, I can think of examples which would be acceptable to almost anyone even though this didn't hold. The best example I can think of is an apartment which overlooks the gardens of many brownstones, has a great view of the beautiful gardens, plenty of light, but unless you go right up to the windows and look up, you don't see any sky.

I dont need a view and value space more. That said, selling an apartment without a view is more difficult, because most people think they need a view. Good light is very important though.

To me, Manhattan is all about the view. U want space then move to Montana. Also, forget space, LAYOUT is KING.

when I was single, a view was nice. now that I have kids, space is more important. to each his own, right? and maybe I will move to montana, I think I can live for 50 years there on 1 year's worth of my taxes in manhattan. oh well, I will have to live without sushi delivery.

definitely go for the bigger space. both light and sound/noise issues trump view, and yes layout trumps space. and don't forget your home should work for you, not JUST for resale value. good luck!

I'd take space over view. Space and location. Rather be in a great location with a great space than a small space and crappy location with magnificent views.

"To me, Manhattan is all about the view."

No, its not. Manhattan is about getting out of your fing apartment and doing something, not looking at life from afar. Thats what Jersey City and LIC are for.

"U want space then move to Montana. Also, forget space, LAYOUT is KING."

I don't care how you lay out 300 square feet, its still tiny.

For me, space + layout + not horrible view > great view, ok space + layout

its all about degrees. Saying "x is more important than y" in these cases doesn't actually say much... its really how much of one one would give up for the other. If its 2% less space for the view, of course, no matter if space is "more important" to you.

aifamm and others are more on the right track...

"To me, Manhattan is all about the view."

You don't LIVE inside your VIEW. I don't care how great the view is, if you're sleeping on top of your refrigerator at night it's pure hell. (I hear many cells on Rikers Island have some magnificent Manhattan views, but I certainly wouldn't want to live there.)

***

"forget space, LAYOUT is KING"

Agree with somewhereelse ... when you get below 700 square feet or so, tiny is tiny no matter how it's laid out.

Thanks and interesting to see everyone's viewpoints....Some of you have said that it does just come down to personal choice, and what I am will to live with, I am starting to agree with that, rather than worrying about the resale market of my apt. I've lived in a small space for so long, that space seems to be winning me over. Space with light. As far as view, if the urge strikes, I guess I can always hit the roofdeck. ;)

Most people will say space as opposed to view b/c most people have space but don't have any view. I've been to huge mansions in the hamptons/long island with all the space you could possibly need but nothing in the world can compete with a spectacular view of the big apple. MANY people have space but only a FEW own a Manhattan view.

Having moved so much I always always always buy with resale in mind. Heed the advice of 30yrs 5 step program. If a view will set you apart from the crowd, then that's step 1 -er 4. Keep in mind also that 1200sf without view can live about as large as 1000sq with. It's not all about the numbers all the time. Give me 750ml of Napa cab over a gallon of Lonesome Charlie any day.

You can own a Manhattan view in NJ.... location and space trumps view.

Many of the comments here seem to reflect a bias toward particular apartment types, and apartments and building-types typically found uptown or FiDi/BPC (or, as someone above said, in the outer borough or NJ -- as one of my old professors said "it is the view of Manhattan that you can't get from Manhattan"). There are quite few townhouses with a view, and equally few apartments with a view in any of the many hundreds of low rise buildings that dominate Chelsea, Gramercy, Soho, Tribeca, the village or LES. And, real lofts with a "view" of anything are rare indeed.

I think space is the greatest luxury that exists in Manhattan. I have lovely view of the harbor for 12 hours a day in my office, I have no need for it at home, and my dog can't chase tennis balls in the view.

Unless of course it's a Trump view. in which case space trumps tiki bar and hot rock massage cabana.

All depends on if you have kids (or not). Try telling your kids they're gonna' have an awesome view but they have to have their bedroom in the living room 'cause there just isn't enough space,

> nothing in the world can compete with a spectacular view of the big apple

Not correct.

Having a view of the big apple can't compete with LIVING IN the big apple.

> MANY people have space but only a FEW own a Manhattan view.

Yes, but even fewer have space in Manhattan.

> You can own a Manhattan view in NJ.... location and space trumps view

Bingo.

Looking at manhattan is nice, but a small fraction of what being there is.

food or water?

paper or plastic?
chicken or egg?

oil or cream?

Anna,
Of course in a fantasy world, you should have BOTH space and view. But if you plan to have a child then having one bathroom vs 2 bathrooms will make a difference betwn surviving vs. suffering. You can always sleep double decker and use pull out couches......but you can't have 2 people on the toliet at the same time. Also, what if someone drops by to visit. Who gets to use the bathroom first? And of course,later on in life.... grown ups (eg: you) may also want privacy when they shower without children going in and out.

For me it's space - I need light however.

After a while you won't be amazed by the view, but your guest will be.

As 30yrs posted

>(Another way of stating it is there are 6 elements, one of them being price);
1) Location
2) Building (tenement on one end of the spectrum, posh luxury ultra-service "name" building on the other)
3) Space
4) Light/view
5) "X" factors - 14 foot ceilings, outdoor space, skylights, high end finish, etc<

THat was the value for me renting in manhattan the last 12 years. Ive experienced varying measures on the above factors to now ascribe values that are more or less important to me in my sales search.

THere is no right 1 answer for everyone on the scales of value. But these are the base points to consider.

One needs to think in terms of price per sq ft. If the light is the same, view only adds 10-30% per sq ft depending on the view. For example, apartments located on CPW in the same building may have a price difference of upto 30% assuming the light is the same.

zddv

I feel like the one thing nobody has brought up (I am a real estate agent who works in the same firm as 30_yrs) is that if you are trying to take a stab at predicting resale valuation, the submarket you're in --- in this case the building -- matters. For example, the Orion at 350 West 42nd street is mostly a view tower; it's not like people are clamoring to live near the Port Authority. So the difference between a view apartment and a non-view apartment in the Orion, in terms of resale, is greater than it might be in other buildings.

You mentioned Riverside Blvd. -- since I don't in general think of that as a neighborhood with a lot of convenience and services, I think having a view would be more important over there in terms of resale than it would be if you were, say, on Riverside Drive in the 80s.

That said, for the sake of your happiness for the next five years, I would take the two bath, and just give yourself a little longer on the other end to sell and accept the fact that your upside is somewhat capped.

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

"I feel like the one thing nobody has brought up ... is that if you are trying to take a stab at predicting resale valuation, the submarket you're in --- in this case the building -- matters."

You know, I REALLY meant to make that point as part of my example of "it depends an awful lot on what's going on in the market at that time:": the "in a large projects like RSB, Lincoln Towers, etc." part somehow got stuck somewhere between my brain and my fingers and didn't make it down "on paper". But I agree with Ali that you have to take that into account much more depending on building, or in some cases location (like BPC).