The 505

If closings already started at this building, how come there's only one actual closing? It's from about a week ago.

Holy rentals Batman! Just noticed this. One rental as of yesterday, two as of today -- what's going on here? One was listed by the selling agent and the other by another agency.

You can't get more than 50% in financing for contracts signed in the end of '07 or beginning of '08 in this building since market values dropped by close to 20% since than.

Update on the battle at the 505, a project that was marketed just before the peak in prices:

http://curbed.com/archives/2009/08/31/hells_kitchen_developer_to_buyers_sue_and_youll_lose.php

Of course, no one knew for sure that RE and the economy would have this hard a crash. I wish you guys who signed contracts on the 505 all the luck in the world in getting some concessions from the developer.

I still stand by my comments from last year -- good and bad -- about the project and the area. I did practically beg people to really learn about the street and neighborhood, and I think it's positive that despite the economic downturn, I'm not aware of any pickup in crime or signs of distressed landlords letting their upkeep deteriorate.

I had a bad gut feeling about the pricing of the units -- it seemed they were priced based on aggressive anticipated appreciation -- because the neighborhood was non-prime in several important ways. But I think the developers were just super, super lucky that they could hit that psychologically important "$1000 per sq foot" mark for new construction (a data point that poster after poster here was in awe of).

But I'm no psychic, but I just have a really good feeling that if the buyers stick together, they can do something to get the developer to split some of the difference between the enormous profits they'd make if they got 2007 prices and the appropriate 2009 pricing now. It just would be foolish business to foster extensive litigation just to force the pain onto the buyers, when clearly it's pure luck that the building came online for marketing when it did, and not just 3 months later.

* * *

Just for reference, some of the old postings:

>> anotherguy about 13 months ago
If you're thinking long term, and are patient, I think it'll be fine. But this is still a bit of a fringe area, with five blocks to the north and five blocks to the south each much better areas, IMHO.

These nearby buildings (one block to the south) seem to me to be typical. Prices have softened in the past year or so, and I don't think they're through. So I question whether the pullback in values is over, and I think as a fringe area, it is fairly vulnerable right now.

In age, these are a few years further along in the same area. (See a few months earlier in this thread for more discussion of the differences.) http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/516-west-47-street-manhattan
http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/building/517-west-46-street-manhattan

>> airahcaz about 13 months ago
Furthermore, there are less than a handful of 1 bedrooms remaining, building is preconstruction and all sold. 100+ people got it wrong? I don't think we are debating whether to buy here or not anymore?

>> anotherguy about 13 months ago
All I'm saying is you should really get to know the street. I'm guessing the 100+ people were most entranced by the low price per square foot. Just feel comfortable with what you're --> getting <-- for your money, right now, and not based on your hopes for where the neighborhood is going.

Any news on this building? How many have closed? How many still available? What the developer is doing with respect to concessions? The litigation?

The closings are listed on this site - about 1/2 dozen recorded so far with more each week. The developer is not giving concessions. Why should he? The prices were pre-construction with signed contracts. The law suit is frivolous - stupid at best and greedy at worst. Imagine a new construction developer suing for additional profits when markets are good and property values increase by time of close. Also the building is quality and the comps still show value above other offerings in the neighborhood.

And all the relistings? What's going on there? Are these units that purchasers are backing out of or units that were held back? Are they still marketing at 90% sold even though more listings come up each week? Does anyone know what these are?

Miestogo - have you seen the inside of the building? How do you know it is quality?

I have been in the building several times. It is quality construction but you can see that for yourself if you visit. Specifically, quality masonry, thick walls, good choice of materials, etc. Since I commented we've seen additional closings as well as some re-listing. My guess is you'll see about 10-15% re-listing due to mortgages being denied. A lot has changed in the mortgage approval process and required financial health since people bought pre-construction on pre-approval letters in different times. I don't know for certain if this is the case but you can always call the broker and read his spin as best you can.

yes the constrution is good, but can you justify the over 1100 a square foot price in todays market.?

Everyone has to make their own choices based on area comps, etc. I think it all depends on the economy or in New York more specifically on the stock markets. If we continue to see decent markets, then the price is probably worth it. Manhattan real estate is not for the faint-hearted :)

See Real Deal on buyers filed with AG of New York.
http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/fighting-buyer-mutiny

What is taking the AG so long to make a decision, particularly at the Rushmore where there are so many people involved?

Thousands of applications, and overworked, understaffed attorneys.

The the developers for real that they have relisted units and successfully made sales? What lender is giving mortgages in this building with 50% litigation?

BofA

And how does that work? How are they able to oversee the litigation and give financing in a building that appears to be minimally occupied?

Re: lenders -- try Citi as well. I don't think "minimally occupied" is completely accurate, given that the building is over 20% closed. Could have been worse, though at the peak this building had ~90% in contract. There are some ways to go, though judging from apparently strong open house volume that may change.

again, i'm no attorney, but just my impressions on the real deal article: some sort of out-of-court settlement is the best deal for all involved, regarding the ILSA (Interstate Land Sales Act) claims. and that means the developers giving something back to the buyers. not 100% back, but SOME concession.

i mean, if the builders want to hold the buyers to the letter of the law -- their contracts -- yet want to argue that they shouldn't be held to the letter of all the laws the buyers can point to -- like ILSA -- just seems like foolishness. and from the article, the buyers' best defense is that, "uh, the law was too obscure and inconvenient for us to know about?" good luck with that.

do i think the buyers will get a price break to put them in line with current market values for their units? no. do i think the developers will and should have to give back some of the difference between contract price at the time of signing and what the units would fetch now? yup.

i just hope the buyers have a serious street-fighter style litigation specialist for an attorney. this won't be gentlemanly.

Very simple. Developers have to acknowledge current market conditions, and buyers (or buyers already in contract) have to be more realistic and manage expectations. Unless both parties accept that 1) these units won't sell at 2007 prices [developer] and 2) these units aren't so impaired that they are worth 25%+ less [buyer], there will be no happy medium...

Discounts shown on recent closings seem to be fair.

Anyone know the latest with the litigation? The building? Doesn't seem to be a lot of closings, but the building looks complete. Also, the rentals aren't looking good either. They have been listed for a long time. Anyone have any insight as to whether the developer is negotiable? Does do they want to get the units off their hands, or will they just go all rental?

Building is complete, amenities in place. Slow pace of closings, but closings occurring nonetheless. Some rentals are being listed by actual unit purchasers, others by developer/broker. From what I hear, developer is negotiable -- all rentals probably not the ideal/priority here. I also hear from other brokers that contracts are out on some units being returned from the litigation, some at slightly higher prices. They are in the process of expanding (new project on far West 42nd street) so developer insolvency is not a concern either.

Buyers expecting 30% off and developers willing to give up to 8% (see prices listed here). Anyone see a problem? Both parties have to be realistic. Personally, I think 30% off a Manhattan new construction condo is absurd and an expectation for the uninformed but...c'est la vie.

maverick: "Personally, I think 30% off a Manhattan new construction condo is absurd and an expectation for the uninformed but...c'est la vie."

I see your point, but I think the issue is that this is a seriously non-prime neighborhood by some important metrics (distance from train, proximity/variety of services, issues with critical mass of gentrification). If a deep discount is going to be realistic, it's in a place like this.

But, indeed, it's a waiting game.

i think 30% off is perfectly reasonable. the bubble is burst

I count 27 closings since August. Many are at no discount. The biggest discount I see off of "last ask" is 8%. It seems buyers are more or less sucking it up and paying close to contract or walking away.

Another interesting data point is what is going on in the rentals:

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/601674-rental-505-west-47th-street-clinton-new-york
12/04/2009 Listed by Citi-Habitats at $3,950
12/10/2009 Price decreased by 6% to $3,695
01/08/2010 Price decreased by 3% to $3,595

http://streeteasy.com/nyc/rental/600316-condo-505-west-47-street-clinton-new-york
11/27/2009 Listed by Realty within Reach at $2,900
12/07/2009 Price decreased by 7% to $2,700
01/13/2010 Price decreased by 8% to $2,475

That's quite a bit of quick price chopping.

Another guy: Midtown West is not a prime neighborhood for discount by ANY means -- there is too much visible upside on the Far West Side of Manhattan as compared to other areas that are more appropriately described as a place befitting of a "deep discount." You want deep discount? Look at Harlem, FiDi to start. If you want to quantify you can -- and use a simple unadjusted price per square foot of recent closings and compare. If the area is indeed ripe for a deep discount, you would see this at least start to be priced in. The small discounts I've seen at this building and some others in the neighborhood are fair IMO. I'm not sure distance from train is as applicable here as a building on 12th avenue, and if you are questioning proximity/variety of services you clearly do not know the neighborhood too well.

Whoever thinks 30% off is "perfectly reasonable" doesn't understand simple economics -- if it WAS perfectly reasonable then you would see sales hit with that type discount and there wouldn't be support at 4-7% off (which this building has had). 30% off would paint a more catastrophic scenario, and one would be foolish to bet house money on a claim like that.

As for the rentals...unless you've been living under a rock it's pretty much old news that the rental market is weakening in NYC so the price chopping is not surprising -- the rate at which the units are being discounted is. However, too many variables to make this a valid argument as I know of a couple people using units at this building as an investment property and attempting to rent out. Rapid price cuts make me think desperation vs. logical pricing.

Wake up. Whether you like it or not there is a type of manifest destiny that's been on the minds of developers (and the government) to get development over to the Hudson River - it will happen (finite supply), it's just a matter of when. Downturn considered, the discounts are fair.

Maverick, are you a broker or in contract for a unit?

Freewilly - my best guess is a unit OWNER pushing for one more sale to leverage what will ultimately be sharp increases in his/her common charges when the building is not filled. What's going on with the Developer RAISING prices of units? Are they kidding? Why would someone in 2009 purchase a unit for more then a 2007 listed price?

you know ,
even if you paid 2007 prices you would still be chepaer
back in the crazy time, you would have paid transfer tax, closing lawyers etc
so even at paying list , you are stil not paying 2007 prices/ actual cost
remember everybody who bought back then, had to add all those extra to their basis costs.

and if you are waiting for the building to go bankrupt, well that train never arrived

not to say they don't exist elsewhere, maybe you should start looking at projects that are just now coming onto the market for a big discount

does anybody know if there is a "web site" / face book etc for the homeowners on the 505

Freewilly - a well-informed and fully looped in member of the community. I am neither a broker (blegh) or in contract...just someone that's bullish on that side of Manhattan. Some are more bearish, as are most people on Streetyeasy and that's fine. I am not.

hkinterested - Ran offering plan through my attorney and there was some mention that these developers are paying the common charges for the non-sold units. If a developer believes it can get a better price then by all means they can - if it doesn't sell you'll be vindicated but if it does at the new price you will look like an idiot...which is not a exactly impossible with record comp at banks this year. You can claim that they may be in stock etc, but cash comp should be enough for a part of a down payment or even an entire down payment for some of these units. Why would someone "in 2009 purchase a unit for more than a 2007 listed price"? Simple. If the buyer feels it was fairly priced in 2007 and is still fairly priced now. 2009 is over. 2010 is here and a recovery is inevitable coming into the next up cycle. As much as people who can't afford to buy a decent spot in Manhattan wish it would, economy's not staying in the sh!tter forever,

@miamibeach, I THINK I see what you are getting at but keep in mind - transfer taxes are still assessed now so not sure what you would be referring to.

Funny you mention the building go bankrupt. Obviously none of us are privy to information that could be used to assess a potential bankruptcy but if we look at the most recent news bit regarding these developers it may shed some light into what state they are in. About a month ago it was leaked that the developers were revealing a new hotel project on 42nd street closer to 11th avenue. Not exactly a small job. Simply put, if you are in danger of bankruptcy or are running on fumes/low on cash reserves the LAST thing you want to do is increase capex on a new project when you have existing obligations on an old project. My quick read would lead me to believe that they are sitting on adequate cash, enough to withstand these units not selling in the immediate future and the carry cost that accompanies such a scenario. If they were truly DESPERATE, then you would probably see all these remaining units go up as rentals or see units auctioned off/foreclosed on by their sponsor bank. We haven't seen any of the latter so I would guess that they are banking on a recovery this year. Don't underestimate comp season this year...that's the key takeaway...especially at a new construction condo that's priced below many comparable properties on aggregate.

I believe there was some mention on here of a FB group in the past. I think it's owners only.

I'm really suprised how many people care about some crap Condo in the middle of frickin nowhere. 332 posts? About what? What could be so interesting?

If it were in Long Island City, you could divide that post # by 50. Condo itself not so interesting - what gentrification does to it and property values in the next 5-10 years is.

Mav --

You do have to consider that the empty lot on 10th/48th is slated for public housing - so not sure which direction the gentrification is going :)

Also, if you search CL for "sherene" you'll get the rental listings for the rental building at 520 W 48th street. Seems unrealistic that people should pay close to a 1 MM for a 2 bed condo, when you can rent a 2 bed 2 bath down the street in a 7 year old building for $3100 (which is $400 less than the rent was 1 year ago BTW).

Yes I have heard a park from the city, but following CB4 it would be affordable housing. Would be best if they put the affordable housing on top of the exposed railroad tracks and the park to the east of it. Gentrification is going in the right direction in this case -- a decrepit lot that's been used by the city to do water tunnel 3 work for years now and a magnet for the neighborhoods unsightly residents (since the former bodega on 47 and 10 had been replaced by something more respectable) is finally being replaced by something of value. Affordable housing has to be taken into context of what it is replacing. In this case, it's actually serving as a boon - which can't be said for most of the affordable housing developments going up in the city.

As for 520 West 48th, it's similar to the Clinton West building on West 47th across from this building. Amenities and build quality vastly inferior. Not really comparing apples to apples. You can on size and configuration basis for sure...but that wouldn't be entirely accurate. Also, 520 W 48 is closer to 11th than 10th...bigger difference than most would think, but you're THAT much further from public transportation. Clinton West is the nearest comp, but surely not the best one by any means.

Maverick wrote: >> "Another guy: Midtown West is not a prime neighborhood for discount by ANY means -- there is too much visible upside on the Far West Side of Manhattan as compared to other areas that are more appropriately described as a place befitting of a "deep discount." <<

I know the neighborhood well (used to live there, still visit friends there all the time), and the issue that is very easy to overlook is the environmental problems. All along W 47th and W 48th, between 10th and 11th Aves, you have an epicenter of old garages and auto repair shops (some still active, some turned into car dealerships). The simple reason that this area has been so s-l-o-w to gentrify is NOT that it doesn't (at arm's length) have appeal -- it is still Manhattan, after all.

The real reason is that to develop the available land in this particular corridor, you've got big environmental cleanup/remediation issues. This area had a lot of industrial use in the past. The main reason that so many of the new buildings, like the 505, are over the railroad tracks is that, well, there was no contaminated ground there to deal with, in order to build. The 516 W 47th St building one block south is over the tracks there, the motel on 49th is over the tracks, the Archstone Clinton from 51st to 53rd, the Archstone West 54th between 55th/56th -- these are all in the same mid-block location -- all plunked directly over the railroad tracks.

As such, the 505 and these other buildings are a bit of a safe island in the middle of an otherwise partially industrial strip north of 43rd and west of 10th avenue, which in turn is itself an island of environmental challenges. Things get much better when you go east of 10th avenue.

By that, I mean that you have to contrast 10th/11th Aves with all the areas EAST of 10th avenue, which have always been residential, and that are now in the height-restricted, historically-protected Hell's Kitchen district. The spare land there has been promptly developed, for the most part, over the last 10-20 years, as best I can tell. That's because there wasn't any remediation necessary.

So, what I'm saying is that the area where the 505 is represents a special case (over the tracks), and it'll be a long time before there can be a lot of fill-in with newer/better buildings alongside it, or new amenities or destination restaurants or businesses.

Will it happen ** eventually ** ? Sure. Will it happen as fast as, say, Chelsea gentrified, like during the 10 year period of the early 1980s to early 1990s? Absolutely not, because of the environmental constraints. Especially not in these economic times, when commercial real estate capital isn't flowing all that freely. Some of the new construction in the area is already closing in on being 10 years old (built in the 2001-2002 timeframe), and the area overall doesn’t look all that different than it did then.

Sure, there’s been some upgrading of the bars and restaurants on 10th Avenue in the mid 40-s to mid-50s. But even all of those are on the EAST side of 10th Avenue - - the historically residential side. West of 10th avenue is a whole different story, and a much more slow-moving one, IMHO.

To repeat myself from late 2008: all I'm saying is that someone buying there should really get to know the street. The comparatively low price per square foot for the project, even at the market peak, was for a reason -- the developer wasn't putting them on the market with a discount, just to be nice. I think people need to invest here if they feel comfortable with what they're --> getting <-- for their money, right now, and not based on their hopes for where the neighborhood may or may not be going.

The story isn't so much about 10th avenue as are the effects of the Avenue of the Americas-esque 11th avenue rezoning (Kenneth Cole, Prada, Ogilvy, Mother, Mercedes-Benz/Two-Trees Lux Residential). The point is - warehouses, dinky cab repair shops, and mainstream car dealerships e.g. Dodge, Toyota, Chrysler have a definite life, expiring sooner rather than later.

I'm very pleased to see the increased activity on the 40-50 cross streets between 9th and 10th avenue where tenements are getting re-done into more luxury units... a long time coming, and if the Fountain House-run units could be converted, even better.

Directly from CB4. While this has many counter-arguments to City Planning Commission proposals rest assured that all will not be conceded to and concessions will be made with the community to give them enough to avoid starvation but not enough to feast. Try and read through the counter proposals and see the general story. Of particular note :

• Principle 1, 5, 6, 7, ***8***, 9 on pages 2-4
• Identified areas 1, 2, 7 and 9

http://www.manhattancb4.org/agendas/2008_07/28%20CHKLU%20re%20DCP%2011th%20Avenue%20Comments.pdf

And which new construction condominium in Hell's Kitchen/Clinton started in "2001-2002" has not been completed as you refer to? Even the Ink48 (formerly Vu) hotel on 48th and 11th, which ran into a $5mm shortfall somehow found a way to get it done. Galerie 505 is a prominent one that has stalled...but I don't even think they got the foundation into the ground. Two Trees doesn't have the funding yet for the residential portion, but their retail tenants (MB, NYPD) is secure. Interested to see what projects you are referring to.

Maverick: A couple of things:

I said: "Some of the new construction in the area is already closing in on being 10 years old (built in the 2001-2002 timeframe), and the area overall doesn’t look all that different than it did then."

Sorry if I was unclear. I meant that the --> completed <-- buildings in the area have been there for going on 10 years, and if you're a resident there, when you walk out the door today, you don't see a dramatically different neighborhood than the one you moved into back then. My point is just that the facelift/new business progress has been slow.

[An aside: Examples of the buildings I mean would be the 43rd Street strip, like the Strand and the New Gotham and another building I don't know the name of (I think it's at 520 or 530 W 43rd St). Near those buildings on 10th avenue, you still have the same pubs, storefront Chinese food places, nail salons, taxi licensing offices, etc. that were there going on 10 years ago. Yes, the 44X10 restaurant has been there the whole time, but it's not like it's got any new neighbors in the last few years that would make you want to linger on that block any longer than it took to have dinner.]

If I understand you right, you seem to base your argument of "change-soon-to-come" on the idea that existing, non-residential businesses that don't do a lot for residential life (car dealerships, etc.) are more likely to be moving out (do you mean lease expiration?) sooner rather than later.

That's an intriguing thought. It could indeed be a positive catalyst for the area. If you, or other people looking at the 505, are confident that there is a wave of turnover on the way, then I think that's a good thesis to help base your decision to invest in the neighborhood in.

Not meant to put you on the spot needlessly, Maverick, but would you say your confidence level is high on this point? Or are you coming from more of a big-picture, common-sense point of view on the idea (that X years from now, we won't see a string of car dealerships on 11th avenue)?

wow - my comment got totally truncated

what I was trying to say is that for people living in the existing buildings that have been around since 2001-2002, the neighborhood they see when they walk outside today (10th Ave) isn't dramatically more appealing than it was back when they were built.

I take your point about how the car dealerships, etc., on 11th ave may have a limited shelf life. An intriguing point. Not to put you on the spot, Maverick, but would you say your confidence level in that point is high? (That is, you are thinking of something in particular that would make those businesses not just renew their leases whenever they're next up?) Or are you coming from more of a common-sense, "there should be a better use for those properties" kind of reasoning?

How is the train noise in the building?

Any more sales? What's up with the rentals and why are they going nowhere?

No problem re: being put on the spot. Healthy debate is good. Re: confidence level -- I've got very high conviction that the existing car dealerships on 11th avenue in the West 40's and low 50's will be gone in 5-10 years. Dealerships will have to put up with 1) increasing rents (this may not happen in 2010...closer to the mid/latter half of 2011 IMO)and 2) community/city gentrification pressures as referenced in the CB memo above.

I would also go as far as to invoke that "common-sense" as New York is NOT an industrial city anymore like it was in the early part of the 20th century. Excluding the high end of the car market (MB, BMW, MM) which are more representative of a product sold on 5th/Madison anyway (hell, MB and Rolls have Park Avenue brick and mortar presence) -- does it make any sense at all to have car dealerships in a city where people just do not drive? If anything those dealerships would probably be more successful elsewhere from an ROI perspective, off the island.

Just very difficult to see 11th avenue as a car dealership haven into perpetuity...

Closings have exceeded 30%. Train noise more an effect of the sound emanating from 516 West 47th's large front vent vs. hearing noise in the actual building IMO. As for the question re: rentals you can ask that about any newer development...rental market still weak across the city, condos rented out by owners no exception.

Further support for the above thesis:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/hpd/html/developers/West44-st-11th-ave-rezoning.shtml

Any updates on this building? Doesn't look like many more closings in the last two months? Any intentions for the developer to go rental?

Whispers have an additional ~20 units in-contract in various stages of the closing process. Rental not an initiative.

I know it was said that train noise is not really an issue, but I have heard of people walking away from contracts, or showings, because of the noise, particularly on the first floor? Any truth to this?

Doubt it. Train issue a bigger problem on street side due to cheap venting from building across the street (open train tracks on 48th st side also an issue). No material noise in the structure or in the units last time I was there to check it out.

First floor buyers lucky to have increased ceiling heights vis a vis other floors.

Open house volume continues to be strong in the last two months and the ad hoc spa event seemed to generate a lot of interest.

Yes that it why we walked away.. Train noise and slight rumble of floors.... obviously Maverick lives in building or works for developer. Also know that they tried to sell an apartment next to ours, the people came to listen for train and backed out at the last minute. The real estate agents asst stupidly told us....The building feels like it was put together with spit and tooth paste and the upper floors are all crooked from uneven pouring of concrete..Even on the second floor when we were meeting the developer the train rumbled almost worse than the first floor ..It is a joke.

So whats up with the train issue? Is it only on the first floor or can you hear it throughout the building? I am thinking of offering on the 6th floor and need to know if the train is going to be an issue if I face north. Is there a current tenant that I can talk to? I would love to call or email someone who is currently living there to see what their thoughts are. Thanks!

Well I imagine a current tenant is going to tell you there is no noise issue (see buddyparker's comment). You should do the research yourself. Go stand outside the building (or inside) while the train passes. CondoNYC - do you know if the developer is negotiable?

Friend lives in building. I visit often. I do not work for the developers.

Having said that:
• It's a concrete building, and for anyone that has seen newbuild projects, they would tell you that concrete (especially for ceilings) sometimes show unevenness. Definitely an issue, but not exclusive to the building.
• I agree that construction quality on the building leaves much to be desired, but at this price point vis a vis 2007 when it was constructed, and even now -- it is clear that the construction quality played a large role in how prices were defined.
• I have a couple of contacts in the building on various floors (3 to top floor) and I would not withdraw an offer based on the train noise. When the train does pass, it is for a few seconds and obviously depending on which floor the unit is on, it will determine the magnitude. First floor noise was more than manageable. Overblown concern IMO.
• You will hear the train outside the building (see my previous comment about poor vent set-up at 516 West 47th, and the open train swath on West 48th). It is imperative that you listen to the perceived noise INSIDE the building. Very important to distinguish noise inside the building from what you are hearing through your windows.
• Whispers have it that the developer would negotiate though if you are thinking of negotiating now - the developer has less incentive to do so IMO, due to perceptions of the broader economy.

what train runs close to the building?

Close? The train runs underneath. It was built OVER train tracks.

Underneath is an Amtrak line, slow-steaming into Penn Station a half mile away. It runs beneath many of the new proposed developments on the West Side.

Any more news on this building? How are sales? What do people residing their think?

live in the bldg
no noise from the train
and i have been in the basement , and have never heard any noise
as for negoitation, well i would think it keeps pace with the stock market
and your position
have money...... then state so in your offer
need to get a loan, well not as good of a positon, better offer more
shame you owners are not talking about the turn over to the condo board, and thinking about the futuer
before the developer leaves!( we only have one time to negotiate anything that needs to be addressed)

That last post just made me feel retarded.

For those looking at buying in this building...

I read elsewhere that there is a park going up on 48th street directly across from 505, but it is actually going to be a 99-foot public housing project. (That's a few stories higher than the 505.) There is going to be a small green space at the SW corner of 49th & 10th, but you won't see it from your apartment.

The specifics are publicly available here: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/pdf/env_review/western_rail/00_feis.pdf

Pages 10-13 are of particular interest. Further in the document it indicates that the building will be above the HK standard of 66-feet and be built at 99-feet.

Might not matter to some, but at least you should know what's really happening before paying EXTRA for a north-facing view.

Well, I fell for the streaming advert and went to read about 505. What's going on in this place?

By the way,, looking up a few comments I just loved this from Maverick: "I have a couple of contacts in the building on various floors (3 to top floor) and I would not withdraw an offer based on the train noise. When the train does pass, it is for a few seconds and obviously depending on which floor the unit is on, it will determine the magnitude."

So the idea is that noise that is only a few seconds is not a real issue (but, wait, those amtrak trains aren't exactly zooming as they cross into manhattan, are they?).

Buyerbuyer - what is the latest on this building? Is the developer negotiating on the remaining units?

http://ny.curbed.com/archives/2010/12/10/hells_kitchen_building_beats_buyers_in_court_then_rubs_it_in.php

@ buyerbuyer: Correct. Trains are not zooming in. If they were, duration of the noise would theoretically be shorter.

@hk interested: lawsuit has failed and info seems to point that the building has 10-15 units left for sale.

EMF problem from train tracks?

I am interested in this building but I am more worried about EMF (Electro Magnetic field) from the train tracks than noise or vibration. Anyone has any information to share? Thanks.

http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/appeals-court-overturns-key-ilsa-interstate-land-sales-full-disclosure-act-ruling-in-nyc-involving-fifth-on-the-park-and-one-hutners-point

Re: buddyparker's link to the realdeal article regarding the court case. I stand by my comments of last year, from above. The developers were foolish to hope they could exploit a loophole while assuming their customers would lose if they tried to do the same. They should have cut a deal with the buyers who felt ripped off. But they just couldn't seem to stomach giving any ground. This is a game of chicken that they just shouldn't have started.

As I said:

>> "again, i'm no attorney, but just my impressions on the real deal article [http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/fighting-buyer-mutiny
]: some sort of out-of-court settlement is the best deal for all involved, regarding the ILSA (Interstate Land Sales Act) claims. and that means the developers giving something back to the buyers. not 100% back, but SOME concession.

""i mean, if the builders want to hold the buyers to the letter of the law -- their contracts -- yet want to argue that they shouldn't be held to the letter of all the laws the buyers can point to -- like ILSA -- just seems like foolishness. and from the article, the developers' best defense is that, "uh, the law was too obscure and inconvenient for us to know about?" good luck with that.

"do i think the buyers will get a price break to put them in line with current market values for their units? no. do i think the developers will and should have to give back some of the difference between contract price at the time of signing and what the units would fetch now? yup."

Judge overturns ILSA ruling at the 505, a victory for 35 buyers
October 04, 2011 02:00PM

http://therealdeal.com/newyork/articles/fed-judge-overturns-interstate-land-sales-disclosure-act-ruling-at-505-condominium-handing-victory-to-35-buyers