Cc and taxes

Might be worse than that. Do you think the sf includes the extra living space above the living room that the broker thinks needs to be removed?

Well round numbers like 2000 sq ft always suggest some fudging but can not say.

I can only imagine what a tough show that's got to be if they won't show a single pic of the interior.

Well, they are honest about the place needing gut reno. But cc+taxes? I feel bad for the seller.

"Currently configured as 5 beds, 4.5 baths, duplex residence with balcony and panoramic views. Legally a 4 bedroom. Buyer would need to file permits with DOB and renovate the space back to double height ceiling in the living room."

I'm not wild about the charges, but the bigger worry is that condo management apparently doesn't have control over significant architectural changes made by their tenants.

I think buildings of this vintage were not planned as luxury product due to far east side location. With market growth and now the 2nd Ave subway, the area has become more upscale which explains why so many units have been combined or reconfigured.

Neighboring units just sold, with the double-height living room intact: https://streeteasy.com/sale/1326172

What did it sell for?

ximon,
I'm not so sure I agree about the luxury comment - back in 1988, this is what "luxury" product looked like for the most part.

Yes, 30. I should have said that luxury has been redefined from what it was considered in the booming 1980's. Apartments like this are not being built today - size, amenities, etc. on't work for today's buyers.

Also, 350E72 was not a luxury location back in the mid-1980's. Not sure I would call it a luxury location even today. And all the combined apts. here tell a story.

This is an even more out of the way location, but in the 1980s this building was considered kind of up there on the luxury scale:
https://streeteasy.com/building/the-promenade