The charcoal grey condo building at 2101 FDB/8th Avenue, between 113th and 114th Street is one of the smaller new developments but apparently has been doing well. The new construction called The Parc Standard looks about finished and research has it that sales started at the end of 2010 and now 25 condos are in contract out of the original 28. Common charges are around $200-$300 per month and there's a 25 year tax abatement. The interiors are pretty standard condo fare and there has only been one 4% price reduction in the past so what's making these units sell? The average asking prices look to be in the $700 per square foot range on apartments that vary from 550-1,000 square foot. This building is also FHA approved for 3.5% down payment. There's a lot of doom and gloom forecasted in the market but this one seems to be doing well. Thoughts? Top photo by Ulysses. www.ParcStandard.com
Let me start off by saying how wonderful Harlem is and all that and how extraordinary and positive it would be to have a building like the parc standard have 21 units in contract. Its actually a nicish building in comparison to the condos in the corridor, and looking at the layouts of the 1&2 bedroom places I can see why they would be attractive.ReplyDelete
Now for the debbie downer, A careful look at street easy identifies a few issues. The last unit to go into contract was 2 months ago, and most of the remaining 21 have been in contract for 5 or 6 months, including some that did not have standard sales, as if they were insider deals.
Also, we have no way of knowing, if in fact these are legitimate sales until they actually close. And further more we have no idea what the actual sales price was.
I want nothing more than for there to be sales activity in harlem at the highest ppsf that the market can carry, but to state that the units have all sold at $700 ppsf at this point is kind of misleading.
The location is good. The photos look okay to my eye -- maybe the build quality is thought to be decent?ReplyDelete
I haven't closely followed condo pricing, but the common charge appears reasonable, and the availability of FHA financing probably increases the pool of potential buyers.
This is among the ugliest buildings in Harlem.ReplyDelete
If this building is indeed a success, I think it is because a lot of first-time homebuyers (which I think there are a lot of) were priced out of other neighborhoods and are looking for reasonably priced apartments (studio, 1 or 2 bedroom) in Harlem as opposed to the larger, expensive apartments in buildings like Soha 118 which is still trying to sell units. New developments should focus a bit more on the price range of first-time homebuyers as opposed to those who are looking for $1 million+ condos in Harlem. There seems to already be an oversupply of those. I think new developments like 88 Morningside and Parc Standard have the right idea in terms of pricing and size.ReplyDelete
Agree with 1:50pm. I actually quite like this building and the price is pretty fair with more than reasonable maintenance fees. When we were looking I saw The Observatory on 103rd & Lex (I think...) and the prices were astronomical for the neighborhood. Maintenance at that place was also in the $900s.ReplyDelete
We looked here, deciding against the location. 113th and 114th Streets, east, are not good. The cafe at the corner of 114th is in a beautiful building, it is a shame.ReplyDelete
Ahh...good old 114th. What can be done about this street? It really seems to be in dire straights.ReplyDelete
In defense of the hostile residents, most of whom sit around the sidewalks throwing garbage hither and yon, they have been done some wrongs. The city moved some of them out, promising to renovate their truly substandard housing, and then just dropped the ball. Something like that. I cannot recall all of the details. Nor can I imagine what will happen with properties. They remain projects.ReplyDelete
There are housing projects further east and south but not on this block. If you are talking about the section 8 buildings, those are also not on the avenue and further east. People who come and check the area out obviously get the value of the location.ReplyDelete
The padlocked buildings that line 114th are projects. They are well-known by people who actually know Harlem buildings.ReplyDelete
There was some motion by the city to sell them a few years ago, it was not approved but I do not remember the particulars.
Yes, padlocked and closed. The rumor is that the section 8 brownstones buildings will be torn down for new buildings and the original tenants are not so sure they will be returning. These are on the other side of the avenue further east. This condo is further west.ReplyDelete
That is not the only condo in that area that is effected by the appearance of 114th... I looked at the park lane with a friend that made the mistake of walking down 114th street on her way there. Neeedless to say it was not a selling feature. If I lived in the this building I would choose my route to and from the 2/3 train at night wisely. It would be interesting to know how many of the contracts are real and how much they actually agreed to for a sale price. It is unlikely that they sold for asking.ReplyDelete
This building is just across the street, on the other side of FDB. Given that, we did not feel that it was sufficiently west of that section of 114th or from the frequent police barricades intended to curtail the drug activity. If you know the area, you must be familiar with these.ReplyDelete
It is misleading to suggest that the bad area is distant. It is not. If people know the truth about an area, they may still move there, but they will stay because they were prepared before arriving.
True that.... In fact, anyone who has lived here for even a small amount of time learns which streets not to walk down at what time of day. And thats just in central harlem from 110 to 125..That is a reality. Many people want to candy coat it, but If that is not what you are expecting then you will be surprised.ReplyDelete
6:02: There is an important distinction that should be made here. When you say they are section 8 buildings, there is a suggestion that tenants may come, bring their section 8 vouchers, and that is okay for this building. This leaves open the possibility that the spaces might be rented to non-section 8 tenants, should these materialize and meet credit requirements, etc.ReplyDelete
That is not at all the case for these buildings. They are designated section 8 buildings and ONLY accept, and house, section 8 tenants. If someone were to leave, a new tenant will be sought exclusively from the section 8 population. This is permanent, and I do not know that this can change even of the buildings are replaced. The wisdom behind this was, we are using taxpayer property, and we must use it in a socially responsible way.
There must be some way to change the designation of these properties. Harlem has an unfair quantity of section 8 housing already. The density is mind boggling. The city should replace those buildings with a building somewhere else in manhattan to distribute the subsidized housing. Or better yet do away with it all together.ReplyDelete
On the other hand, the building is next to Questan's and Posh Paws !ReplyDelete
Sometimes they have kittens for adoption outside.
Oh brother.... yes, a posh paws makes it all better. Drown our disfunction in consumption, even if its a chain store. Oh look, the grant houses, lets go to starbucks.ReplyDelete
Strangely enough though, in spite of, or because of, the obvious section 8 housing and general struggle of Harlem, business rents are still affordable so it allows places like society, native, and les ambassades to exist. In manhattan lower, the rents would be so high that the turnover these places get could not support their businesses. They are charming and local, sometimes a little rough around the edges, but a good thing. So, in spite of it all at least everything is not a chain.ReplyDelete
Fact time everyone! Both sides of 114th St between FDB and ACP are NYCHA projects - the Randolph Houses. Several years ago the city closed down the south side of the street and relocated the tenants - some to the north side of the street and others to nearby projects. The renovations were supposed to happen quickly but never did. Tenants have complained but the city still has no set start date for renovations.ReplyDelete
The PAL closes the block during the summer daylight hours so children have the block for street games - they are not there for drug busts.
This block used to be notorious for drugs but has come under such high surveillance in the past few years that it really isn't so terrible - but it is poverty stricken and there is much loitering especially at night - it almost looks like a movie set for a 1980's ghetto.
My opinion is that the city will not renovate the south side of the street and that they probably closed it down not for renovation but to try to stop the drug trafficking. Of course I can't prove that but it makes sense...
Just to add my two cents, I pass through 114th fairly frequently and as the poster above mentioned, it is cordoned off to allow kids to play during the summer holidays. I have yet to see any signs of drug activity and for the most part it seems to be families hanging outside chatting making use of the empty benches on the opposite side of the street. Definitely an old school community vibe about it, that perhaps used to exist, but is now missing from other parts of the city. Would love to see both sides of the street renovated with affordable housing.ReplyDelete
I would love to see both sides of the street renovated with market rate housing, and to be honest if you do not see the drugs, day or night.......you are wearing rose colored glasses my friend.ReplyDelete
I will just take renovated. I guess it must be the shades (or the early hours)...haven't seen a thing.ReplyDelete
I am with Chris, we must protect as much of the section 8 housing in Harlem as possible. Harlem has an obligation to house as many poor, unemployed, active/recovering addicts as is possible, regardless if the current quantity of section 8 and projects are entirely disproportionate in the area.ReplyDelete
I spent 8 years in university and have 100k in student loans, scraped together just enough money to put a down payment on a condo in Harlem solely so my exorbitant tax dollars could be spent rebuilding section 8 housing in my neighborhood for the unemployed and needy.
To even consider the idea that this property might actually be used to build housing for teachers, nurses, firefighters, and others who make middle incomes, so that more middle class people move to the neighborhood absolutely disgusts me.
Drug dealing is a serious problem in this area. It is not always true that the streets are roped off to allow children to play. The police are struggling to curtail the drug dealing and violence on the side streets east of FDB. I have firsthand knowledge of this. It is obvious even when looking through rose-colored glasses.ReplyDelete
is anyone aware of the shoot-out that happened last Friday evening, Lenox and 114th ? A dice game and robbery and/or disgruntled people and the usual.
I'm not sure I agree with your tone, 10:04, but I get you. Look, I think the issue is the very idea of "Section 8 housing" -- Section 8 is a voucher program for people that need rental assistance. They can and should be able to live anywhere.ReplyDelete
And the sooner the city abandons the failed, destructive formula of concentrating poverty within specific buildings and locales, the better.
poster at 10:04am - your post does not make any sense.ReplyDelete
Poster at 10:04: it is not good for the section 8 people themselves to be concentrated in certain areas. This is not working to accomplish anything positive, and the evidence is right here in Harlem.ReplyDelete
The Randolph Houses are not part of Section 8. They are NYCHA housing projects:ReplyDelete
Section 8 is a voucher program.
10:04 is being sarcastic, but he missed my point. Affordable housing (which is what I was suggesting), as opposed to Section 8, would probably benefit you in your case (unless you are earning 100k + a year), but yeah, I guess it all comes back to having realistic income limits on said affordable housing.ReplyDelete
Market rate housing would almost certainly price you out of the neighborhood if you are carrying a ton of student debt.
Poster 10:04 was being sarcastic, in case some of you did not get that.ReplyDelete
Chris is making an important distinction - "section 8" and "affordable" are two vastly different things. In Harlem, housing designated as "affordable" was often section 8 by default, but this is probably changing.ReplyDelete
New York needs to preserve affordable housing, most landlords and developers are against it of course.
I agree that creating affordable housing along 114th would be a great use of the area.
Market rate is more or less affordable in Harlem these days compared to the rest of manhattan. There are opportunities to buy these condo's at 500- 600 ppsf right now. A household making 100k- 150k a year might be able to swing that, but certainly could not afford anyplace else in manhattan. The issue is that they are having difficulty selling them at those prices because of the issues some of the posters have stated here. Some of the programs "gift" household incomes with less than that, like hdfc apt's where a household income of up to 80k can get a three bedroom apt if they have children. These programs make more sense, even if they are pure charity.
The randolph houses are fully subsidized houses, the properties are locked into that cycle for possible eternity. You can make the buildings look pretty, but you will still have a large concentration of
social welfare concentrated together on one block. These are not people working who cannot quite make the rent to live in new york.
Portland has an interesting urban planning technique, where they require that all new developments have a 10 or 20% allotment for employed people who make below a certain income. That mixes market rates with some subsidy. It does not make concentrations of class in one location.ReplyDelete
10:46: Is it true that the places cannot change, say, to rent stabilized units from project status ? All kinds of funny things happen in New York. I do not know, I am really asking. If not, this is definitely something to consider when thinking through a buy in the direct area.ReplyDelete
It may also be why one of the posters insisted on defining the properties as merely 'section 8" [read; for now ...} and emphasizing that they are padlocked. i.e., selling ...
Good point 10:46. Market rate apartments probably would be a fairer deal for all. Something I wonder though, with the affordable housing deals of today, are there stricter rules in terms of re-selling the apartments at market rate, or renting them out at market rates? That always has seemed to be a bit of a scam.ReplyDelete
NYCHA has the same program only better. I have posted this info before and I got it directly from the NYCHA website.
one out of every two vacanies in public housing are now reserved for working families.
Since tbere are a lot of housing projects in Harlem it is a good idea to learn about how they work. THe NYCHA website doesn't give all the info that you might want but it provides a fair amount..
...sorry I misread your post about the 20% allotment but NYC has that in place also. I know of many developers like The Avalon Group that negotiate with the city on those terms but sometimes they renege or find loopholes later. Plus they are only required to offer the lower cost housing for a period of time.ReplyDelete
Back to the Parc Standard, at least it is next door to Bier International!ReplyDelete
There is not a whole lot to say about the parc standard, you either like the building or you do not....... and as far as the sales performance the building cannot seems to close on many of the units in contract. So really, its sales performance is suspect. One thing for sure, that one apt up high is pretty sweet with the big terrace. High enough off of FDB to be quite enough with nice outdoor space. Layouts are a little strange though with the extra "windowed" room. and the front door opening up right into the kitchen/dining/living room "area".ReplyDelete
10:46 -- HDFC apartments are not simply "gifted" to people under a certain income level. The income restriction is a limitation imposed at the time of purchase, and sellers will generally set an asking price in line with whatever the market will bear (somewhat less than a "market rate" co-op, given the additional regulatory restrictions in place).ReplyDelete
This is also true if the seller is the HDFC corporation itself (i.e., for the sale of a unit that remained empty after the conversion). Assuming the board is following its fiduciary duty, they will seek the highest price that can be obtained from a qualified buyer among the general public, rather than cater to insiders (with or without a kickback).
The folks who do receive shares in an HDFC for a nominal sum (typically $250) are those who lived in the city-owned building prior to its renovation and conversion to an HDFC co-op (meaning they were participants in HPD's TIL program and chose to buy in).