London Terrace maintenance

Swimming pool.

Why would a swimming pool cost that much stache, spread over 700 apts? I kinda recall someone saying $150K/yr to maintain a swimming pool at my old building, which was smaller and perhaps excluded lifeguard wages. Let's call it $400K/yr for good measure on the one here -- that only works out to $50/mo/apt.

I think there are some specific reasons related to the conversion process, but I'm not certain. I know there are others on here that have more experience with this building. I do know they have quite a few staff manning and maintaining the building.

Probably still paying off all that local law 11 facade work they did on that beautiful brick.

I wonder where they are on the benchmark for local law 97.

I would check in with Bruce Wayne Solomon or Susan Singer or one of the other listing brokers who works regularly in the building, since I haven't read recent financials, but from my POV the maintenance isn't high. I have a big studio at the Parc Vendome -- which is a similar-style block-through, also with four entrances. (It's also of similar vintage, though it's a condo, and it's in Midtown.) Anyway, my property taxes by themselves are $780/month, and rising. So backing that out of the F or B line maintenance, you get a resultant number that is a bit just below or a bit just above $1K, which is about what my common charges are. It takes a lot to support the staff for a building that big, and remember each entrance has 24/7 coverage.

ali r.
{upstairs realty}

Ali, while I think LT is still fairly high, its true the rest of the city gained substantial ground and not as far ahead of the field as they used to be.

That's a good point, Truth, London terrace definitely used to be seen as having high maintenance relative to other similar buildings. I did the math on one of the studios, assuming the square footage is correct, works out to about $2.60 a square foot for maintenance. Certainly not what I would consider high in today's market for a similar building.

On a side note it's getting close to 100 years old. They're still working on the facade.

Looking more closely, I guess you're right - I was just looking at raw numbers, not on a per square foot basis. LT studios are a little bigger (around 500 sq ft if the listings are accurate) than a lot of other Chelsea studios.

Brickwork: I would think that's just an assessment, not base maintenance.

On a side note: I tremble to think what local law 97 is going to look like once it comes into force in pre-war bldgs. I'm picturing huge assessments.

I can vouch for the studios. The dressing rooms are plenty big enough for a full size bed.

I'm not sure I'd agree the studios in London Terrace Towers are larger than 161 West 16th St or 200 West 20th St.

In looking at places, it helps to take a holistic approach - or at least that's how I see it. In this case, I'm not sure a few extra square feet makes up for money tied up in maintenance. I could be happy in a place marginally smaller or in a marginally less desireable area (UES, UWS), keep the extra $500-$700/mo for an occasional flight to Europe or nice dinners out. There are even options in Chelsea, they're just smaller. It's all very personal, in the end, isn't it?

That’s a good viewpoint. Housing is but one area that can enrich a person, and people often overly skew their finances toward it.

Many years ago, I had run across an apt on SE, a significant upgrade but at a price that made it worth my while. I saw it, negotiated, and broke the lease on the old apt, paying a month’s rent for that. After a lot of sketchiness at the last hour by the owner, however, I pulled out.

My old apt had already been rented, and I had very little time to figure things out. I was set on finding an upgrade that was just as attractive, which was not an easy task. Sensing my struggle, my boss gave me the suggestion of just finding a lesser apt and using the difference to go out to dinner every night. I briefly considered his idea, but in the end I marched on and found something just as fantabulous. It was an interesting perspective, but in the end my waistline is better off for it.

MTH, the keyword there is "I"-- I bought a jumbo studio in the Parc Vendome, which is in many ways a twin building to London Terrace, because I had looked at a smaller studio elsewhere and the listing broker hadn't budged on price. It wasn't so much that I thought I needed the extra space as it was a "if I have to spend over X dollars, I might as well get Y value." But then I met my now-husband (aka mr. front_porch) and we ended up living in that apartment for five years -- & with two people, every extra square foot ended up making a tremendous difference.

ali r.

As far as the pool goes I'm fairly certain the annual payment from the London Terrace Gardens more than covers the cost of operations, so then notion that maintenance is high because of the pool is I'll founded.

Since I don't see pool use listed on the Gardens amenity page I take back that last comment.

30 I think there was a big fight pre covid about who was allowed to use the pool. To the best of my recollection the tower portion won out on this.
And 30 wasn't it the same developer for Terrace, 200 W 20th etc.?

The pool is owned by the Towers. There was an agreement where the Gardens paid something like $250,000/year plus half the costs of the pool.

What are the Gardens? The rental piece of the complex or something?

London Terrace Gardens is the rental complex in the middle of the block:
https://streeteasy.com/complex/london-terrace-gardens

London Terrace Towers are the Coop components at the end of each block:
https://streeteasy.com/complex/london-terrace-towers

I see, thanks.

London Terrace and 200 west 20th are not the same. Emery Roth designed 200 west 20th and 300 west 23rd street. London Terrace is completely different, but the same designers as Parc Vendome.

@front_porch for sure - not planning around the possibility of a partner at this point, but I'm an unconventional person open to unconventional (separate with sleepovers) living arrangements :) And this layout always amazes me: https://streeteasy.com/building/30-west-60-street-new_york/12y

MTH: "Tell me you're an Airbnb without telling me you're an Airbnb"

Re 30 W60th 12y - No knowledge of the building, but WTF advertising that much sleeping capacity in such a small space? I acknowledge I am completely out of touch with the market, but to whom is that meant to appeal?

I have read stories of families of 4 in studios.

It's like that Seinfeld episode with Kramer & the Japanese business men...

Does anyone happen to know if there is a maximum number of people allowed in a 1BR?

I was once at a birthday party with around 50.

I believe the housing maintenance code specifies the amount of people that can live in an apartment.

Nada, I believe in my more social single days I stuffed about that number into a large studio.

@front_porch - I would think a partnership (ie a couple) would be easy to distinguish from an airbnb where you have someone new every few days

@front_porch - I see you were referring to the place at 12y at 30 W 60. Yes, that definitely does look like an airbnb setup!

maintenance is high..... new underlying loan maybe ?

Looks like they are doubling the Coop underlying mortgage to $80 million.
https://mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=739049&m=61768&id=23691&p=&article_id=4218535

That link seems to want a login. Here's another (same?) article:

https://www.habitatmag.com/Publication-Content/Bricks-Bucks/2021/December-2021/London-Terrace-Towers-Co-op-Board-Gets-a-Pleasant-Surprise

(seems like the only 'pleasant surprise' is the interest rate, and even then...?? )

Interesting and an incredible change of Local Law 11 from $3M to $15M
This is a sop to the construction industry from the city and a implied "tax" on apartment owners

Hard enough to live in this city without the extra expense