392 3rd Street Goes Condo
Though it’s still a rental building for now (here’s an old Streeteasy listing for a $6,950 three-bed, three-bath), 392 3rd Street, between 5th and 6th Avenues, is going condo. The NY Times has the listing, with six 1,500-square-foot three-bed, two-bath units going for $1.299 million (that’s $866 per square foot), with $247 of common charges…
Though it’s still a rental building for now (here’s an old Streeteasy listing for a $6,950 three-bed, three-bath), 392 3rd Street, between 5th and 6th Avenues, is going condo. The NY Times has the listing, with six 1,500-square-foot three-bed, two-bath units going for $1.299 million (that’s $866 per square foot), with $247 of common charges monthly. The other two units are 2,700-square-foot duplexes: three-beds, three-baths with private patios. Common charges are $416 a month. More factors in the luxury makeover: Jacuzzis, marble steam showers, private laundry, Viking and Bosch appliances and — the biggie — PS321 school district. Think they’ll get their asking price? GMAP
392 3rd Street [NY Times]
i disagree: a friend of mine, hoping to find a rental apt on a great block, asked someone (a workman I think) coming out of the building just this past fall how many apts were vacant and under reno. 3 was the answer. Obviously, this might have changed since then.
Plus, two years ago while renos were in full swing, I stopped at a stoop sale out front and got an earful from an entrenched RS tenant.
Sorry – didn’t mean to sound concrete and facty.
You know what that means Max…tickets for drinking on the stoop if there’s no gate!!!
Max, though the nyt ad is not a model of clarity, the posting here suggests there are 8 units for sale, six floor-thrus and two duplexes. where are you getting that 5 are going to stay rentals?
These look incredibly nice to me.
The maintenance is a steal for an apartment this size.
I think these, despite the market, will sell.
And another thing: does anybody else think it is odd that they completely landscaped the front yard with flagstone and benches but didn’t install any fence/gate at the boundary with the sidewalk?
A few things interest me about this listing since I walk past this place on my way to the subway every day. The two duplexes are composed of ground floor and basement. I watched them digging the hell out of those basements 2 summers ago (I peeked in once – poor workers) – they made them much higher ceilinged than the ordinary basement conversion and it looked pretty nice down there.
The patios could only be little squares of earth just behind the building since the footprint leaves very little property in back and it backs up against another big apt building on 4th St. (thanks Google Earth!)
The other 5 apts must be rent stabilized – otherwise why not vacate them and sell the whole place? And one assumes, given the quality of the reno that the rent stabilized apts must be well below market otherwise they’d have more easily bought these folks out if they could have – though the MCI’s for new mechanicals must be pretty whopping. In any case, I wonder what sort of cash reserves they put in place.
Per Property Shark, they bought the place in 2005 for $2.3M and I assume have been carrying 5 rent stabilized apts for 3 years while renovating 3 apts. Unless they worked some financing magic with the seller, I’m guessing they’re ready to get some cash out of this place already.
Anybody know anything about the effects on quasi-luxury apt valuations in a small building that is 5/8ths rent stabilized tenants?
between 6 and 7th it is a wide street, 5th and sixth have slightly deeper yards and much wider sidewalks.
before the depression they were going to make 3rd Street 2 way but then they ran out of money after only doing one block. Since then, 80 years now, there seems to be no need to progress, and considering two years ago they took some driving lanes out of ninth street, I doubt any time in the near future they would revisit that idea.
3rd street is the really nice wide street right? with the front yards?
*rob*
FLH, they must be counting the underground (garden level) floors since there are six of the 1,500 sf units, which would take up the top three (of the four) floors described in the NY Times ad.