Mar. 16, 2010 - what about that (not yet) New Construction across the street?

good, or bad? yes and no
I had a kind of cocktail party conversation with someone who may be buying very near a high profile (pun intended) proposed Major Real Estate Development in a prime part of Manhattan. Long story (aren't they all?), but I don't represent them, so we were just talking "generally".

We talked about a lot of things: potential impact on resale value (now, during, after); quality of life issues (during, after) from noise, dust, congestion, 'tumult'; light and view impacts; and, miscellaneous. They seemed to think it worthwhile that we had this conversation, that it helped them think systematically about the risks / opportunities involved in their anticipated purchase and The Project nearby.

I tried to explain that everyone will approach a situation like this differently, for a host of idiosyncratic reasons, depending on factors such as:

• how long before they are likely to move again;
• whether the current purchase price includes a discount for (short-term?) negatives;
• if they trade light (a slice of sky) for a view of A Beautiful Building, how they value each;
• if there family members there regularly during the (noisy) work day (sleeping toddlers, work-from-home creatives);
• whether they would open their windows if they could, or prefer filtered breathing;
• whether they enjoy watching something being built (perhaps a boys-love-cranes-and-iron-workers thing);
• whether they view That Particular Project, once built, as a net benefit (a work of art?) or as a blight;
• simply: one's tolerance for uncertainty and risk

Which made me think that there might be Some Generally Applicable Principles (i.e., a worthwhile blog post) helpful to people in such a situation. Refill your coffee, if you find the topic interesting. Manhattan Loft Guy is about to wander, as some of these things bear explication.

location, location, location
Rarely is that maxim more relevant than when a huge project is involved. Is it next door? (blocking lot-line windows, endangering your party wall?) Is it across the street? (blocking light and view?) Is it around the corner? (making the beep-beeping more remote?) Is it 3 blocks away? (blocking view, but more remote for dust and congestion?) If it blocks sky, is The Money View impacted? (will you still see the river, the park, the Empire State Building?) Is it on my side of the building? (screw my neighbors on the other side!) If The Development Site runs completely through a block or sits on a corner, will the deliveries be made on 'your' side or on the other? (is your block association stronger than theirs?) Is it so close that my building will have a sidewalk shed for The Duration?

Here's one thought experiment about New Construction Nearby: the people who live on Second Avenue feel very differently about construction of the subway than people on First Avenue.

Another angle: if you lived so close to the Woolworth Building that you can tell who came to work late this morning, your windows have lost view and light (granted, the light and view was lost 100 years ago); but if you are 20 blocks away with a direct (protected!) view of that Cathedral of Commerce, that is your Money View.

One more: the folks at 474 Greenwich Street were less enthralled about construction of Zinc across the street when their foundation began to crack.

The Project
How big is it? This is most obviously important in relation to your location and view, but also about construction methods and timing ... how long will it take to drive all those piles? ...  how many hundreds of truck loads of girders will there be? ... how many weekends will my street be completely closed when they jump the crane to the next-higher level?

Which side is the construction elevator going to be on (that elevator will likely consume the sidewalk until the building facade is complete)?

Is The Project compatible with my political sensibilities? It may be one thing to live with consequences when you appreciate that the net benefit is a benefit (a school is being built or expanded; Mikhail Baryshnikov is building an arts and performance center) than when there are more bloodless capitalists building more luxury housing on a scale that is out of character for the neighborhood.

Aesthetically (whether the architect is a name or not), will you like to look at the thing when it is done? Will you find it thrilling to say (years down the road),  yes, I live across the street from The Stunning Building?

timing is everything
This might be a more important factor than location.

No matter how near or far, might you have to sell when all the negatives are apparent but before the benefits are obvious, or are you likely to glide through Construction Hell to get to The Other Side? The worst case is that you buy in without a discount for disruption (noise, loss of view, whatever) and then have to sell with a discount because the darn thing is not finished.

The best case is that you buy with a discount because The Project is real-but-not-started-yet and that you will not in any case sell before the scars have healed, the landscaping is done, and whatever benefits have sprouted.

life style
Some people buy a particular Manhattan loft or apartment entirely because of what is inside (the quality and/or amount of space), or because of the location (within a school district, proximity to work or to a park). Some of those people are essentially indifferent to what goes on outside the window. For example, people who work at night or who work 100 hours a week (medical residents) want the darker, the better.

Other people will spend all waking hours within 6 feet of a window, and anything that makes the window less attractive (noise, distraction) will impact their quality of life. The more so, those with seasonal affective disorder.

While it is (generally) true that (most) infants 'can get used to (most) everything', few infants sleep well with pile-driving.

If you work at home on Something Important That Requires Great Concentration, you might not like pile-driving either. Indeed, you might not like it that every delivery truck has to use Reverse to align at the un-loading point (beep, beep, BEEP), or that cement trucks queue up (idling) under your window, or that lunch hour for each set of trades involves a dozen professionally profane people sitting in the sun opposite your windows.

you may be paranoid but you may be right
Any construction site involves risks (and I don't mean to suggest that another crane will fall down). The longer the construction goes on, the more risk. The higher the building, the more risk. You should read this piece from Curbed to see why this guy said this about the Incredibly High Gehryness of Beekman Tower, 52 Beekman Street (hint: death is averted):

"I am not somebody who is automatically against the idea of large buildings. I'm beginning to think this tower is too tall for the neighborhood in which it's located. We have very narrow streets here, with a lot of people living nearby."

After this weekend's attacks by Mother Nature, more people may be more concerned about whether those guys up there properly secure materials hundreds of feet in the air.

sitting by the dock of the bay
The physical orientation on the completed project can be very significant, particularly if there is a commercial component to The Project. A 100% residential building gets city Department of Sanitation service (day times); a commercial establishment (office, hotel, restaurant, museum, whatever) gets private carting services, which are generally at off-hours and (all too often) at 4 AM.

I once lived in a loft building with bedrooms in the back. The good news is there was a lot of light in the back because of a parking lot; the bad news was the buildings across from and adjoining that parking lot had commercial trash pick-ups in the wee small hours. Part A: beep, beep, BEEP. Part B: the grinding of hydraulics as they lifted metal trash bins. Part C: dropping said bins on the sidewalk.

How likely is it that you can get someone to tell you where the trash will be completed for a not-yet-built building? How motivated are you to find out? If your bedrooms are on that side, you might want to check that out.

Apart from trash, many commercial buildings get many deliveries throughout the day and evening. From the beep-beep of FedEx trucks, to semi-trucks hauling large pieces of equipment, or machinery, or just stuff. If that loading dock is on your side, you may hear it.

benefits ... we got benefits
When the darn thing is up, some buildings add a lot to the immediate neighborhood ... from a stretch of new street level retail for an under-served area (many blocks need another dry cleaner; some blocks really need a bank; most don't 'need' another nail salon) ... to just being a nicer,  safer (better lit!) street scene to walk by.

Some new developments increase property values; a few ... err ... don't (methadone clinic? city agencies? some schools, some say).

Some people are afraid that if a 'nicer' residential building comes in, their building will suffer by comparison. My read of history is this is logical but not proven by reality. The property values for Your Basic Small Coop Loft in Tribeca have been enhanced, repeatedly, by the addition to the neighborhood of uber condos, and of even regular condos. That rising tide does tend to float all boats. (But this is true only if you sell after the benefits are felt.)

This rising tide can work even if the new development destroys some specific part of your value. I am thinking here of the Lincoln Towers complex in the West 60s along West End Avenue. The river views of nearly all residents here have been lost by the time that (that Trump abomination to Manhattan street naming convention) "Riverside Boulevard" was filled in. Yet it is my impression that the collateral benefits to these West End Avenue buildings from having so many high-end condos and rental properties nearby (cabs, street retail, general cachet) have made up for the immediate loss in market value driven by the lost river views (though not for the loss of the views, esthetically).

In this regard, "light" must be distinguished from "views". A new development that blocks certain lovely views but leaves your home well-lighted would be a very different outcome from a new development that was so close and so tall that you are plunged into darkness. I have seen lofts along Worth Street that have suffered market declines of a half-million dollars because of massive nearby building. Sucks when it happens to you.

NIMBYs can always hope
Sometimes "projects" don't become "buildings". We've seen that recently caused by changes in the market and credit conditions (56 Leonard Street), sometimes by local opposition that is well-placed politically (I am looking at you, Greenwich Village whatever-for-historic-preservation), sometimes by a combination of the two. But one should be very leery before predicting that a Neighboring Monstrosity can be stopped.

net-net, it is up to YOU
Overall, all of the things I have talked about (and the other elements that will occur to you as you read this, or me after I hit SEND) depend on your tolerance for risk, your tolerance for temporary noise, dust, congestion, your tolerance for experiencing Life In The Big City. That tolerance -- for any of these elements -- probably will change over time. Developers' schedules, appetites and capital may or may not coincide with your cycle of tolerance. And (or) you may find out that things that you 'knew' you had to have (could not live without) are not as sacred as you thought.

It is THE BIG CITY. Nothing stays the same. Deal with it.

Or not. As you prefer. It is your choice.

Hope this helps.

© Sandy Mattingly 2010

Feb. 26, 2010 - theater group needs some FREE space short-term / anyone have some?

outsourcing
I got an interesting request from someone affiliated with a small non-profit theater company that needs donated space for a small site-specific production from April 20 to May 9. I will try to figure out if I know any suitable angel-with-space and will make inquiries within Corcoran, but I wonder if YOU might be able to help.

yes ... YOU
The request came from a Manhattan Loft Guy reader who made appropriately brown-nosing comments about this blog and even promised to comment every day if I can help find space. (That last bit was over-kill, really, but she did say it.)

requirements + specifications

• the group has insurance (they've done this before)
• attendance could be up to 40 people, or as small at 15
• cast of 3
• they need exclusive access for rehearsal and performance times; otherwise could share space
• types of spaces that might work:

apartment (loft style = "ideal")
hotel suite
retail (clothing) space
private club room
"church-like" space (but not a church)

the close...
If any of you knows of possibly suitable space (or has such space), send me an email and I will put you in touch with these folks to ask questions, confirm they are people you'd want in your space, etc. [Sandy AT Manhattan Loft Guy DOT com] Remember: they are looking for donated space.

Wouldn't it be nice if a reader of MLG could help out another reader with a loft? Anyone planning a 3 week vacation soon?
 

© Sandy Mattingly 2010

Feb. 20, 2010 - 38 Warren Street and other loft buildings in 1894 (lamp + "gas trimmings" importers & more)

The Google is my (distracting) friend
I played around on Google when I was looking at the listing history of 38 Warren Street (for the February 19, was the terrace free at 38 Warren Street?) and found some interesting history history for that building, and for others since converted to residential lofts. "Interesting" to Manhattan Loft Guy, at least, so if you may be of a similar mind, read on, as we dive deep in the NY Times archives, almost to the birth of the Ochs - Sulzberger era Times.

The Paper of Record was not yet an old grey lady when it ran this piece on August 31, 1984, Marked Revival of Trade. Apparently, the merchant class in Manhattan was then feeling relieved, with the country coming out of a depression, "the tariff question" having been settled, and out of town buyers flooding Manhattan wholesalers and hotels.

In all branches of trade merchants realize that the period of depression has passed, and they look forward to continued activity and profit for some time to come.

Buyers from out of town have come into the city within the last few days by the thousands and there is activity in all the wholesale districts.

Those "wholesale districts" in 1894 include

38 and 42 Warren Street, now in 38-44 Warren Street
Here's the connection to 38 Warren Street:

At the office of McFadden & Co., importers and dealers in lamps and gas trimmings at 38 Warren Street, A.N. White of the firm said

"We have had many buyers in, and our business is good and increasing. We also have good reports from our men on the road. ... Our collections are easier, which indicates to us a more plentiful use of money by the customers of our customers and a more general consumption of goods...."

Since that condo was formed by the combination of four buildings and is referred to as 38-44 Warren Street, these guys were also on site:

At the office of L. Strauss & Son, dealers in china and glassware, at 42 to 46 Warren Street and 116 Chambers Street, Lee Kohns, a member of the firm was seen. He was in a most happy frame of mind over the business outlook.... 

  "That the good effects of the settlement of the tariff question are making themselves felt must be apparent to every merchant.... We are so busy now we are working our men day and night. ... In anticipation of tariff changes, all goods sold in the Spring for Fall delivery were locked up in bonded warehouses, pending settlement of the question, in order that purchasers might reap the benefits of the reduced rates of duty. These wares can now be shipped...."

another MLG appearance by 1200 Broadway
This August 31, 1894 article also quotes a good many hotels who benefited from the commercial horde. One is a residential loft building hit too frequently on Manhattan Loft Guy to cite:

At the Gilsey House it was said: "There has been a large increase of travel this week. Business men, men whom we know to be regular buyers, are flocking in. There has been no question that there has been an improvement in conditions since the tariff question was settled."

One recent Gilsey House (1200 Broadway) link to a recent NY Times article will add a little to my Gilsey House trove, but I will not further digress from 1894 to quote that article.

In trying to get back to that August 31, 1894 article, I re-ran a search in the times archives and got an article from a week later along the same lines, with a series of quotes from merchants at addresses that indicate how much business was done in the current loft districts, TRADE GATHERING MOMENTUM; IMPROVEMENT IN BUSINESS KEEPING UP VIGOROUSLY.

some 1894 lofts are now offices (darn)
This September 6, 1894 article references many businesses on current residential loft streets, but many of these addresses now have offices or rental buildings, rather than loft coops or condos. Interesting to see, nonetheless, the publisher at 766 Broadway (Charles T. Dillingham & Co.), the bicycle manufacturer at 12 Warren Street, the furniture dealer T 193 Park Row, the "cloaks and suits" company at Fifth Avenue at 22nd Street, and the "collars and cuffs" company at 33 East 17 Street.

So much for tripping down memory lane, for today at least.

© Sandy Mattingly 2010

Sep. 11, 2009 - 8 years, still fresh

quote of the day
Rudy Giuliani, whom I loathe, read this morning from Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whom I revere. Let's just say that Rudy made a nice choice:

“Everybody can be great,” he said, “because anybody can serve. You don’t have to have a college degree to serve. You don’t have to make your subject and verb agree to serve. You only need a heart full of grace, a soul generated by love.”

R.I.P.  2,752 souls (up 1 since last year) Plus those at The Pentagon and in Shanksville.

Basic coverage, with a strong WTC-focus: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/11/remembering-the-horror-of-a-bright-blue-morning/?hp

(as if you need additional links for this)

© Sandy Mattingly 2009

Feb. 10, 2009 - diversion / art from a Manhattan loft neighborhood

Nov. 8, 2008 - into the melting pot (with a grain of salt?)

'minority' majority + bare majority only English

Crain's New York Business had an on-line link yesterday to some "City Facts" that are intersting but that made me wonder if I needed salt with those (fries). (Their visuals are more ... well, visual than my text will be....)

Crain's Fact #1: in 2006, the racial/ethnic (not the same things, but oh well ... that's what the Census Bureau does too) background of the 8,214,426 estimated residents of New York City were (1) "White" 34.5%, (2) Hispanic/Latino 27.9%, (3) Black/African American 23.8%, and (4) Asian 11.5%. In other words, we are (and have been for a while) a city in which the so-called "majority" is a minority of the population. While 1.3% is reported as "other", 0.9% is reported as "two or more races", which I found to be surprisingly low.

Unfortunately, I can't click to a source for these data from Crain's, so I don't know how reliable the data are.

Some salt: I went to the US Census Bureau web page, here, where I easily found information from 2000 (if they have updated ethnic/race data I did not dig for it). If the search page holds, you will see that in 2000 the White proportion was reported as 44.7% of the City's population, with Hispanic/Latino as 27%, Black as 26.6%, and Asian as 9.8%. So, way back then us white folk were an overall minority, but not nearly as dramatically as claimed by Crain's for 2006.

Could the mix have changed so much in 6 years? (Note that the Census estimates the 2006 population as the figure that Crain's uses, 8,214,426, which is only a 2.6% overall increase -- hardly enough to swing the ratios even if all the 2.6% were non-white.) And note that the Black/AA and Asian proportions are lower in the Crain's 2006 numbers than in the Census Bureau's 2000 numbers. So, use the salt here....

Crain's Fact #2:  in 2006, out of a total of 7,637,820 people of the age of 5 or older (funny way to count, but, whatever) in the City, (only) 3,981,767 speak only English at home (which is 52.1% -- a bare majority), while 1,883,804 (also?) speak Spanish, 381,506 (also?) speak Chinese, 193,563 (also?) speak Russian, and 174,140 (also?) speak French (including Creole and other derivatives). 

The remainder is a rather large number of 'other' New Yorkers -- some 600,000+ folks aged 5 or older who may speak English at home but also (or exclusively) speak a language other than Spanish, Chinese, Russian or French.

Did you notice how the French and Russian language speakers seem to have been reversed (or something) in the Crain's chart? Perhaps the Russian speakers were counted with a surge at the end, that upset their sequencing?? ;-) 

Note to self: check other cities in the 2000 Census Bureau data to see how relatively diverse our NYC melting pot is.

Oct. 2, 2008 - Manhattan as 'different' (not unique) / counting geniuses + immigrants

a reflection, not a rigorous analysis
I am not a card-carrying member of the Manhattan Is Unique So Real Estate Price Will Never Come Down party, but I have audited classes in the Manhattan Market Is Different school.

I noted with interest an article about the number of MacArthur Foundation grants to Manhattan residents when the NY Times reported on that last week (September 26: A Genius on Every Block? No, but It Seems That Way), which lead to the kernel of an idea about a blog post, which got overlooked in the press of the Business and Life Continuum. I was thinking aboutabout how this article about Manhattan-as-magnet-for-talent had real estate relevance. posting

But what spurred me to actually use bandwidth and time to address this was this piece reported yesterday on-line in the national REALTOR® rag (and sourced to Forbes) about some cities losingtheir attraction for immigrants (Where the Melting Pot Has Frozen). Sort of the other side (or another side) of the same coin.

on the one hand, a draw
Clyde Haberman of the Times points out that

As Haberman explains about these so-called "genius" grants, MacArthur officials frown on the word “genius,” leaving it to journalists and assorted other hacks. Rather, the foundation says that it looks for women and men who are able to “transcend traditional boundaries,” who are risk-takers even in the face of obstacles, who can “synthesize disparate ideas and approaches.”

I have said repeatedly the one of the things that makes our local real estate market different from others is that Manhattan has always been a magnet for creativity, ambition and entrepreneurship. In the context of a city deemed to be safer and more 'livable' by people with huge wealth or income who used to move to the 'burbs, that has definitely helped create demand for scarce Manhattan housing. Add the globalization of wealth and travel to that creativity-ambition-entrepreneurship magnet, and there is yet another different strand increasing demand.

Haberman put it poetically, in historical terms:

(I HEART Clyde.) Note that, in my opinion, neither Boston nor California have other attractions to a global market that Manhattan has.

Of course, these kind of attractions are both ephemeral and fragile. There is no reason to assume that they will continue to make Manhattan a different real estate market indefinitely, and it may be hard to predict when an accumulation of 'bad news' will hurt the Manhattan 'brand' enough to make a significant difference. But I see that situation holding, at least until we see more and deeper bad news on a systemic basis.

(snobbery, admitted
Yes, Haberman talks about MacArthur grants to city residents, rather than to Manhattan residents. But I am enough of a Manhattan snob to assume that the bulk of "city residents" who win these grants are Manhattan-based, either as residents or workers. [Go ahead, prove me wrong.]

I don't think it much matters for my general point, however.)

on the other hand, not so much
Not only do other cities generally lack the creativity-ambition-entrepreneurship magnet that Manhattan has, but other cities are losing the degree to which they are attractive to immigrants at all, at least according to Forbes. As reported on-line by REALTOR.org,

They don't mention New York, which still seems to be a magnet for immigrants based on everything I have read. (No sourcing here, but I recall reading that New York City's recent population growth is entirely attributable to in-migration of foreign-born and increased birth rate among recent immigrants.) But they did count the cities with the lowest percentages of foreign-born residents:

• Pittsburgh, 3.1 percent
• Cincinnati, 3.5 percent
• St. Louis, 4 percent
• Indianapolis, 5.4 percent
• Cleveland, 5.6 percent
• Virginia Beach, Va.. 5.6 percent
• Kansas City, Mo., 5.9 percent
• Columbus, Ohio 6.3 percent
• Nashville, Tenn. 6.7 percent
• Milwaukee, 6.8 percent

Once again, my man Clyde hits it on the nose:

As a footnote, in the endless debate over immigration, you could cite the MacArthur program as evidence that the United States, for all its troubles, remains the place where many of the world’s brightest want to be. This year’s winners, all of whom must be citizens or residents of this country, include people originally from Nigeria, Russia, Croatia, Egypt, Tanzania, England and Canada.

... Nearly all the New York [MacArthur] winners ... came here from somewhere else.

so what?
So, this won't prevent a decline in Manhattan real estate values -- if that is what general and local economic trends have in store for us -- but these related factor do provide some additional (unique?) layer of insulation from the otherwise cold that our market may feel. Call me Pollyanna if you like (so long as you call).

Sep. 25, 2008 - NYC photos / could not stop scrolling

is it memory lane if I am too young to remember (or to have been alive then)?
Hat tip to today's Today's MUG from Manhattan User's Guide for linking to a forum on WiredNY with an amazing collection of photos, mostly of Manhattan, mostly black and white, some more than a hundred years old. Once I started scrolling, I kept thinking, only a few more, then I will get back to work.... But I scrolled through the whole thing in one sitting.

one Manhattan loft angle
I am sure that many pictures could front stories about Manhattan lofts (especially the Broadway shots), but the one that immediately caught my eye with a Manhattan Loft Guy angle is the 10th one down, "Tiffany's Union Square" from 1899. That is the building now marketed as 15 Union Square West, which I touched on in a very early post: July 7, 2006: dynamic city / time runs out on a stripped Tiffany's.

condo inevitability, indeed
But I was wrong about "the inevitable condo": the structure hasn't been torn down for condo development, but stripped to its 130 year old cast-iron skeleton and reclad in glass over the cast-iron  (and gut renovated, of course), with another 6 stories built on top.  http://www.15usw.com/

Enjoy the photos ... see if you can pull away before scrolling through them all.
 

Sep. 11, 2008 - September 11, again

I will re-post what I said on this date two years ago, slightly updated:

Dec. 20, 2007 - NYC Housing Stock / distribution of renters + owners, coops, condos, houses

THX to REBNY for sending along a pie chart from the US Census Bureau 2005 Housing Survey of the distribution of housing types in the City as a whole (beggars would want to see Manhattan only, but we can't be choosers here).

Couple of interesting things, at first blush. REBNY highlighted the fact that 67% of the City's housing units are rental units, while another 21% are "conventional homes". City-wide, there are only 76,060 condo units and 309,195 coop apartments, a 1:4 ratio. With 3.1 million households, the average household size is less than 2.7 people -- I suspect that number is well below the national average.

Interesting stuff.

(C) Sandy Mattingly 2007

Nov. 14, 2007 - 176 Perry has new loft in mid-8 figures

Jul. 24, 2007 - Gilsey House ancient history (circa 1980)

Jul. 14, 2007 - R.I.P.

Nov. 30, 2006 - Manhattan Users Guide on Nannyhattan

Nov. 27, 2006 - isn’t Williamsburg enough? / cities competing for hipsters

Oct. 31, 2006 - Curbed means never having to say you're sorry

Oct. 30, 2006 - where the (wild?) things are / the distribution of the ‘creative class’

Oct. 17, 2006 - do loft owners have cars? / beating parking tickets

Sep. 25, 2006 - unique strengths in the Manhattan real estate market – not just an urban myth?

Sep. 11, 2006 - September 11 / 343 firefighters