392 CPW | New Yorks Best Kept Secret

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/16244-park-west-village

was the bedbug issue solved? did that 2 bedroom sell at auction last year?

very interesting complex! do all units have a parking space included?

wonder whether this set of buildings was a middle class project (kind of like Stuyvesant Town-Peter Cooper Village downtown)

Your joking right? These four buildings are incongruous with their environment (mostly prewar -- certainly along CPW), bordered to the North by a series of housing projects, and, in a relative sense, only recently out of their own Mitchell Lama status (making the residents a frustrated mix of different SESes). Further, of the four, 392 is probably the worst of the four buildings: 372 and 400 are on the Park and 382 is at least on 97th rather than 100th (directly opposite the projects).

Even for those who want postwar spaces and amenities, there are better options out there.

> recently out of their own Mitchell Lama status

exactly! it has the looks of a project (though a middle class one). who on earth do the residents get the subsidized deal and then try to flip it for a million bucks!? unless they pay a ton in flip taxes, it seems to me that current residents want to pocket a RE lottery win.

"If you have moved into an apartment in 784, 788 or 792 Columbus Avenue, there is a strong possibility that you are being overcharged.
These buildings are covered by the New York State Rent Stabilization Law which requires landlords to follow a specific formula when setting new rents following an apartment vacancy. The owners of Park West Village have a history of overcharging new tenants by inflating the costs of apartment renovations"

this is from the tenant association:
http://www.pwvta.org/

what does it mean? are most of the 7 buildings filled up with renters or are they owners that don't live there? are the owners beginning to try to sell vacant apartments... so that the project is beginning to transition from rent controlled to market rate ownership?

OMG!!--A 3 Bedroom on CP!!--it's A STEAL at 1.799M$! . . . for the seller!

ok, after reading a little i got it. 20% of the apartments remain rent stabilized, the condo conversions happened in 1987 and 1991. funny, those were RE crash years!

> OMG!!--A 3 Bedroom on CP!!--it's A STEAL at 1.799M$! . . . for the seller!

but not even that. the stuff i've read says that the project only has studios, 1 bedrooms and 2 bedrooms. there are NO 3 bedrooms...

"but not even that. the stuff i've read says that the project only has studios, 1 bedrooms and 2 bedrooms. there are NO 3 bedrooms..."

Correct, the largest original apartment is a 2 BR 2Bath with a small dining area that measures UNDER 1200 SF.

read the brochure that's available online. what a pity that this project was built!!! they turned down brownstones, moved out 11k people... to accommodate 5k people within 7 ugly designed buildings!? what were they thinking?

guess that back in the day (late 1950s) brownstones weren't greatly appreciated.

As a pont of clarification, most buildings in this area were cold water flats and not the beautiful Brownstones one thinks of as they wander in other parts of the Upper west side%u2026
I drive down 10th avenue in Hells Kitchen and envision that was probably closer to the aesthetics of what once stood in the area. In addition, dread the thought of ever being subjected to the living conditions that existed. I wonder if they had not torn down those buildings, would this neighborhood look like the south facing block of 96th street between Broadway and Amsterdam???%u2026. hummm, I say good riddance. Too bad they missed a few buildings along the way.
I thank the visionarys like Robert Moses who have really tranformed this city to what it is today included Riverside Park, Henry Hudson Parkway and 372/382/392/400 CPW...

Designed in 1960 by Skidmore, Owings and Merril, CPW Towers, aka Park West Village, emerged as one of NYC’s finest examples of “Towers-In-A-Park” urban planning. The landscape includes elegantly maintained private grounds filled with shade trees, strolling areas and children’s play spaces. On the premises is a wonderful health club, modern laundry facilities, storage facilities, and a parking area. Convenient mass transit leaves you minutes from anywhere in New York City.

Description provided by Maria Cangiano & Lauren Cangiano

rsm321 said: "392 is probably the worst of the four buildings: 372 and 400 are on the Park and 382 is at least on 97th rather than 100th (directly opposite the projects)"

Speaking for myself, I would much rather have a south-facing apartment in 392 CPW (with park views and over 1 block of open space (a tree-filled parking lot), meaning good sunlight, between me and the next building), than a south-facing building on 97th Street.

And regarding those projects -- I've walked around that area plenty of times at night. Never had a problem.

This is a nice complex now overshadowed by the monstrous Columbus Square project. The apartments allow for plenty of light and the spaces, though none larger than 1200 sf unless units are combined, make the most of the size. The downside are the conditions of the buildings themselves; they are old, have very slow elevator service, unsightly unairconditioned hallways, units are air conditioned by leaky window units, terraces often need upkeep as do the plumbing in the buildings and leaks throughout the structures. As stated, the best are 372 and 400 with 392 and, lastly 382 the two least desirable. They sell at a pretty high $ despite the downsides I mentioned because of the park location and low carrying charges.

JVORD10: Are you a broker trying to advertise your listings?? Is that the only reason for this posting?? Also, I believe the prices listed are "ASK" prices only, NOT the actual sales prices.

I, also, would like to know if they solved the bedbug issue. Also, as of last year, I believe the sponsor still owned alot of apartments in that building. Isn't the sponsor also involved in another complex farther uptown that defaulted on their debt last year? That was in the newspaper. He does NOT have a good reputation. Hopefully, he won't default on any of his obligations in this building!

Also, in the past, I looked at apartments in that building and noticed that there are ONLY 2 elevators for the entire building (I think over 400 apartments). I had to wait awhile for an elevator and would be very concerned if they ever need to take one of the elevators out for maintenance or repair.

Also, NOTADMIN: I believe the 2 bedroom sold at auction last year after a 2nd try. It sold cheaply (in the mid 800's), but the apartment needed a complete gut renovation and faced the new building. Also, no one was available to answer any questions about the taxes/charges (the amt listed in the paper seemed VERY high for the building, so may have included back payments). I tried calling 3 times and got no response. So, I gave up.

Hi KAR3F: I am not a broker I am a unit owner%u2026 The bed bug issue affected less then 2% of the of the buildings apartments at 392CPW and the management took immediate action containing the situation and completely eradicating the bed bugs in the building.
392 CPW has 2 sets of elevators, 4 in total serving 9 units per floor. The elevators were recently updated, reconfigured making the them high speed and computer controlled and ADA compliant.

As I understand, sponsor units in this building are less then 23%; making it very attractive to financial institutions to invest and not held by the same owner as the Rental buildings on Columbus Ave. A majority of the sponsor units continue to be renovated and sold and a high percentage of the rental units serve the Columbia University population.

Common charges and Taxes are extremely low making 392 CPW a very attractive property to purchase.

Hi ephraim2: I disagree with your statement, of the four buidlings 392CPW has the strongest finacials and a large reserve. The landscaping is beautifully kept and because we are not directly on 97th street, it is quiet and you feel as if it is an extension of the Park which is a rare find for New York City.
As for the projects across the street, Whole Foods and 808 is about equal distance to 392CPW where they are charging as much as $14,000.00 per month rent. The beauty of living in NY is the ability to celebrate such diversity within 1 city block not found anywhere else in these United States of America.

A testament of which of the four buildings would be better to live in; look up, look at the balconies and that will be a reflection of who your neighbors will be.
On Another note, I have noticed of the four buildings, 392CPW is the only building planting trees.

These are nice, middle class apartments. They are not luxury level or million dollar plus apartments. At least not in my opinion.

> Also, NOTADMIN: I believe the 2 bedroom sold at auction last year after a 2nd try. It sold cheaply (in the mid 800's), but the apartment needed a complete gut renovation and faced the new building. Also, no one was available to answer any questions about the taxes/charges (the amt listed in the paper seemed VERY high for the building, so may have included back payments). I tried calling 3 times and got no response. So, I gave up.

well done karf! 800s for a project above 96th is truly aspirational. these are not large apartments btw, they are just livable imho. the bubble had made young people put up with tiny barely livable apartments, it's time for that to change. buyers willing to put half a million or more for a property should be getting way much more value in terms of quality of layouts, light and lack of noise.

Hi Bronx Boy, you are absolutely right, particularly because in NYC Middle Calls is considered those making above $125,000.00 and less then $500,000.00 and luxury apartments start at $2000.00 per sq ft.

> NYC Middle Calls is considered those making above $125,000.00 and less then $500,000.00

but there's a total lack of livable places in the $300-$500k range, so those that earn say $125k-$200k/year are priced out of Manhattan unless they rent. but they could still buy something in bronx or queens.

jvord,
These are worth in the $700 to $800 psf in my opinion. But others will pay more.

sometimes secrets are well kept for a reason. Often, because they're a crock of sh*t.

notadmin said: "these are not large apartments btw, they are just livable imho."

Well, here's an over 900 sq ft 1BR in 392 CPW, with a nice 25-foot living room, dining room, southern exposure, balcony with a Central Park view and four walk-in closets:

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/475011-condo-392-central-park-west-upper-west-side-new-york

And here are examples of other "standard" UWS 1BRs in more recent construction, all of which are about the same boring layout with about 2/3 the space.

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/533074-condop-2373-broadway-upper-west-side-new-york
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/514794-condo-275-west-96th-street-upper-west-side-new-york
[I'll post another two links in my next post ... SE refused the post. ]

Which layout do you prefer? And would you please point me to ANYTHING on the UWS that is about a half million and has "quality of layouts, light and lack of noise" to your preference and comparable to the 392 CPW apartment I linked to above?

[ Another two small UWS standard 1 BRs ]

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/536317-condo-215-west-95th-street-upper-west-side-new-york
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/539505-condop-250-west-89th-street-upper-west-side-new-york

renting is obviously better ephraim2, these 7 buildings in fact include 20% of rent stabilized apartments for rent. the financially smart thing to do is to grab those units, not these overpriced purchases. just my 2 cents.

I recently tried to buy an apartment in the building. There are many great things I like about the building but several banks (including Citibank) will not lend to the building. Will likely cost you a higher rate to get financing.

UWS9: You might want to go with Wells Fargo or JP Morgan Chase, we had no problem financing and had a great rate too.

I am looking at renting a studio in the bldg. Their studio apartments are selling for $500k which is crazy high..they rent for under $2k. They look like stuy town but the rooms are large.

UWS9: If you post your email address, I'll get you the name of a rep at a real bank (with good "normal" bank rates) who can do the deal for you, assuming your personal finances are acceptable.

thanks for the replies but I chose to pass on the apartment... more than just the mortgage rate (although the number of sponsor owned was a real issue for several banks)

UWS9, no problem. You are correct that the number of sponsor units is an issue for many banks, however there are a handful of real (i.e. national, large) banks for whom that is not an issue because the building's finances are excellent and the reserve fund is huge. Best of luck in your search for a home.

These were never Mitchell Lama buildings, only rent stabilized. The apartments are large by Manhattan standards, as stated 1 bds as large as 900 sqft plus balcony. There is also a 640 sqft studio. 2bds are 1200 sqft plus balcony.

The buildings are cut into 2 sides with 2 elevators per side, there is no access to the other side unless you go to the basement or roof. Therefore 100 apartments per elevator. The hallways are un-airconditioned and there are no service elevators, major problem for move outs and move ins, also when collecting the trash.

Plenty of light and air, and the best apartments in 372 & 382 are facing North, quiet and views of the park. Best apartments in 392 & 400 face south. Parking is limited and there is always a waiting list.

Any rent stabilized apartments are owned by a major realty firm and never come to market, they are renovated and sold when they become empty.

Being above 86th street, east of Bway is the major disadvantage, along with unattractive exteriors and huge buildings, leading to security concerns due to the multiple entrances for each building. Really needs 2 doormen per building to have really security but that would raise the maintenance.

Pros and cons just like any other building.

The apartments command a higher price due to the low maintenance and real estate taxes.

> The apartments command a higher price due to the low maintenance and real estate taxes.

or due to seller's aspirational pricing?