Tasteful friends, the apartment of Adolph Green and Phyllis Newman is listed at $24 million

Flawless.

ON TOP of the museum. Count me out.

The stuff doesn’t REALLY come alive at night, dum dum.

I like that the have done nothing to the terrace. Not a single stitch of nouveau rich decoration. Unless the realtor has stripped it all away.

The parquet flooring seems to need a bit of work, but it's great space.

Zuul like.

Apparently!

Beautiful. I like some rooms better than the peach colored ones, but to be in NYC yet so above it all. Bliss.

Gorgeous.

The monthly maintenance is $9,200, which the listing describes as extremely low. Maybe it is, compared to other $24 million apartments.

Love the kitchen, and, of course, the views.

Big inheritance for her kids.

G was a neighbor?

No, thanks.

It definitely needs some updates, but more of a thoughtful updates to some of the paint and decor, versus a let's flatten it all out and make it an HGTV monstrosity kind of thing.

The kitchen is way too small. It's suspicious no baths are pictured.

Looks like a fixer.

The baths look like bathrooms in middle-class Jewish 60s suburban homes on Long Island. Not like 26 million dollar "residences".

Flawless? Whoever lives in the back bedroom has to share a bathroom with the staff!

It brings a tear to my eye.

That’s a lot of money to live in such a polluted environment.

I love it, warts and all.

Would the co-op board still approve show people? One tires of the paparazzi and let’s not forget the occasional assassin.

I like it, except for pink.

Speaking of pink, Helen Gurley Brown used to have a fabulous place in The Beresford, complete with a sitting room in one of the turrets.

Yes, if I’m going to live in the Beresford, I’m going to want turret access.

I love it. Do the furnishings come with it? If I had another 3 million, I could buy it.

Love Love Love. A real New York apartment. 10 room duplex with terrace on the park? It's perfect.

Think of all the DL favorites who partied there over the past 60 years.

Betty Bacall, Lenny Bernstein, Arlene Francis, Dorothy Kilgallen, Lee Radziwill, etc.

Jule Styne, Stephen Sondheim, Barbra Streisand, Barbara Cook, Hal Prince,...

Allen Ludden, Paul Anka....

Ugh, I think you can see Trump Tower from the balcony, not to mention the various skinny towers going up all over midtown.

R27, Streisand would not have been included in the Green/Newman social circle.

I like it, but I'm not sure I could live that high up. I have a terrible fear of heights, and I'm afraid the terrace would be wasted on me. But, overall, I like it.

It actually seems underpriced. Was this the lady on What's My Line? Did she replace Dorothy?

Do you suppose the co-op board knew her mother was “Marvelle, the Fortune Teller,” and her father, Sigmund, analyzed handwriting under the moniker “Gabel the Graphologist” on the Atlantic City boardwalk?

R33, And that as a child performer she was billed as Baby Phyllis Newman?

What was Phyliss Newman famous for? Just television game shows? Was Mr. Green her spouse, just someone else who lived there another time?

Phyllis was a Tony Award winning actress/singer.

Adolph Green was a famous lyricist/librettist, along with his writing partner Betty Comden.

All three are dead.

When I was a kid in the early '70s, I remember her shilling for some lady product like Midol, Pamprin, or Femiron.

She was a "great" musical theater performer.

R32 Yes.

How the hell did Phyllis Newman get that rich?

Her husband got rich.

I’ve always liked her, but I remember her on Johnny Carson where she was poor mouthing about living hand to mouth and being unable to pay for health insurance. I believed her but something doesn’t jibe. I was about ten and remember being very concerned.

R40, They purchased the apartment 60 years ago for a fraction of the now $24 million price tag.

Same for Bacall, who purchased her Dakota apartment in 1961 for less than $100K and it sold for $21 million.

Aren´t all actors members of a union?

Helen Gurley Brown’s turret sitting room could be soooooo much better with a little imagination

Why do you think Streisand wouldn't have been there?

R23 living with Turret Syndrome.

[quote]I’ve always liked her, but I remember her on Johnny Carson where she was poor mouthing about living hand to mouth and being unable to pay for health insurance.

[quote]They purchased the apartment 60 years ago for a fraction of the now $24 million price tag.

I read that the Greens bought their Beresford cp-op in the early 1960s for I think $45,000.

Comden and Green wrote a bunch of musicals, but very few big hits, and nothing like RENT, or Phantom, or Chicago. Now surely the Greens weren't POOR poor, but shows rarely ran for many years back then, a huge hit ran a few years, and being a writing team, Comden+Green split their earnings 50-50, of course. Their biggest hit "Singin' in the Rain" was a film, fully produced and owned by MGM, so they didn't make ANY money from the film other than the paychecks they cashed in 1952, a long time ago. There was a stage version which flopped on Broadway, and they didn't write the score just the libretto, the film's producer Arthur Freed and Nacio "Herb" Brown wrote the score.

Even their biggest hits aren't big earners other than "On the Town". Their other "hits" "Wonderful Town", and "Bells Are Ringing" aren't cash gushers. "A Doll's Life", "Do-Re-Mi", "Hallelujah Baby", "On the Twentieth Century" "Subways Are for Sleeping", and "The Will Rogers Follies" are seldom revived by anyone. Phyllis used to call up the publisher Music Theater International who license the Comden+Green catalogue and ask "What is the next quarter looking like?", and sometimes ask for her share of royalties in advance. You pay that co-op maintenance every month! In her final years Green's partner Betty Comden sold her co-op and moved to one of those massive Soviet-looking co-op buildings in the West 60s, which are far less glamorous and expensive to maintain.

Phyllis Newman and Adolph Green both acted and performed wherever they could, but both lived long lives and spent lots of money, which I guess their royalties barely covered.

R47 I adore your sort of cleverness... It's like the classic DL wit that has evaporated.

But those views. Would not matter what the rest of the apartment looked like.

Profit they are making on that place is likely insane -- UWS was sketch back when they bought it 60 years ago

Ha! We cross-posted R48, but you answered my question. Thanks!

Because she was a self absorbed bitch who never wanted to be a part of the theater community, R46? Because she wanted to believe she was above it and convinced herself that she "did it all by herself"? Because she never gave credit to anyone or anything? Because she saw theater as a stepping stone to a Hollywood career where she could do shitty movies? Not sure, R46.

R48 Agreed. But Green must have done very well with Peter Pan. And songs like "The Party's Over" and "Just in Time" are standards. No?

And now we have "Phyllis On Assistance" to make fun of.

Very nice!

The fireplace communion-rail setup is strange, though.

Phyllis should have sold it years ago and lived it up.

This is a first for me re these tasteful friends threads---but this place is really nice. I like everything about it. Nothing offends!

The apartment already has an offer from someone in the building. The Greens had a very high royalty income from his shows that are still being performed today. They also had a great house in East hampton they sold around 10 years ago. My Grandparents had a similar apartment at 15 West 81st St without terraces next door to the Beresford which they bought for under $40,000.

[quote]Agreed. But Green must have done very well with Peter Pan. And songs like "The Party's Over" and "Just in Time" are standards. No?

Comden and Green contributed "additional lyrics" to the "Peter Pan" score written by Carolyn Leigh and Moose Charlap, and again, they wrote SOME lyrics to SOME songs, not the music, or the libretto, and they still split their royalty 50-50. It probably isn't very much. More or less the same with "Applause", they wrote just the libretto in that case, not the lyrics and that show is never revived.

Yes, "The Party's Over" and "Just in Time" are their biggest hits, but again, lyrics only, half of that royalty each. In contrast the reason Lin-Manuel Miranda makes such a staggering amount from "Hamilton" is that he wrote the music, libretto AND lyrics all by himself, and the show has already run longer than ANY Comden & Green show ever ran and will likely never go away.

I don't know the details, but at some point Green owned a music publishing company with his friends Bernstein, Sondheim, Jule Styne, and, I think, Comden. Styne's eldest son, Stan, managed the company for a while.

R40

Central Park West like much of the UWS from 60's up into the low 90's was a vastly different place sixty or fifty years ago. Much of it was considered blighted and slated for urban renewal, that is just how much of it was slums.

You could have picked up a row house, former mansion or even rented a grand pre-war apartment from Riverside Drive to Central Park West for very little money.

The Beresford like many pre-war buildings was rental until converting to co-op (1962), while others on UWS and elsewhere didn't convert until late as 1980's. That meant these buildings often had renters (tenants who didn't buy), who often were living in rent regulated apartments paying very low sums per month. People like Nora Epron, Mia Farrow, Cyndi Lauper, among others all at one time or another had "cheap" UWS huge pre-war apartments.

Unlike across Central Park on Fifth Avenue, the co-ops of Central Park West were more open to diversity, this included gays, blacks, Jews, mixed race couples, theater people (actors, actresses, performing artists, etc...). Many would have liked to be on UES, but since they couldn't it was CPW/UWS where (back then at least) they got more for their money anyway.

As mentioned by R58, here ya go; the Green's Hampton's compound.

If someone inside the Beresford is making an offer, that could be it then; usually boards like that sort of thing. Well provided current shareholder is in good grace and favor along with having ready money.

R44

Yes, most if not all who qualify are; they'd be fools not to join SAG/AFTRA.

That being said, there is dirt; but isn't there always?

R62 Nice pool. Thanks.

Thirty million and you still have an apartment with steam heating and window air conditioners. A homeless shelter (ok hotel that takes in homeless via city program) down the street. A half-way house/shelter around the corner, and more of the same within several blocks.

A woman was attacked a few blocks north at CPW and 83rd.....

A subway stop right in front of building means all sorts of persons coming and going past 24/7. City is in process of removing parking along west side of CPW to install bike lane from 59th to 96th.

Just watched "My Favorite Year" again and Adolph Green was laugh out loud funny as King Kaiser's frazzled producer.

The terraces and views are just about perfect.

Eat Me in St. Louis

Bang bang bang

With a hard-on

Wang Wang wang

In a twat

Wee wee wee

In a pussy

Ooh baby together we're hot

Bam bam bam

With a packer

Warm warm warm

In a slot

We could have fun together

Ooh baby I want what you've got!

Doing ding ding

With a hard-on

Ding ding ding

With a hard-on

Ding ding ding

With a hard-on

[quote]Thirty million and you still have an apartment with steam heating

That means radiators, right? I LOVE radiators.

Think it's baseboards.

But those horrid parquets floors and they all have to all go except the classic checkered kitchen floor, love that.

Over decades the Beresford apartments has seen the who's who of theater/entertainment world as residents.

This New York Times piece "Upstairs at the Beresford" interviews late actor Roger Rees, and his husband Rick Elice, in their CPW facing apartment.

it's quite charming. It's a lot of money for their kids.

Key difference between CPW and Fifth Avenue co-ops is UWS buildings generally (but not always) allow financing in whole or part. The B. allows up to 50% if am reading sales listing correctly.

Across the park however things are vastly different. Most UES buildings, especially co-ops on Fifth or Park avenues do not allow financing period; sales are all cash transactions. Same for certain white glove buildings on Sutton and Beekman Place.

Needless to say not everyone has ten, twenty or more million lying about spare to pay for an apartment. Even those that do (and have plenty left over) may not want to put that money into equity, but rather have it earning or doing something else where.

While it is true certain properties should increase in value over years, but with co-op or condo that always isn't a given. Especially if one is not planning on remaining for twenty or thirty years.

One of reasons behind the boom in condo or private home (row house, mansion, etc...) over past decade or so is those types of housing can be financed. People have say paid six million for a townhouse in cash, then turned around and pulled money out of their property via loans. When interest rates were near or at nil this made sense as it was some of the cheapest money you could get.

Will be interesting to see if this apartment sells at asking or anywhere close.

Lauren Bacall's apartment down the street at Dakota finally sold for $21 million down from asking $26 million.

R74

The daughter is married to a famous orthopedic surgeon, so while not loaded with buckets of money, isn't near starvation either.

Depending how things are structured a good chunk of this sale will go to taxes. Thankfully for the Green's heirs Donald Trump/GOP tax (ahem) reform lowered rates on estate and other taxes until 2025.

Love the apartment on the whole, but what little they showed of the kitchen was very underwhelming, which I suppose is why they didn't show more. And sad they showed none of the bathrooms. Old people, even the very rich elderly, are rarely interested in upgrading baths and kitchens. The thought of all that work is overwhelming to them, so they're satisfied to live with what's already there. They only replace an appliance if an old one breaks down and can't be repaired. The elderly more often than not like things "the way they were" and don't want to hear about the way they could be. Plus they know they're close to the end anyway so what's the point. They won't live long enough to enjoy the change.

With Thanksgiving just several days away since no one mentioned it.....

Those grand apartments along Central Park West that overlook the park have front row seating for annual Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade. Units with terraces or balconies are even more fun.

Everyone has brunch or some sort of party, more so if there are children in the household or extended family. Some homes have sleep overs which gives children and adults a chance to walk about CPW and side streets Thanksgiving eve for the balloon blowing up and other prep work.

Needless to say by Tuesday evening before Thanksgiving NYPD has started getting barricades ready (walked along CPW last night and some were already unloaded), and by Wednesday the area is a zoo. Making even getting in or out of our own building a hassle. Central Park West is closed off to traffic so if you need to drive (such as load up your car to head out to country or wherever spending the holiday), best to get it done by Tuesday before.

I would have to have some sort of permanent cover installed on at least a portion of that terrace in order to take advantage of it during light rains. But the building management would probably put a stop to that right quick.

R77

Adding to your comment remember this is a Manhattan, NYC "white glove" co-op. Meaning getting any work done is often an aggravating hassle with the board.

For instance off the bat many of our best buildings only allow major renovation/construction from Memorial Day until Labor Day or say late May until September. Reason? Most households will be away (the country or out of it) during those months so other inhabitants won't be bothered.

Depending what is wanting to be done plans have to be filed with city, go through the board, and if building is a landmark that adds another layer. Landmark doesn't cover interior of private homes, but if you wanted to do something like install new windows or anything else that involves the facade...

Beautuiful, I want it

R78, While filming "The Mirror Has Two Faces" together, Bacall invited Jeff Bridges and his family to her Dakota apartment to view the Macy's parade.

Interesting analysis by First Night Fannie about Adolph Greene's income stream.

It makes sense the apartment will probably sell to another building resident, since new money coming into the city today would loathe such an old building- a co-op AND a fixer-upper. Hence the Woody Allen-esque theme music accompanying the photos.

The daughter did not waste any time selling it.

Green and Newman were wealthy, but not fabulously wealthy. They could have never afforded to buy it at today's price.

[quote]The daughter did not waste any time selling it.

She had no choice. Helen Gurley Brown's heir wanted to live in her apartment and the building forbade it and forced a sale. Co-ops don't play around.

r76, a very handsome orthopedic surgeon!

We're forgetting that Adolph Green, along with Betty Comden, were the most important musical screenwriters at MGM during their golden period. They wrote screenplays for Singing In The Rain, The Bandwagon, On The Town, Auntie Mame, and others. I'm sure Hollywood was where they got most of their money.

Jerry Seinfeld supposedly lives on the 19th floor, also.

R86, Very handsome? Seriously?

R88, After Adolph died, Seinfeld offered to purchase the apartment to join it with his, but Phyllis chose to remain living there.

They've done some serious photoshopping in this photo of Amanda. Starting with getting rid of all the gum she shows when she smiles.

So as someone who grew up there...

The UWS was very sketchy in places during the 60s and 70s. As such, it was favored by people in the arts who could get large apartments for cheap in easy commuting distance of theaters. There was also a sizable Jewish community with a lot of psychiatrists, journalists and professors sprinkled among the doctors, lawyers and teachers.

West End and Riverside were always nice-ish and Broadway was sort of the dividing line--east of Broadway you had tenement style buildings along Columbus and Amsterdam and on the side streets. So CPW was sort of isolated and thus the apartments were not that expensive given the location.

That all changed in the 80s as the area became gentrified.

I grew up further south than the Beresford, but I suspect the dynamics in the building were the same. (My parents bought our place in the early 80s so they were among the first of the new wave of young professionals moving in.)

A lot of the older people in our building (and there were a LOT of older people when I was a little kid) were upper middle class retirees who didn't have that much by current standards, e.g, if you were a law firm partner in the 60s and 70s you might have been making $300K/year, which was like $2M/year in 2019 dollars, but when you retired in 1977, you didn't have a whole lot in the bank and if you then lived for 25 years off your savings, and got hit by some major medical bills and gave money to your kids, suddenly it was 2000 and you didn't have a lot of money left, but the apartment you bought for $50K in 1967 was now worth $5M, so you had that.

It led to a lot of battles between the newer families who wanted amenities like playrooms and gyms in the building and to redo the lobbies, upgrade the electricity, etc. and the seniors who didn't want to spend.

At this point almost all those buildings are mostly newer residents who paid millions and so all the amenities are in place and the boards have gotten more sophisticated and all that.

CPW still has a very different vibe than 5th or Park, it's not so much "new money" as people who don't care about "society" and all that. That includes many people who might qualify (by DL standards) as "old money" but are just opting out of the uptight world of their parents.

Add to that the fact that many of the buildings on CPW are nicer than the ones on Fifth and that CPW is both less crowded and more integrated into the neighborhood than Fifth with subway access and two parks (Central and Riverside) and lots of people prefer the UWS.

I'm thinking the Green/Newman apartment is one of the last giant high-floor apartments left in the name buildings (Dakota, Beresford, San Remo, El Dorado) along CPW.

New/foreign money tends to go for condos, so they'd all be in those buildings by Time Warner Center and along Riverside in the area formerly named after Orange Twitler.

[quote]Green and Newman were wealthy, but not fabulously wealthy.

But didn't they make a fortune in the meat tenderizer business?

[quote]CPW still has a very different vibe than 5th or Park, it's not so much "new money" as people who don't care about "society" and all that. That includes many people who might qualify (by DL standards) as "old money" but are just opting out of the uptight world of their parents.

Are the co-op boards less snobby than the ones on the UES? I know The Ardsley rejected Mariah Carey, but she completely fucked up her interview by coming in with an entourage and acting like a loon.

For those of you worried about how Phyllis Newman could afford to live in this apt, do you understand that these kinds of people do not live off CASH? They live off income from investments. And if Adolf was indeed in publishing, he probably made a mint to invest.

CPW Thanksgiving filmed in Farrow's apartment: no terrace to watch the parade from.

[quote]Are the co-op boards less snobby than the ones on the UES? I know The Ardsley rejected Mariah Carey, but she completely fucked up her interview by coming in with an entourage and acting like a loon.

A friend of mine lived at the Dakota many decades ago. She said they rejected Cher.

Their place in the Hamptons, upthread, was beautiful. But, lord, that bathroom could have used some love.

R92 speaks the truth. I'd add those apartments were also FILTHY before they got re-sold by their heirs.

One more thing, after the War the Jews were completely shutout of 95 % of the Upper East Side A-list buildings.

Comden and Green were uber-Jews (think lyrics about Kleins) so there is no way a wasp-dominated building would go near them. Hence the Upper West Side, which was also always easier for African-Americans to travel to clean their houses. The Upper East Side preferred Irish domestics, who would not have been all that happy about working for the Jews back then.

I would take out all the walls to create a more open space concept. Hubby can't wait for demo day. Some shiplap and a huge clock, paint the whole thing white and done!

R91, Bad link. Unfortunately, Amanda resembles her father.

Adam Green also resembles his father. Pity.

[quote] Are the co-op boards less snobby than the ones on the UES?

They used to be fairly clueless (this from my dad who made the grave error of letting himself get talked onto the board of our building's board back in the day because he was a lawyer) as for many years they would pretty much take anyone who was interested in buying.

They've become much more discerning but it's not the snobbery you find on the UES. They may reject celebrities because they don't want the hassle, but mostly they are looking for people who will live there full time and be a part of the community of the building

All true R99, but people like the Comden-Greens would never have thought about living on Park Avenue--they wanted someplace a little messy and artsy and everyone they knew lived on the UWS--it was part of their identity. (Which is not to say there weren't social climbing Jews, but they stuck to buildings on Park like the one my grandparents lived in where it was mostly Our Crowd Germans and they had their own society.)

And the apartments weren't so much filthy as just not-renovated-in-50-years and smelt and looked like someone in their 80s or 90s had been living there, often cared for by round-the-clock nurses for the last few years so yes, they were pretty much gut rehabs.

In her memoir, Newman wrote about how self-conscious her son was about his height. I think she just said he was short, not exactly how short. As mentioned above, both her kids look exactly like Green. In her book, she was always taking great trips, and one kid went to Harvard, the other to Brown. I think Adolph invested the money he had wisely, and had wealthy friends who gave him savvy business advice; by the 70s, they seem to be on easy street.

It's hard to believe today that the UWS used to be slummy in many areas, I've heard plenty of stories from old-timers about how shitty it was in the 70s and 80s. Prostitutes would stroll up and down West End Ave. and Riverside Drive, and turn tricks in Riverside Park. Lots of muggings at night and also in broad daylight.

It’s sad that a middle class family could afford to live in that building a few decades ago and now you need to be born with a platinum spoon in your mouth to even be interrogated by the co-op board.

[quote]New/foreign money tends to go for condos,

There have been many articles in recent years about how the pre-war buildings are losing their luster because they're outdated and of course the dreaded co-op boards. People want new buildings with all the modern conveniences (gyms and central air/heat are a must, among other things) and they just don't want to deal with the hassles that living in an old building entails.

There's that R107. but there's also the fact that co-ops look unfavorably at people who won't make New York their primary residence. They want someone who will volunteer to help supervise decorating the children's playroom for the holidays, not someone who will drop in for three days to go shopping over the holidays. That excludes most of the Russians and Chinese and tech moguls from the Bay Area who want a place in New York for bragging rights.

It's not all foreigners, though. Lots of full-time NYers can't be bothered with the old co-op buildings anymore. Times change.

R85

Couple of reasons why heirs or the estate sells off a co-op.

First yes, even if one inherits (or out right buys) shares in a co-op, the board does not have to allow said person or persons to move in. They may and most likely will require the same approval process including presenting a package just like everyone else.

Next just as with a private home heir, heirs or the estate have hefty tax bills which require liquidating some assets to pay, unless of course they can find other funds.

Finally people who inherit property aren't always in the position financially to carry in terms of taxes and other costs. Know of at least three UES townhouses that had to be sold (one at eventually fire sale price by motivated heirs) because they couldn't afford taxes and otherwise to keep the place.

IIRC monthly maintenance on this unit is around $10k, an assessment that can increase with any vote by the board. Larger apartments hold more shares and thus are affected by raising monthly charges.

As noted the Green's daughter is in theater and married to a doctor. They likely have some money, but enough to keep that apartment (providing they even want to go through the board approval process), obviously one does not know for certain.

It could also be the two children decided best to cash out now rather than wait ten, twenty or more years after either one of them dies (who ever moved into the apartment), and try to sell then.

Again thanks to DT and GOP tax "reform" while estate and other taxes are still substantial on such a sale, they are better than previous rates which things will revert to in 2025 unless something happens. Given the noise coming out of Warren and other democrats about taxing wealth to pay for their vast wish list of social spending, can understand selling up now rather than being caught with pants down later.

R89

Not to cause offense; but Dr. Jeffery Kaplan is good looking enough in a Jewish male sort of way. While not tall, he does have the other common trait of an attractive enough face, at least while young. However as time goes on aging often isn't kind.

Interesting take on whole "Good Buildings" on UES and elsewhere:

How the other half lives!

"And the apartments weren't so much filthy as just not-renovated-in-50-years and smelt"

SMELT?

One thing to remember about "our very best" or "good buildings" is that few to anyone is building anything remotely like them anymore. Yes, that A.M Stern building on CPW comes close, but places with plaster/lath walls that are two or three brick thick, 10' or higher ceilings, and so forth just aren't going to happen ever again on a large scale.

For one thing land costs are so high assembling a whole or half block is just often not possible for what one would get in rents or sales per square foot. So developers simply build "up" instead.

Main thing is thanks to zoning changes and multiple dwelling laws passed post WWI you simply cannot even design these pre-war buildings anymore.

On another note no end of new construction in NYC today, and this includes units selling for millions or renting for very high figures are total garbage in terms of construction quality.

For you girls that like pre-war apartment porn, here is a unit a few blocks west and two south in Apthorp.

Unit was purchased and renovated by a "designer couple" (code word for gay?), and IIRC didn't sell but is now rented out.

For record even as a condo and for all the noise about pre-war it has been very heavy lifting to sell off units at Apthorp.

Seventh-Ninth and Broadway is a nice enough area I suppose, but not for prices people are asking. More so when target demographic has a wealth of choices including new construction.

Speaking of pre-war buildings you won't see ever again going up, add courtyard residences to that list. Only ones left (Apthorp, Astor, and others) are only ones and no one is going to build them ever again. That empty court yard space while great for air and light represents a total waste far as developers are concerned, especially when one has a full city block of property to build upon. Heating and ventilation systems have vastly improved since before WWI, so need for open court yards really no longer exists. Fact you have plenty of modern construction high rise residential where windows don't even open is proof.

[quote]I'm thinking the Green/Newman apartment is one of the last giant high-floor apartments left in the name buildings (Dakota, Beresford, San Remo, El Dorado) along CPW.

YMF, where did they go?

R117

As with many pre-war buildings post WWI and Great Depression changes were made that broke up large units into smaller apartments.

Original floor plans for Beresford had two or three apartments per floor. This was in keeping with concept for these new buildings like the Dakota and so forth going up prior to WWI or WWII; they were literally mansions in the air built to lure the wealthy out of their own private mansions or town houses into apartment living. The latter was something American wealthy abhorred in concept; finding apartment living rather louche. This even though idea was imported from the various palaces and hôtel particulier of France and elsewhere.

WWI and Great Depression affected nearly every segment of society, and that included the wealthy demographic these grand old pre-war buildings were aimed to attract. So units were broken down over years into more easily rented (or sold) size.

Ironically fast forward to the 1990's or so until now many buyers of these old pre-war co-ops look to recreate original floor plans by buying adjacent units that were once part of their apartment, in short putting things back to rights in creating one large unit.

If you've ever been into any of these pre-war buildings often you'll notice something just isn't right about apartment layout. Often it is because things were chopped up and thus flow as designed is broken.

Favorite way of doing this is to seal off those long hallways by creating closets (one one each side of "new" apartment). In film Rosemary's Baby, Roman and Minnie Minnie Castevet's apartment is on other side of one rented by Guy and Rosemary Woodhouse. The two units were once one large apartment but was divided a closet is key. Rosemary can hear goings on in the Castevet's apartment through said closet, and the witches next door gain access to her's via same.

Actually Ruth/R117 (and R118) I meant that it was one of the last ones that was still owned by someone who'd bought it 40+ years ago or their heirs and not extensively remodeled.

I suspect that whoever buys the apartment at OP will put some serious money in bringing it up to date--kitchens, bathrooms, lighting, electric, etc.

You figure if someone is spending $25M on an apartment, they're going to want plumbing to match and that they're not going to be running to Home Depot on the weekend and watching DIY videos on YouTube to make that happen.

Who owns it now?

I get everything you're saying, but it's not as if people have been buying and dividing large units recently. They don't become available often, once in a generation, but it's not as if they're endangered.

According to this thread R120, someone from the building bought it, or at least put a bid on it.

But given Datalounge, I'd take that with several grains of salt.

Maybe even an entire shaker.

I'm not going to believe that it sold, as it was only listed today.

People today who want the pre-war look, and have $24 million to spend, are more likely to be attracted to the new faux historic apartment houses going up around the city.

Of course they don't have anywhere near the build quality of something built in the 1930s, but they do have the nice kitchens and bathrooms people want today. As well as pools, gyms and so forth.

They have a lot more character than the usual glass tower. I like this one a lot.

R121,

Maybe or maybe not; it all depends upon where these huge units are located and how cobbled together.

Late Huguette Clark's massive apartment at 907 Fifth was broken up and sold as the three separate units they were by order of board.

R124

Will give you about bathrooms, but one must remember many early residents of these pre-war apartments well into the 1960's or so then nor now even see their kitchens; they have help for that.

R125 You got me. I remember that.

Speaking of huge apartments, 907 Fifth has its fair share.

r124 I also like that one.

Love that graceful little curved staircase, just tucked away in the corner....

R124

Beckford House and Tower are firmly in Yorkville on Second avenue and 80th and 81st. That Icon Realty couldn't be bothered to even think of separate names for two different buildings is telling enough.

No one seriously considering the rich heartland of UES or even part of UWS will settle for that area of Yorkville, Second Avenue Subway or not. Sales office has opened, but myself and others are keen to see if Icon gets anywhere near asking prices for either rental or condo units.

[quote]Will give you about bathrooms, but one must remember many early residents of these pre-war apartments well into the 1960's or so then nor now even see their kitchens; they have help for that.

Doesn't matter.

Even if they don't use the kitchen, they want something that's brand new, clean, bright with a professional range, huge fridge, wine cooler, space to eat-in etc.

And BTW: dabbling in cooking is something that young wealthy people are often interested in today.

Separate names, for two separate buildings?

Robert AM Stern on W 81st Street

R113

Two separate buildings one block from each other with a stretch of low rise structures and East 81st between.

Jayne Wrightsman's place is on the market.

[quote]That Icon Realty couldn't be bothered to even think of separate names for two different buildings is telling enough.

Dumb comment.

[quote]No one seriously considering the rich heartland of UES or even part of UWS will settle for that area of Yorkville, Second Avenue Subway or not.

Is that really still a "thing?" Personally, I think it's relaxed a lot in recent times. Living on a certain side of Lexington isn't really as important as it used to be, esp. with younger people.

Of the new retro style buildings, I find this one to be absolutely gorgeous. It's a shame it's on an ugly block.

R85

Hold up! Gurley Brown's daughter inherited her mom's home & the co-op board refused to let her live there????

WTF! How is that even legal? You said co-op boards "don't play around". Why do they get a say if it's her home & why would they care if her daughter lived there (assuming she's not a felon).

R137

No, it wasn't and FWIW think your example is "dumb" as well. What is the point of having two buildings only marginally near each other with same names?

So if you're expecting guests, a delivery or whatever it would be wise to give street address and not have them rely solely upon Beckford "house" or "tower". Particularly since Second avenue is one way going south, many drivers are likely to stop for the first "Beckford" they see, assuming name is going to remain somewhere on buildings. Currently they are on scaffold signage.

Not to mention one building is rental, the other condo. This Icon's first time at the rodeo as developers, and they are primarily known as one step up from slumlords (company routinely makes various lists of top ten worst landlords), so needless to say don't have high hope for this project far as luxury housing is concerned.

R85

Unless missed something Helen Gurley Brown was childless. Her husband predeceased her by two years, so there wasn't a daughter or any other child to inherit that apartment.

Furthermore yes, co-ops do not have to transfer shares based upon inheritance or any other means of conveyance; the board is well within its rights to approve or deny anyone or thing they choose who makes such an application.

More than a handful of children whose parents were shareholders simply aren't what a building wants (for various reasons ranging from personal conduct to finances), and thus won't be allowed to have their parent's apartment regardless of what a will or whatever states.

Ditto when you see auctions in news media about estate or forclousure auctions on shares of a co-op apartment. Yes, you can win said auction but the co-op board does not have to allow you to take possession of unit.

r142 There was a NYT article about it. I couldn't remember exactly, hence why I used heir. The woman who manages Helen Gurley Brown's estate took years to sell the apartment and wanted the trust to continue to own the apartment. The building was not having it.

[quote]To inspire the children who take part in the programs, many of whom are economically disadvantaged, Ms. Burton has been opening the Beresford apartment for meetings and events. Ms. Brown’s desk was moved there, the bits and bobs atop intact as if in a museum exhibit, from the Hearst Tower.

-- r85

R142

Answers are contained in above linked NYT piece:

"The rules of the co-op dictate that an estate without an heir who is an immediate family member must sell the apartment as soon as possible. Ms. Burton asked for some time before selling, so she could unwind the estate, and Mr. Phufas was fine with that."

Furthermore:

"“Estates from notable people and with complicated trusts often take years to settle,” he said.

But patience began to dwindle a few months ago when Ms. Burton told Mr. Phufas that she wanted the trust to continue to own the apartment.

“That is a wish,” he said. “Wishes are one thing and legal obligations are another.” He later added: “We told them they have to sell it ASAP. Our common courtesy commitment has been fully fulfilled.”

Ms. Burton initially said of the board, “We are in a battle with them to let us keep it.” She later attributed the delay at least in part to renovation on the building’s facade and tower. “We couldn’t sell it because the roof was leaky,” she said.

“Ideally you want that to be done before you put it on the market,” Mr. Phufas said, “but it took less than one year. It’s been three years.”

William D. Zabel, a lawyer in New York who is uninvolved in the estate but has represented the estates of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis and many others, found the situation unusual.

“This is a strange, strange story,” he said. “There is no good reason for keeping that apartment for more than six months. These things can take time when you are negotiating estate taxes but when it’s all going to charity, there are no taxes,” he said.

Moreover, a trustee should not subject an asset to possible devaluation in a fluctuating market, said William Josephson, a retired partner at the law firm Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, who was the head of the New York’s attorney general’s Charities Bureau. “A trustee is obligated to sell an illiquid asset as soon as possible,” he said."

end quote

Trust of Mrs. Brown's estate was seeking to use that apartment as some sort of museum or for meetings and events, not as residential living. That alone would tick off many co-op boards white glove buildings or not. You move into a co-op to live; not have all sorts of people tramping in for "events".

Nearly all co-ops have rules or otherwise specify in proprietary lease outlining conditions for sale or transfer of shares to heirs, trusts, etc... In other words what is and is not allowed and rules that must be followed.

Longer a building allows things to go on unsettled with a deceased person's shares/apartment things can come back to bite them in behind legally later. More so giving the liberal left leaning of NYS court system. If trustee of HRB's estate had been allowed to carry on with their events or other uses of that apartment for two, three or more years what happens when someone else wants to do the same? If matter went to court a judge may say (and rightly so) a precedent was set and that could be that.

There is a process to transfer shares of co-op to a revocable trust, but it is complicate, costly and subject to building's rules.

R128

I will never understand the enigma known as Hugette Clark. She has $400 million dollars and a 50 room NYC apartment yet she chose to live the last 20 years of her life in a hospital. Not because it was required but because she chose to.

All the while she has dozens of servants who keep up her NYC palace, her Santa Barbara home & her CT home as if she'll pop in at any day.

And Huguette Clark was in a normal hospital room, too. It wasn't a private hospital suite. Bizarre woman.

R146

For which Beth Israel hospital extracted every penny they could get out of Huguette Clark.

Thanks to the clock running out estate of late Ms. Clark couldn't claw back any of the vast sums either. wicked when you think about it.

I used to read about Huguette and her dollhouse collection and think she was a little off. When I saw her collection of dollhouse furniture I understood it completely.

R146

Maybe, then again maybe not. Those close to her in charge of managing her financial affairs were cleared of wrong doing on grounds Ms. Clark was lucid and otherwise in her right mind right up to the end it seems.

When you look at it so many of these heiresses from early part of last century well past middle ended up to various degrees somewhat "damaged" if that is proper word.

Usually things started before they got out of the nursery by having one or both parents who shouldn't have been allowed to breed. Things pile on when you're surrounded by people who mainly are only there because of your money, or so you believe and or are told.

Statements made by Beth Israel are more telling:

"A brief submitted by the hospital's lawyer, Marvin Wexler, in January and obtained by The New York Times counters that the hospital provided “a well-attended home where [Clark] was able to live out her days in security, relative good health and comfort, and with the pleasures of human company.”

Relative to the size of her $300 million fortune, Wexler argued, the gifts she gave the hospital were small. Besides, "Having provided lifesaving and compassionate care to a person of Ms. Clark’s wealth, it would have been surprising if Beth Israel had not approached her for donations."

For those who do not know, hospitals are going into overdrive hitting up well off to wealthy patients for "donations".

If the attending physician or a nurse won't or whatever, some places now have entire teams/offices who will either visit a prospective touch while they are still inpatient, and or contact them shortly after discharge.

We're not talking about some kindly religious making the rounds with their begging cup; but college educated professional rain makers who are there to do a job; get money. These people review daily admissions, seek information from nursing or other staff etc... and it is all legal long as they do not discuss/divulge personal healthcare information.

Ms. Clark or anyone like her would have or still is a sitting duck for such fund raising.

In the end how things rolled, and a cautionary tale; if you truly don't want your family to get anything, better set up ironclad trusts, because your will can and likely will be challenged and smashed.

Ms. Clark's family went from getting nothing via her will, to over $300 million to be divided up.

Next big winner was that personal nurse who received $31 million during Ms. Clark's lifetime in gifts, only had to return $5 million. While she lost out on potentially another $30 million or so from the will, the nurse still got over $20 million. Who said a career in nursing doesn't pay well?

The reason Hugette's situation is so crazy is one the one hand it seems she enjoyed or felt looked after in the hospital. She was taken care of (even thought she wasn't sick enough to be in patient) by a team of RNs. She only had a small hospital room.

With her wealth she could've had private duty RNs around the clock at home. She wouldn't be confined to a small hospital room. She had a palatial apartment. The RNs could take her for walks & later wheel chair rides thru the park or drives in the country. She could be surrounded by her collectibles and such.

Whenever I've been hospitalized (5 days) I was climbing the walls.

I was once hospitalized for two days and I was also climbing the walls. I could not wait to get out of there and be in my own home and my own bed. I cannot imagine how or why that woman wanted to stay in a hospital.

R153

Read linked article above and other media; even Ms. Clark's own personal physician who initially tried to convince her to move back "home" or whatever in end agreed her condition improved by remaining in hospital. Not only that Ms. Clark seemed happy was stable and thriving.

Ms. Clark had been living on her own before being admitted, and what did all her wealth get here then? Skin cancers that got way out of control due to not being addressed promptly and properly along with assorted other health issues. She wasn't eating properly and not taking care of herself, nor was in any condition to do so.

Being estranged from family who was going to engage and supervise these nurses and others people on DL recommends? You don't think private duty nurses and others don't do things to their wealthy charges? You don't think stuff doesn't go walkabout (silver, jewels, other valuables)? You don't think their wealth insulates these people from elder abuse?

At least in hospital nurses attending Ms. Clark were vetted as Beth Israel as their employer is ultimately responsible for their actions.

Are there good and dedicated RNs and LPNs who do home care? Sure, by all accounts it was the late Mrs. Brooke Astor's nurses who ratted out her son, and did their best (even when it meant going up against the son's explicit instructions otherwise) for their patient.

In a perfect world someone from Ms. Clark's extended family would (or should) have stepped in; but they used the excuse of her not wanting then near to beg off. Family knew where Ms. Clark was, and likely extent of her condition. Did any of the nephews or nieces show up and make a determined effort to help their aunt? Yes, maybe at first she would have told them to get lost, but who knows what perseverance, time and tenderness could have done.

R138

Well we shall see won't we when sales/rentals commence.

Second Avenue isn't Lexington or even Third, and yes will give you that there was a time people wouldn't be caught dead living east of Lexington (aside from East End), yes to some extent things have loosened up. Still it will be interesting to see just who moves into these buildings. Extell is doing something on First between 79th and 80th that will be an entire block.

Sales have begun for Beckford house, prices aren't that out of line for new construction when you consider how little "family sized" apartments there are in Yorkville.

Fun fact: Huguette Clark was a fan of the Smurfs and enjoyed painting them as well as watching them on TV.

She liked 80s cartoons in her 80s.

Hugette <3 Smurfette

Yes, but was Huguette Clark ever a panelist on "What's My Line?"

[quote]Adolph Green, along with Betty Comden, were the most important musical screenwriters at MGM during their golden period. They wrote screenplays for Singing In The Rain, The Bandwagon, On The Town, Auntie Mame, and others. I'm sure Hollywood was where they got most of their money.

I think you are mistaken. They wrote screenplays for MGM as EMPLOYEES there and were guns for hire. I'm certain they did not retain any ownership of their works, and residuals for broadcast and other non-theatrical income was not a contractual reality back then. Old movie actors did not receive residuals for their work until the early 1960s. SAG President Ronald Reagan ended an actor's strike at the time without bargaining for them. He is still reviled for this among many other reasons. Current screenwriters do receive residuals, but it's not the same as the actors deal.

Speaking of reclusive women of wealth what about Barbara Walters. She has had the same live in housekeeper for 50+ years. She has said countless times on TV that Icobel is her family

I know that Babs' daughter isn't very involved. I hope when Babs finally passes that Icobel gets a huge chunk of her wealth

This article spells out the legalities of inheriting condos and co ops in NYC.

It’s exquisite.

r162 I could be wrong... But, I swear that the CPW apartment Barbara Walters lives in now is the same apartment she grew up in. Her father fell on hard times and they lost the apartment when she was an adolescent and then as an adult she bought it again.

It doesn't have an open concept kitchen. We love to entertain, you know. And it doesn't allow me to see the cook from the living space, where I am keeping an eye on the nanny while she brings up my children.

R165, doesn't Barbara Walters live on Fifth?

She may, but I know she's moved around. She grew up on CPW in the 60s blocks. Maybe she doesn't live there anymore. I remember her mentioning this.

Walters lives on 5th

R166, The listings for both Bacall's Dakota apartment and Jackie O's Fifth Avenue apartment avoided showing any photos of the kitchens.

So, Theo and Lola will become a thing and Kyle and Summer will reunite?

Jackie O's apartment was gut renovated by that hedge fund asshole who bought it. It was apparently quite shabby and in need of major work.

R172 it was MARVELOUS!!!

And all four will move to the Beresford, R171.

[quote]Jackie O's apartment was gut renovated by that hedge fund asshole who bought it. It was apparently quite shabby and in need of major work.

She was on assistance! She couldn't afford it!

[quote]The reason Hugette's situation is so crazy

Her name was HugUette.

"Hugette" is one of Chrissy Metz's nicknames.

[quote]hey wrote screenplays for MGM as EMPLOYEES there and were guns for hire. I'm certain they did not retain any ownership of their works, and residuals for broadcast and other non-theatrical income was not a contractual reality back then. Old movie actors did not receive residuals for their work until the early 1960s.

Well then it's obvious, Mr & Mrs Adolph Green were able to buy, live in and upkeep a $24 million dollar UWS apartment just because they were swell people.

Has anyone seen the HBO documentary airing now called Very Ralph. It's about Ralph Lauren.

Now that man came from nothing & created an empire. He knows how to live. He has 5 palatial homes & each one has an entirely different aesthetic.

Now that is Fuck Me Money.

Depending upon what sources one believes Barbara Walters once lived at 555 Fifth, and now resides at 944 Fifth avenue.

No one is really sure media wise, and that is how it should be.

Apparently 740 Park avenue tuned Ms. Walters down, but we don't know when this occurred.

In any event am quite sure Ms. Walters does *NOT* live on CPW or any part of UWS for that matter.

If still at building show in YT clip, it most certainly is not CPW, but one of our white glove buildings in the rich heartland of UES.

Know that building and it is on Fifth, but not going to say where.

Really is disgusting way that person ambushed Ms. Walters as she left her building. Something ought to be done to protect New Yorkers from these grubby little people and their cameras. At least the man had decency not to show full facade , awning or otherwise give address away. Perhaps he was sat down afterwards and spoken to severely.

R177

We don't know what the Greens paid for their apartment back in the day. Current asking price reflects in part hopes, wishes and dreams of those involved with the sale. As noted previously many CPW apartments have had equally lofty original sale price listings; but what they actually sold for was another matter. Again Lauren Bacall's unit did not sell for full asking price.

Opening asking price for a co-op or condo is just that; a number owner or whoever is selling the place believes they can get. No different than when a private home goes up for sale. What people are actually willing to pay often is quite different.

If we take above post as gospel then an insider has made an offer, but we know it wasn't for full $24 million otherwise it would be a pending sale.

Again just to remind this building allows up to 50% financing, so whoever buys only needs say $10 million or so in ready money. For those with sufficient assets (and a healthy credit score) this can all be arranged by say putting their current home/apartment up for sale, then using proceeds as down payment. Credit comes in since there are ways of borrowing cash based upon sale of current home to get funds needed to purchase the other.

Of course going down that rabbit hole means previous home must sell for enough to cover said loan or there will be some trouble.

555 Fifth is an office building, and has been since it was built in 1955.

[quote]In any event am quite sure Ms. Walters does *NOT* live on CPW or any part of UWS for that matter.

Babs told many times on The View that she was UES and would walk with her assistant and hairdresser thru Central Park to the West Side ABC studio.

How are condos allowed to discriminate? Aren't there laws? Landlords own their buildings and they can't. If I have $50 million cash I should be allowed to live there.

R183

Sorry, meant "555 Park Avenue"

That is a pretty long walk for a woman of her age even then, but good for Ms. Walters.

But we're talking about where the good lady lived, and it was not on UWS.

On another note those ABC studios on West 61st have been sold by Disney.

R172

If this is shabby, count me in!

[quote]On another note those ABC studios on West 61st have been sold by Disney.

No doubt you meant 77 W. 66th Street.

R185

Condos are different, basically main tool open to those boards is right of first refusal. So if they don't want current owner selling their place to latest Powerball winner Tyrone and one of his baby's mommas along with six of his kids, they either have to pony up and meet seller's number, or step aside.

That being said individual condo owners can (and most likely) do have strong feelings about who they will or will not sell to; same as with owners of private homes in certain areas.

That being said in both instances today many sellers will take anyone who is willing to pay asking price. This explains why so much of recent new construction in NYC (including on Billionaire's Row" is owned by all sorts of persons.

Where did Dolores Gray live?

[quote] It doesn't have an open concept kitchen.

No that apartment is from a time when people actually had class and didn't want their home to look look like a Steak & Shake.

I don't fancy it, wrong side of town

R166

These pre-war buildings were built and designed often based upon European (mostly French) interiors; that is you have public and private spaces. Furthermore things are divided between servants/utility areas and that for family.

When many of these buildings went up they had common dinning rooms as an amenity. By early 1900's the servant problem was becoming acute with good cooks (never mind maids and other domestics) becoming harder to find and keep. Common dining areas allowed residents to dispense with having a cook since room service (if you will) was also available.

While most of us feel the opposite today, back then people also found the "odors" coming from kitchens objectionable. So they were usually well away from family areas if possible. Again if one had servants it wasn't as if you'd be the one preparing meals or whatever anyway. Even if a glass of water was wanted, you rang for the help.

Fast forward to modern times there is often little to be gained by converting kitchens in pre-war buildings to open concept. Again they are often far from main living areas so it isn't as if anyone is going to see anything. Also often servants rooms (maid) is off the kitchen, which is a highly coveted bedroom in many families because of privacy it affords. Most of these apartments have back service doors which would be near kitchen and that maid's bedroom. Perfect for a teenager who wants to come and go as he or she pleases.

R192

In general tend to agree; but in some instances open concept can and does work. Will Truman's apartment on W&G is a case in point. There is something to be said for being able to converse and otherwise interact with one's guests while preparing food. Of course in an apartment that small opening things up makes for a better use of space, it certainly makes kitchen less claustrophobic than many others in Manhattan/NYC apartments.

How many people have a full live-in staff anymore, even the very wealthy?

It will always be Downton Abbey on Datalounge R196

R196

Judging by the coming and going see all over UES (Lexington west to Fifth) plenty of people still have live in help. Maybe not a small army of servants as of old, but at least a maid. We know Jackie Onassis had her maid in an apartment nearby (which was subsequently bequeathed to her IIRC), so am assuming that still happens in some households. There is no way many of these domestics are living anywhere near Fifth Avenue nowadays. Even Yorkville is pricey.

That being said yes, many homes make do with a daily (or two) and perhaps a cook. The later usually always lives out, which is as it should be; you want something to eat in middle of night get up and make it yourself.

Thanks to new minimum wage, PTO laws and stricter enforcement many homes use an agency for help; this way they only have to pay one bill and don't have to deal with taxes, time off, etc....

Contrary to what some might believe at least on UES much of the help is Filipino, not African American. Those who can and still go with old ways bring help over from Europe. But that is expensive and complicated.

R197

Well since you went there, by WWII if not before advantages of having staff live out became apparent to even those who could find and afford domestic help.

There is something to be said for privacy which obviously isn't total when you have people who aren't members of your family constantly lurking about.

In film "Butterfield 8" Emily Liggett while discussing her marital woes with her mother the latter turns to her and says "in history of this family you know what we have never had?", EL turns around goes to door and slams it shut and responds "yes, privacy".

Bad enough in a white glove building with 24/7 lobby staff people know all the comings and goings of every resident (and their guests) , but even in those huge full floor apartments voices carry.

Yes R198. As I might have mentioned once or twice, I grew up there.

People's grandmothers had live-ins which was more about company for widows and reminding them to take pills, turn off the faucet in the bathroom, etc. than Downton Abbsey nonsense. And families with very young kids have a live-in , with an au pair who can teach the kids French/Spanish/Mandarin etc. trumping the Filipino or Caribbean nanny.

Also meant to point out re: your earlier bit about Thanksgiving. My parents did that when we were little kids and into it, but really maybe there were two families in the whole building who made a big deal over it every year and I always assumed it was a business related thing rather than family, just based on who they were. And ever since the blowing up the balloons on Wed night became a tourist thing 20 years ago to the point where you can barely get anywhere near the museum to see them, no one who actually lives here still does that. (When I was in college and the years shortly thereafter, we'd go to Dublin House on 79th Street to meet up that Wednesday.)

The only live-in staff most wealthy people have these days are an au pair for their kids. Cooks and housekeepers live elsewhere and come and go throughout the week. Of course there are a few handful of families who still have the full live-in chauffeur,/housekeeper/backup maid/cook living there full-time, but that is very, very rare these days.

LOL. I think we cross-posted R201, but yes.

Lots of that going on these days, YMF! I forgot about the elderly ladies. Yes, some of the old widows have a live-in personal assistant or helper or whatever you want to call it, if they live alone.

Lots of DLers think that people who are on the wealthier side of life still live like WASPS from the Edwardian Era, the Downton Abbey reference is so true.

R203

Great Edwardian era of servants began dying off post WWI anyway.

In GB and elsewhere new labor laws meant minimum wages, working conditions, PTO, overtime, etc... For those who saw the remake of "Upstairs/Downstairs where someone contacted local government agency who monitored such things, it prompted a house visit. Suffice to say 65 Eaton Place was afterwards going to be run in ways totally alien to Lady Marjorie.

Live in staff made sense back days when there was no to nil public transportation, and or one brought people in from the country, or hired recently arrived immigrants. But that has all changed.

At certain times of morning you see scores of African American, Filipino , and other minority women making their way west from Lexington Avenue subway stops, in the evening it is the reverse. These are the maids, nannies, home health aids, and other domestics employed in various UES homes. Otherwise they are going east for same and or to the various nursing homes, hospitals and other healthcare related places.

Large problem today with live in help is where would you put them anyway. Even if you have a Classic Six or Seven those servants rooms often have been turned into offices or bedrooms. Ditto for townhouses where those top floor bedrooms once were servants quarters.

Place that does our shirts and sheets has a list of when staff arrive and leave from homes they service. They are only allowed to fetch and deliver when the help is on duty. For white glove buildings there is often an added restriction of service entrance hours. In certain buildings NOTHING goes up main elevators besides residents and their guests. All deliveries, tradesmen, etc.... must go around back/to side.

Keeping with Downton Abbey for a moment, under Victorian and Edwardian "rules" for being a lady or gentleman one was supposed to do little work as possible.

Obviously this meant actual toiling for one's money and so forth; but extended really to all and any sort of physical labor including even dressing oneself. Recall the new heir Matthew Crawley thinks the job and idea of a valet is absurd; a grown man dressing another. Then you have famous quip from Gwendolen in "The Importance of Being Earnest "I am glad to say that I have never seen a spade".

Arrival of electricity and then following a host of mod cons meant less need for and indeed possible to live without servants. You don't need to build and tend fires to cook or heat with all day. Modern washing machines and dryers can do what took three or four days in about two hours.

Even by between war years it was possible to run even great houses with far less servants than previously. But this is where American chatelaines differed from her sisters across Atlantic.

American homes of the 1920's, 1930's etc... were often built or upgraded/fitted out with every single mod con available. Meanwhile in GB and elsewhere homes were often stuck in comparatively prehistoric times. Electricity, indoor plumbing, central heating, and so forth were not universally embraced in those old grand piles. People didn't see the need since one they weren't doing the work, and servants came cheap.

The novel "Marjorie Morningstar", by Herman Wouk, has several interesting chapters about a Jewish family moving from the Bronx to an upscale apartment on Central Park West (modeled on the Eldorado). In the 1930s, CPW was part of a wealthy Jewish enclave called "the pleasant ghetto", where Wouk himself lived as a teen in the early 30s, before the economic downturn of the Depression took its toll on the family's finances.

Great Depression really was a leveler in so many ways....

Parts of UWS (mainly CPW and Riverside Drive) were meant to compete with Fifth, Park and Madison avenues on UES, but it just didn't happen.

The GD hit both sides of Central Park, but east side did better overall. Yes, many of the old mansions and townhouses were torn down with property redeveloped, but you got wealthy or at least well off moving in. OTOH Riverside Drive and CPW was a mixed bag.

Marjorie Morningstar film (based on book of same) stars DL favorites Natalie Wood and Gene Kelly.

Carolyn Jones (Mortica Adams), George Tobias (Abner Kravitz) and Martin Balsam also make appearances.

I read the book by one of Jackie's servants. She was a young Irish woman and as I recall, I think she was friends with another Irish woman who worked for Jean and Stephen Smith.

There was a charming part where she came to the apartment for the interview and another servant directed her to wait, perhaps in the living room. As she sat there, in came John Jr, who was around 5 at the time. He was friendly and was, as I recall, showing her the tricks his dog could do. The applicant and John talked in a friendly manner. Not long after this, Jackie came in to interview her. It seems that Jackie had been out in the hall and witnessed the woman's interaction with John and that worked to help her get the job. She and at least one other woman servant lived it.

If you look at the floor plan of Jackie's apartment (see the above link) you can see that there were 3 maids rooms.

She worked for Jackie for a number of years and sometime during this time, the woman and her friend got an apartment of their own that they would use on their days off. (They wanted some privacy.) And they agreed not to tell their employers that they had this other living space. When she found out, Jackie was shocked.

Sorry, I don't remember the name of the book, but the young woman eventually married and Jackie, Caroline and John came to the wedding and the reception. Onassis was invited too and wanted to come, but was out of town on business. There were a couple pictures of Jackie and her kids sitting at a table at the reception. I believe the woman quit working after her marriage.

The bit about her meeting the young John Jr. was a nice story.

I think the book was published after John Jr died.

R209, The book was most enjoyable. After Jackie died, Kathy remained close to JFK, Jr. and Caroline.

When Kathy got married, Jackie gave her and her husband full access to a warehouse of furniture she maintained in order to furnish their apartment.

r206 r208 The book, [italic]Marjorie Morningstar[/italic] , was so much better than the movie, particularly in terms of Jewish sociology.

R210 ...A picture of the bride and groom with John Jr at the wedding reception.

R210, She tells a story in the book of spending a weekend with JFK, Jr. and Carolyn on Cape Cod after Jackie died. They were all in the kitchen where JFK. Jr. was making burgers at the stove wearing just a towel. At one point the towel fell to the floor and Kathy's husband quipped "John, I thought we were having burgers, not hot dogs."

Phyllis and Adolph's wedding day.

r214 Now that's Big Dick Face.

R209

Good blood tells.....

Much as many (including those on DL) have a go at JBKO, she was a product of her time and class.

You can tell much about people by how they treat those in service or otherwise work for them; domestics, secretaries in office, etc...

Ms. Kathy McKeon was hired and a personal assistant to Jackie Kennedy Onassis; not a domestic.

Mrs. Onassis paid for the couple's honeymoon to Barbados along with giving Kathy McKeon all that furniture.

In case anyone was wondering it wasn't Jackie O who gave Kathy McKeon name "Jackie's girl"; but the MIL Rose Kennedy.

R136

That hair! Can smell the Aerolak hairspray from here! *LOL*

Late Jayne Wrightsman obviously had a standing once a week with "Mr. Gerard" for a wash, set and comb out".

Mr. and Mrs. Wrightsman collected tons of antique French furniture, this included pieces that came from Versailles or otherwise once belonged to the Bourbons IIRC. Much of it was donated to the MET, so many pieces that (IIRC) the museum shortly afterwards issued an edict; "no more French furniture".

Also if recall correctly Mrs. Wrightsman had in her collection queen Marie-Antoinette's last diary, or one of them anyway.

"Wicked Widow Of Central Park West." *LOL*

I love it!

r206 r208 Martin Balsam actually lived at The Eldorado.

I never watched Boardwalk Empire, but I read that in the last episode Steve Buscemi's character leaves his life of crime in Atlantic City and moves into the the penthouse of the newly constructed Eldorado. I watched it and all l I remember was seeing was him looking out a window over the park. I just looked it up and the finale episode was actually called "Eldorado".

What was the oxygen about? Newman had been a heavy smoker?

She had COPD.

R223, I believe you meant "had".

That's what I wrote r224.

Great thread.

[quote]Phyllis used to call up the publisher Music Theater International who license the Comden+Green catalogue and ask "What is the next quarter looking like?", and sometimes ask for her share of royalties in advance.

R48, I don't believe any of their shows are licensed by MTI except PETER PAN.

R222, Phyllis was on oxygen for years before she died.

R228

Most people are. My dad was on oxygen about 5 years before he died. He had Pulmonary Fibrosis.

r228 It took me a few minutes to think of who the female interviewer sounds like... Nancy Pelosi.

[quote]Jackie O's apartment was gut renovated by that hedge fund asshole who bought it.

The late David Koch (of the Koch Brothers) and his wife Julia bought Jackie's apartment. They were the ones who did the gut rehab. He is not a "hedge fund" guy. They didn't live there very long, maybe they sold it to a finance guy, but they were the first owners after Jackie and the ones who renovated it. I imagine it was a dump in "estate condition" when they bought it.

As I stated already, the Greens paid $45,000 for their Beresford co-op in the early 60s, and the idiot who thinks they made residual money for their film musicals is a moron.

Two take away points:

"Mr. Dubin—who currently resides at nearby 1010 Fifth—is managing partner and co-founder of Highbridge Capital Management. But more interestingly, he’s also chairman of the Robin Hood Foundation, a favored charity of the late John F. Kennedy Jr., who also had a seat on its board and who grew up in the apartment Mr. Dubin is buying."

"When Mr. Koch bought the apartment back in 1995, he said, it had to be completely refurbished."

“Mrs. Onassis was very conservative financially, and she didn’t spend much on it,” said Mr. Koch. “We gutted the apartment and redid everything.”

Long story short JBKO didn't splurge with those tens of millions she bled out of Christina Onassis; but did what many of her class have always done; lived off the interest and not touch capital.

That capital was put to work by Mrs. Onassis's fancy man Maurice Templeton which allowed "Jackie O" to leave an estate nearly double her divorce settlement.

Old WASP and other families (Protestant and Catholic" are known to live in what could be termed shabby conditions. Rugs thread bare, drapes and upholstery needing to be repaired/replaced, driving beat up old bangers, etc.... But they've got plenty of money in the bank, just don't see need to spend in when what they've got (in their opinion) is still serviceable.

Besides at some point once the children had moved out/on and started their own lives; what was Jackie Onassis going to do vastly redo her apartment for anyway? It's not like she gave huge parties or otherwise entertained on lavish scale often. She also was long past the whole 'your home is your calling card" thing; redoing a place then getting AD or some other magazine in to photograph....

Jackie expected to live a lot longer than 64, so she had to be financially conservative. Her mother lived to be 81 and her sister lived to be 88, both experiencing money problems in their later years. If Jackie hadn't become ill she would have lived just as long. Apart from her other qualities, Jackie was pragmatic.

[quote]allowed "Jackie O" to leave an estate nearly double her divorce settlement.

She wasn't divorced.

You're right, forgot Mr. Onassis died before proceedings were completed.

R233

Call it what you will, but of all three Bouvier women, Jackie played the game most efficiently. Yes, there was plenty of drama and trauma, but she was really never short of money once marrying JFK, nor afterwards right up until end.

Rather ironic when you think about it Caroline K. ended up with everything.

My favorite "middle class" UWS pre-war apartment was set cooked up for film Odd Couple in 1968.

Layout is just perfect for a small family; master bedroom with separate bath; one or two other bedrooms plus another full bath, likely a powder room somewhere, full kitchen with service entrance (and likely small maid's room off side), and those stairs at entry way.

Fuck, the owners of Jackie's apartment are part of the Epstein crowd...

[quote]In a deposition, Giuffre, née Roberts, claimed she was trafficked to MIT professor Marvin Minsky, who died in 2016 at age 88, as well as former Maine Sen. George Mitchell, ex-New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and money manager Glenn Dubin, whose wife, Eva, is an ex-girlfriend of Epstein’s.

Renovate the kitchen and bathrooms. But don't do anything else, please! The apartment's layout is perfect. Open kitchens make me vomit.

Wow, weak stomach there, R239.

If I had the bucks I'd buy Bette Midler's NYC home she's currently selling. Not being from NYC I have no idea about it's location being good or bad but it is a fantastic space.

I'm single so I don't need the 5BR but if I could afford to buy it I could afford people to clean it.

[quote]As I stated already, the Greens paid $45,000 for their Beresford co-op in the early 60s,

That would be about $380,000.00 in today's money.

Did Phyllis do a lot of stock?

R241, Would you really want to live on three floors?

R244

Sure. It would only be 2 floors for me becuase all the guest rooms are on a single floor. That leaves the Master & all the real living spaces on 2 floors. Plus, the outside terraces.

It would be great if the apartment had an elevator though .

[quote]Sure. It would only be 2 floors for me becuase all the guest rooms are on a single floor. That leaves the Master & all the real living spaces on 2 floors. Plus, the outside terraces.

You could go to the guest floor once or twice a year and pretend you are on vacation.

Regularly using stairs is an investment in your future mobility.

R245 that apartment has an elevator.

Even if it didn't, you could always get an Acorn StairLift!

Very nice, and I like that it not not slick and freshly refurbished. Emory Roth apartments don't have the best floor plans, and often enough had rather mean ceiling heights (here it looks like a disappointing 9' or 9.5')

How you can tell where Barbara Walters gets her mail at 944 Fifth, at 76th Street:

Look at that floor plan! The servants and family use the same bathroom??? Not in my day!!!

"Much as many (including those on DL) have a go at JBKO, she was a product of her time and class. You can tell much about people by how they treat those in service or otherwise work for them; domestics, secretaries in office, etc..."

R216, many times staff people stayed with their employers their entire lives, even after their duties were no longer needed. And the employers HAD NOT paid withholding taxes or insurance of any kind, therefore the employee was completely dependent on them. This was culturally the acceptable way to do it. My UES grandparents had an white American nanny turned cook/maid who had been with the family (their's and the previous generation) 50 years before she died. I don't know who paid the bill at Lenox Hill where she died in 1976, I only know Medicare didn't.

[quote] If I had the bucks I'd buy Bette Midler's NYC home she's currently selling. Not being from NYC I have no idea about it's location being good or bad

It's a little far north for what is considered a truly desirable Fifth Avenue address for those who care about that sort of thing, but it's still a very nice area with a great view of the park. It's also situated below 96th Street which has traditionally been the street which separates "us" and "them".

[quote] Jayne Wrightsman's place is on the market.

Ugh, that woman was always too grand for us.

I would never use an elevator in a private home. I've heard too many horror stories.

You got that right!

R253

Yes, that paternalist attitude towards servants goes way back to Victorian England if not earlier.

When young people entered service then their parents signed over basically power of attorney to Lord and Lady who ever to make decisions regarding medical and other care on their behalf.

Nannies often remained with families long after Madame's baby making days were over. Some became sort of cross between ladies maids and personal assistant. Others got other work to do in exchange for continued room and board. Case in point would be "nanny" in Brideshead Revisited who remained with the Marchmain family long after Sebastian, Brideshead, Julia and Cordelia were adults. She remained in that house during WWII even after family decamped elsewhere for duration.

The rise of middle classes beginning in Edwardian era somewhat upset this apple cart. They often had money, but not nearly the sort (nor ideals of noblesse oblige) to keep staff on they didn't need nor to be honest cost them money. Nannies from those families often found themselves unemployed soon as youngest child started school.

Am glad to hear your family did right thing by their staff. Far to many domestics of all sorts end up with bare quarters (if any) social security record thus end up facing old age in near or actual penury. Truly poor will get Medicaid for healthcare, but that won't pay for housing and so forth.

R254

Oh I don't know...

Carnegie Hill from 86th to 96th from Fifth to Park has has been and still is home (yes, am going to say it again) to some of our very best families.

In a few instances people have bought those lovely townhouses/mansions between Park and Lexington turning them back into stunning private homes.

Will give you thanks to the museums and hospital (Mount Sinai) things are a bit more busy with various sorts of odd people, but then again so is Park Avenue area near Lenox Hill hospital since Long Island-LIJ bought them many years ago now.

Carnegie Hill is also home to many schools (Convent of Sacred Heart, Dalton, Hunter, Spence, etc...) so there is that to recommend for area.

One thing do like about up there is it still retains somewhat of a quiet village atmosphere; late/over night it is so dead you could fling a dead cat without bothering anyone.

One of reasons townhouse/mansion living fell out of favor for wealthy and others were living in homes with all those levels. Having an army of servants helped mitigate some of the issues, (you could say remain in bed all day and have things brought up), but other wise it was up and down those GD stairs all day long.

Nurseries were normally on upper floors, so unless there was a nanny and perhaps nurse-maid you had to go up there for various reasons. Kitchens were in basements or if lucky ground/first floor, either way food had to be carried upstairs to say bedrooms or whatever if someone were ill, or those children....

The Dakota in 1890.

R252 , where was the floor plan? I couldn't find it in OP's link. TIA.

For R262

[quote] where was the floor plan? I couldn't find it in OP's link. TIA.

Go to OP's link.

Directly below the "film strip" of photos, you will see a button marked "Floor Plans". Click for the floor plans.

For those with Javascript disabled and or otherwise cannot see entire listing in OP's line due to browser issues; another local media has picked up the story. Just scroll down to see all pictures.

Oh and buy the way, another thing in these pre-war buildings you cannot have anymore in NYC; wood (or any other solid fuel) burning fireplaces. Under mayor Bloomberg (the environmental nanny mayor), they were banned from new construction.

Carter Horsley says:

"One of the world's greatest residential buildings, the Beresford at 211 Central Park West is distinguished by its three towers and its two major façades, one overlooking Central Park and the other Manhattan Square, the park that contains the American Museum of Natural History.

This 193-unit cooperative building is one of the masterpieces of architect Emery Roth, who also designed the twin-towered San Remo a few blocks south on Central Park West and the twin-towered El Dorado a few blocks north on Central Park West. It was erected in 1929. His firm, Emery Roth & Sons, would also design more office buildings in the city than any other firm."

Thanks, R263 . I don't know how I missed that.

R262/R266

You're welcome.

R262, directly under the photos.

On the 2nd floor (20th floor in diagram), there's a cluster of 3 bedrooms, 2 small staff bedrooms and 1 larger bedroom. All sharing one bathroom. The bathroom has 2 doors, one leading to the larger bedroom, the other door leading to one of the staff bedrooms. The person in the other staff bedroom has to enter someone else's bedroom to use the bathroom.

Have to agree with R16. Very odd layout.

I think the laundry room in between the staff bedrooms was once the staff bathroom. When they no longer had live-in staff, they added the washer and dryer and opened up the access to the other rooms.

It's kind of petite. A proper Manhattan prewar living room should be 20x30. This is 17'8"x29. Watch your elbows.

Yeah that one "bedroom" actually has the service entrance in it. They are just calling it a bedroom to add value. And on the first floor there is only one bathroom and you have to go thru the library to get to it. Love how this places call a hall a gallery.

One of the big bedrooms also has a service entrance through the closet. Rosemary’s Baby-esque.

The room with the washer/dryer was once the servants' bathroom.

I think this apartment is swell, actually. Perfect. Some updates needed, but not much.

People, again you know why some by pass these pre-war buildings in favor of new construction.

There are trade offs either way; but it really comes down to what sort of home one values.

Pre-war is just that; something built and with floor plans from decades ago; sometimes things can be made to flow with modern design; others you're left with making allowances or compromises.

You can drop ten or twenty million on any of the new condos on "billionaries" row or elsewhere in Manhattan that will be pretty much move in ready. Or you can spend same on a pre-war, then pour millions more in upgrades, redecorating, etc....

Just because they are named "staff bedrooms" there is nothing written in stone they alone may occupy those quarters.

As we've already discussed few homes nowadays have extensive live in help. In many classic "six" or "seven" apartments (or most other pre-war units) staff bedrooms have long been turned into offices, spare bedrooms for family or guests, and so it goes.

Teenagers or young adults could have those servants bedrooms, and normally they are ones who get, and are glad of it; that back service entrance (again) means person or persons can come and go without doing so via main apartment entrance downstairs.

As for the "open kitchen" concept, it has been done at least once previously.

Bob Weinstein's former apartment at Beresford sold for about $20 million (below asking price of nearly $30 million), has a similar arrangement regarding staff bedrooms.

There are two, but only one has a W/C; also one of those servant bedrooms has been turned into a laundry.

This floorplan has such potential. It can easily and probably will become an "open concept". Leave the master as it is. The dining room and staff quarters become another master suite. The bedroom with a terrace can easily become an open kitchen with room for dining, all open to the living room. It's all down to the master already being on an interior wall. If the master was on the park it would never be done.

The listing of r278

R276

Their apartment is hideous.

R279

It does appear they've installed some sort of central air conditioning system, at least believe am seeing vents in those pictures. That alone is streets above those window units cluttering up much of the windows of Beresford otherwise. Greta Garbo (or maybe her family who inherited) did same with apartment at the Campanile

[quote]Snagging an apartment inside The Beresford, a prewar belle on New York City’s Central Park West designed by Emery Roth, is a coup landed by only a lucky few. But for Manhattan-based chef Marc Murphy and his wife, Pamela Schein Murphy, who were long-time Tribeca residents, the decision to move north—even to one of the most desired buildings in the city—was a fraught one. “I panicked somewhere in the middle [of the renovation],” says Pamela, founder and creative director of lifestyle website The Select 7. “It was like, ‘Oh, my God, we can’t live uptown,’” she recalls. But with both the couple’s children in school in the neighborhood, plus Marc’s restaurant, Landmarc, located inside the Time Warner Center on the northwest corner of Central Park West, Pamela found herself “wandering the Upper West Side like a nomad.” It was finally time for the family to embrace moving above 14th Street.

We have a winner for the grand prize in the "White People Problems" contest.

R277, Is Bob Weinstein my dead mother? Or did he just transport her house into his apartment?

R278, very nice apartment, though I would make only a few modest changes to the plan (none of that open-plan stuff). In the park bedroom I would get rid of the existing closet add an armoire, making this a library/office that could be pressed into service as one of two guest room options, the other option being the staff room. If reasonably feasible, I might consider doing away with most of the wall between the entry hall and dining room and making it a long gallery space with a long dining table. I’d keep the kitchen configuration (but with better cabinetry and finishes). The living room is a very nice space, the selling point together with the terraces. I would ditch or rework the mid-century dreadful (and later) built-ins throughout, lose the bar in the living room, try to clean up some of the over-scaled ducts or whatever in the park bedroom, and replace the bad parquet floors with better wood flooring (or maybe say fuck it and just buy a lot of rugs); and get rid of the window-unit a/c's. In the end it’s a large and expensive one-bedroom apartment with a couple of imperfect options for guests, but that arrangement is fine for some people and at some point it's not so much about maximising the number of rentable AirBnB bedrooms. I'm always happier working with the strong points of a place rather than the dreaded and popular "gut reno" approach of erasing the slate and starting from external walls and slab floors.

NYC peeps live in a huge bubble. *pop*

Tear down that bitch of a bearing wall and put in a bathroom where it oughta be!

In the master bedroom, you could get rid of the dressing room and expand the master bathroom.

[quote] As I stated already, the Greens paid $45,000 for their Beresford co-op in the early 60s, That would be about $380,000.00 in today's money.

Is there a book/documentary/other source that explains how this has happened? I’m as blue as a boy can be, completely working class and a thread like this is like watching a David Attenborough documentary for me. I cannot conceive of how house prices have reached these levels or who is buying them/what these people do for a living. It seems totally scandalous to me that what was once a middle or upper middle class home is now 20 million- and it happened so fast. So, yeah, is there a source that explains the economics of it all.

When it comes to Fifth Avenue and Central Park West, it's the views you're paying for in these $10 million+ apartments.

Pretty classic six in The San Remo, offered by the same agent who's handling the Green/Newman sale

It's not my taste, neither is their Hampton place. I'm not young but I like modern. I really hate the floors and the teeny kitchen in their UWS apt. I'll bet even a 30 inch fridge wouldn't fit. Notice they don't even show the fridge. I hate moldings and multi colored walls and their furniture looks cheap.

Oh and R30, Streisand wouldn't be part of my social circle either. We would hate anyone that narcissistic and bitchy, not to mention she's kind of hard to look at and always has been, even when she was young. Except for appearance, those same reasons would apply to Oprah and Madonna. All horrible people. Now Cher we would love to know.

R289 Cleaned out and rid of all the junk, that's a magnificent apartment in one one of the most beautiful residential buildings in the world.

But if I had that kind of money, I'd still rather buy into one of the Stern buildings.

The court yard at 220 CPS

It's crazy what 220 CPS and the rest of 57th street has done to 15 CPW. There are corner duplex penthouses, corner high floor units, and top floor penthouses sitting idle on the market. Five years ago, units sold in a matter of days/weeks. Some great units at 15 CPW are now sitting for a year. Who wants a view facing north over the park? The view of CPS from 15 CPW is the best view in the city. The A-line unit below has been on the market since September 2018. They're now asking $23 million and they paid $21 million in 2008.

I know it's less prestigious and probably noisier, but if I we're living on CPW, I'd want a lower floor. Just above the tree tops.

Most of the apartments in 15 CPW look cold and sterile to me design-wise. This one—the most expensive one currently for sale, at $65 million—looks a bit more traditional.

$65m for that? I could live a wonderful life with $65m and never set foot in NYC. No one should have that much money to waste on an apartment.

[quote]Most of the apartments in 15 CPW look cold and sterile to me design-wise. This one—the most expensive one currently for sale, at $65 million—looks a bit more traditional.

The finish of the apartments are the same throughout the building. Same kitchens, bathrooms, floors, moldings.

It's the owner's decor that makes the difference.

[quote]Oh and [R30], Streisand wouldn't be part of my social circle either. We would hate anyone that narcissistic and bitchy, not to mention she's kind of hard to look at and always has been, even when she was young. Except for appearance, those same reasons would apply to Oprah and Madonna.

You're such a dream crusher! Barbra, Madonna and Oprah were just dying to meet you.

[quote] Most of the apartments in 15 CPW look cold and sterile to me design-wise.

Agreed, R294. They all look like The Residences at the RItz-Carlton [insert city name]. Of course they are meant to be finished specifically for the buyers, but the architecture is mostly as it is: the low ceilings, the chunky proportions, the badly positioned/centered doors and windows, the fat bulkheads everywhere... All so you can have a Property Brothers dream kitchen with marble slabbed kitchen in the center of your $33M?

I'm not from NYC and not really familiar with locations. I think I'd prefer a water view instead of a park view.

Any grand neighborhoods/apartments with the water view?

[quote]the low ceilings, the chunky proportions, the badly positioned/centered doors and windows, the fat bulkheads everywhere.

15CPW doesn't seem to have low ceilings.

I don't see the the "badly positioned/centered doors and windows" but "the fat bulkheads everywhere" are pretty ugly.

r299 Chicago.

^ Or River House

R300: Ceiling heights in the examples in this thread seem to be 10'; that's above standard, certainly, but not great. Some sales literature for the building states that ceiling heights range from 10' to 14'. For me, 12' feet is the minimum to be impressive and lend some a sense of scale to the place.

Again in the examples here, at least two apartments had doors and windows shoved awkwardly into corners, or with odd spacing the result of compromises in trying to match the symmetry of a facade or exterior elevation with the arrangement of rooms - admittedly a difficult trick in any circumstance and at any point in time, but bothersome for me (and usually well resolved in the best pre-war buildings, especially on the other side of the park.

Seeing a regular rhythm of window-wall-window-wall-window... and then a big void of wall where the spacing falls apart before it meets the other corner is a pet peeve of mine, but something that troubles few other people. And doors stuck into corners of important rooms looks more like and afterthought or bad planning than the work of an architect who claimed to have taken all the best of classic NYC apartment houses and improved upon them.

R302

That apartment has 2 terraces but it says the terraces are owned by the co-op but the apartment owner will have exclusive use. What in the every loving fuck?? You spend $16 million and you don't own your apartment's terraces.

I will never understand all this co-op mishegas.

You don't physically own your co-op apartment either. As with those terraces, in a co-op you have exclusive use of the apartment.

R303 A second look and yes I see what you're saying.

Agree, it's not a small thing.

The link at R294.

Photo 11 is particularly bad. The doorway in the corner with the lowered ceiling piece hitting it.

R304

You own shares in a corporation with a co-op apartment, not actual unit or units. As such the corporation is free (within legal constraints) to place any sort of restriction on things they wish. If you cause too many problems or whatever the corporation can move to buy out/back your shares effectively evicting you from your home.

Uma Thurman got into River House and has barely lasted two years before she and husband are looking to get out.

Wilbur Ross is a resident of River House, which tells you everything you need to know about the place.

Diane Keaton and Gloria Vanderbilt were turned away at one point. I thought Irma's moving in signaled a changing of the guard. Oh, well.

Furthermore the old dinosaurs surviving the crunch at River House slowly are waking up to fact their days are numbered.

This isn't the Manhattan of 1930's or even 1980's and these xenophobic and quite frankly often racist co-ops of the UES are waking up to fact after themselves come the deluge. Even their grandchildren or great-grand children often don't want to live in these buildings, well not at least as things currently are; the young and or anyone else under 100 is moving down town.

It galls these co-op boards that people will pay tens of millions to live "down there" and not even consider applying to any of these white glove co-ops. Yes, in many instances they would have been turned down, but people do like to be asked.....

Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild is still trying to unload her River House duplex, which IIRC thus far has had no takers for the $22 million (asking) duplex.

^ It's actually down to $15 million and some change (see R302).

Guess the Rothschild name wasn't helping move that apartment, so they've dropped it along with price.

[quote]In the master bedroom, you could get rid of the dressing room and expand the master bathroom.

And get dressed in the bedroom? Are you mad?

R10 What a steal!

R309

IIRC Gloria Vanderbilt was turned down by River House because it was widely rumored she was running around with a black man (Bobby Short).

Mr. Short was a well liked entertainer far as that went, but just because people from River House went up to Cafe Carlyle to hear him sing, didn't translate to having him moving into their building. In other words it was a variation of "we like you, but you'll have to use the back door/service entrance..."

Diane Keaton was just all wrong for River House, and yes the arrival of Ms. Thuman was supposed to signal things were loosening up a bit; but obviously that door was only cracked open a small amount.

Mind you the former residence of Barbara Taylor Bradford sat on market for over three years and underwent price chops before it finally sold.

Inside UM's place at River House.

Exactly, r310. "Making it" in NYC used to mean getting into a fabulous pre-war co-op building on 5th, Park, River House or what have you. Now, it's seen as terribly old-fashioned and outdated. Younger people with $$$ are all about downtown. And even the ones who want to live uptown are opting for condo living because of all the modern accoutrements and no dinosaur boards, as has been discussed.

Amazing how NY has changed. What were institutions for decades have been slipping away.

In a city full of snooty co-op and condo boards River House stands almost alone (save few others on perhaps Fifth, Park or Madison avenues) for their tone.

What can you say about a building that pushes away ambassadors from France?

It is no wonder places in that building sit on market for years upon years on end. Board at River House seems to be under the impression there are scores or hundreds of either wealthy WASPs or right sort of Jews with buckets of money looking to get into that pile of limestone.

Realty is quite otherwise, when people can go just several blocks west along billionarie's row and have their pick of new condo construction. That or again head downtown or Far West Side (Hudson Yards).

So if you live on a high floor of a building, especially with really high ceilings and there's a fire, how the hell do firefighters reach you? Even if the building says the apartments are fireproof, what if your own apartment is on fire? From what I understand the typical fire ladder goes up 6 floors.

What's the difference between a coop and a condo? Is a condo like owing your own home?

R320

Buildings have sprinkler systems and are supposed to be of fireproof design.

Absence of fire escapes means these buildings must have enclosed stairways (with doors) so emergency personnel can get up/down and so can residents.

Biggest thing is that by law for ages now all NYC multifamily buildings must have fireproof doors. These are designed to contain a fire within an apartment. But that only works if people shut the darn things, which sadly they don't in the panic of attempting to flee, which allows fire and smoke to spread.

As noted, yes, River House knows times are changing, and they must either adapt or die; but some shareholders aren't fully 100% on board.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R321

Condominium you own actual real estate. For a co-op you own shares in a corporation.

There is a bit more, link should flesh out details...

If the co-op board actually owns your terrace & apartment are you still allowed to declare your mortgage interest & real estate taxes on your taxes? How would that even work if you don't even own the co-op.

R325

In a co-op you don't own property just shares; all taxes including RE are incurred by the corporation (who owns the property) and are then collected from shareholders via monthly carrying costs. Indeed this is how all fees, surcharges and any other costs incurred by building are handled.

Not all co-ops allow financing, so there may not even be a mortgage question to discuss.

Where persons have taken out financing to buy a co-op (or condo for that matter), and or pulled equity out of same (loans using co-op shares or condo property as collateral), then things are generally deductible according to IRS or local tax laws.

This being said not all banks will lend to purchase or even do home equity loans for co-ops, nor will boards always allow. It comes down to fact unlike a private home or condo co-ops owners do not actually own their property, they only have shares. If loan goes into default co-op board does not have to transfer ownership of shares (foreclosure) to bank or anyone else. This is all subject to proprietary lease and rules that govern building in question.

Most banks will lend if co-op board signs off giving them right to foreclose (thus get the apartment in question) in case of default. Historically without such guarantees banks were very leery of doing co-op loans. Some did, others didn't touch that market with a barge pole.

[quote]"It is not in the interests of the residents of River House to cohabit with foreign emissaries who are, to a large extent, beyond the reach of the law."

Well, smell Lady Catherine de Bourgh and her glasses on a stick!

Thanks R322. It still seems kind of scary to me. Like you say, in a situation like that people will most likely panic and not close the door if there apartment is on fire.

R320

Sadly it happens here in NYC all the time; FDNY at one point even came up with a PR campaign advising people to "close the door".

It isn't just high rises, but homes of all sorts as well.

Places are mandated to have fireproof doors for a reason; but they don't work if people leave the things open.

A few years ago some Indian woman was cooking and started a grease fire; she and her family fled their Queens (IIRC) apartment leaving front door open, entire place nearly burnt to the ground.

Like I said, it happens all the time:

"The fire broke out around 5 p.m. inside a third-floor apartment, where a woman’s bathrobe caught fire by candles lit in her living room as she wrapped Christmas presents. She also had lit candles in the bedroom."

"“She removed the clothing, and she threw that on the couch, I believe, and left the apartment,” said Sakowich. “In doing so, she left the door open.”

If I had that kind of $$$, I'd rather live in a lovely townhouse on the Upper East Side instead of an apartment building.

R331

Maybe you would, then again maybe you wouldn't. There are costs and benefits either way.

Remember there were pretty solid reasons why well off to wealthy began abandoning their town houses and mansions for co-op or even rental pre-war apartments, and that continued well into the century.

Town house living is same as owning private property anywhere else, everything is on you the homeowner. From sweeping sidewalk (keeping it free of trash), to clearing snow/ice, taking out garbage, etc.. Yes you can employ persons or services, but that cost money. Internals of said house are also your problems; plumbing, wiring, etc.... In a co-op or condo you are only responsible for such things if they are in your apartment, and or if it affects others living below. For a town house you're on your own for entire structure. Oh and lets not forget constant threat or issue of vermin (as in keeping those ever present NYC rodents off your property and out of your home.

Security wise co-op or condo trumps private home IMHO. Also if you want to go away for a week or extended holiday do you really want to leave your town house empty? First of all those sidewalks must still be cleaned/cleared regardless.

Obviously plenty of people love town house living and numbers grow; but it isn't for everyone.

Believe me r333 I'm well aware of the pros and cons. After living in apartments in NYC, I would much rather have my own townhouse. Yes you have to take care of everything yourself, but that's how most people in this country live anyway. I've been a homeowner for awhile now and wouldn't go back to apartment living.

I'm with you R334, but many people like the communal aspect of apartment living. Not to mention the views.

As for River House. I had a friend in high school who lived there and it was inconvenient AF.

Great views, but very far from everything--stores, shopping, transportation, friends. It's a great looking building but I'd never want to live in that part of town.

Yes, that part of town doesn't have much going on, and it's far away from everything.

Speaking of far away from everything, I had a couple friends who lived on East End Ave. and while it's a very nice street and Carl Schurz Park is also nice, I felt like I was going to some outpost of the city every time I traveled to and from there. Very pretty and quiet (for NYC) neighborhood, though.

From York to East End (or FDR drive if in 70's) is sort of like land that time forgot. It is so far from anything (including nearest subway at Lexington) that people just didn't put it on their map; well not in huge numbers anyway.

New Second avenue subway stops at 86th (back end at 83rd) has changed the dynamics some what. Three two new buildings went up on East End, with another planned.

First you have Robert A.M. Stern (who else these days is doing remakes of pre-war...) at 20 East End (former CUNY building) at 80th street.

Up the block you have another new building at 40 East End...

Twenty East End

While River House cannot shift apartments going for less; 20 East End out of the box sold a penthouse for $28 million. Not bad for 80th and East End where there is also literally nothing over there.

More local coverage of 20 East End, keep in mind this building is three city blocks east of another new building discussed earlier; Icon's Beckford Tower at 80 and Second avenue. Latter building obviously benefits from being two blocks down from Second avenue subway at 83rd and Second.

Any idea about where Kelly Ripa & Mark Consuelos live now? They had a place in SoHo tat I saw in I believe AD but they sold it & bought a huge single family home uptown.

Te interior/exterior look really beautiful whenever they've shown it on her show

Don't you girls know how to search internet?

^^^^^ That's her old place. I was asking about her uptown abode.

Moved on up to the East Side!

Floor plans, yada, yada, yada.....

So young.

r342 Do you?

In his book on The Dakota, Stephen Birmingham recounts the difficulty Lauren Bacall had trying to convince the Co-op Board to allow her to install air conditioning in her unit.

R347

IIRC permission to install that AC was granted to Ms. Bacall only; when she moved out/place was sold or whatever AC must be removed and walls/facade restored to previous condition.

Cannot recall when it began but at some point board at Dakota became concerned about all the renovation work and tightened things up a bit. They have storage rooms stocked with bits of interior furnishings that were removed as part of renovation (gut or whatever) work.

^^^^

So they're just supposed to swelter?

Building just after Dakota (15 West 72nd Street, the Mayfair) was built on land that once housed gardens and tennis courts for the former.

If you look at pictures from when Dakota was built there was literally nothing else surrounding but empty land. Rumor is name of Dakota came about because the new building was so far uptown and in an isolated area it might was well be out west in the Dakotas.

R349

No, just like nearly everyone else in pre-war or even later without either central air or through wall units, residents of Dakota use through window air conditioners. They do have had models for some time now that fit casement and other odd windows.

You can see what one is talking about in picture linked below.

Very few pre-war buildings have central air; so it is window units or those portable ACs that you roll around/stick hose out of window.

Happily many households decamp for the country, Europe or someplace else by time worst of NYC summer weather arrives (July until Labor Day).

R349, Bacall had to agree to save and number each removed brick.

Re The Mayfair, this one is a Tasteful Friends post if ever there was one

And Our Troll--while mom and kids may be out East for the summer, dad still has to work and stay in the city most nights. Plus Our Weather gets very tepid in June and September, causing even Our Best Families to glisten. Hence and entire subindustry around keeping prewar apartments cool and figuring out how to install CAC

Link for TF

That's quite awful, r355: the awkward and inelegant plan, the crushingly low ceilings, the cheap parquet floor from a box, the hollow core doors, structural columns where you least want them, and the finishes - top of the line in-stock Home Depot stuff. It's a fair amount of square footage, but so poorly apportioned. $800,000 trying hard to look like $2.5M

That Mayfair apartment is a disaster. And the description says 3-4 bedrooms, as if you could carve a 4th bedroom out of that floor plan somehow.

This has truly been a wonderful thread that got me through a boring Saturday night while waiting at home with family.

The dark dinning room in R289 's post really annoys me. Must be an example of a broken up apartment. The last thing I want when hosting a diner is for it to reside in a dark room away from any natural light and views. The mirrors on the wall are another questionable choice from the owners. Nothing like watching yourself eat soup to enhance a dining experience. Don't get me started on the track lighting and wall paper.

I went to bed thinking about r278 and r278 I couldn't make the apartment work. The master bedroom faces what I assume to be courtyard, so nothing but brick, while a random bedroom gets the Central Park side of the apartment. Maybe it was intentional to reduce noise for the master bedroom, but it's odd. Walking by my dinning room table to squeeze into the kitchen would be annoying but not the end of the world. I'd see if the wall between the servant's quarter, kitchen and dining room for an open floor plan, but then I'd removed the one non-bedroom refuge in that little place. Hard pass.

That furniture, r358. It's so Levittown 1962.

r322 these older homes are grandfathered into the exemption from sprinklers. Could you imagine the outrage from water damage? . I remember Trump tower, built in the late 70s, didn't even have modern sprinklers which is why the apartment fire earlier this year easily occurred.

R358 This is a very rough illustration of what I meant one could do in r278 The bedrooms are not on the park, but they're for sleeping.

-- r278

He must have been one of the very last Jews with the name Adolph.

Not a bad idea at all r361, but I wonder about the limitations of moving water, drain and gas lines to the other end an apartment. Talk about a Co-Op nightmare. But, I really like the idea of a larger master suite.

If I had $24 million I'd buy a home in SF's Sea Cliff area & pocket what was left.. I'd have space, a gorgeous ocean view, A/C, a yard & no fucking Co-Op board.

I love it hat area r364, but I can’t help feeling that SF is a ticking time bomb for earthquakes, I’d let you have that. I’d want enoug house to entertain with at least the funds for a maid and part-time chef. I dream of hosting 6 course meals in a grand apartment, but it would require help.

I’d take R292’s in a heartbeat. The only thing standing in my way is $24MM, the Co-op Board, and the additional liquid assets I’d need to meet one of the Board’s requirements.

Mmm ... The Dakota ...

More 20 East End

r366 You're in luck. 15 CPW is a condo, so mortgage the hell out of it. Put 10% down and move right in. There's no co-op board.

R368

I love the tiered terrace but for $35 million give me Carmel, CA or Tiburon, CA

I have scheduled an appointment to view and purchase the top two floors of The Pepsi Building. Work will commence shortly thereafter.

About two years ago owners of adjacent CPW facing apartments at Dakota put the two up for sale at same time. Idea was to lure someone into buying both units then rejoin to restore original floor plan of one unit.

Someone took the bait and paid a bit over $20 million for both apartments.

You can see from floor plan how apartments were split; this time it was by blocking off part of entrance gallery.

Doesn't Yoko own multiple units within The Dakota?

BTW, Yoko and Bacall did not get along, big time.

The West Side north of W 65th you can keep, thank you very much.

Why 65th, r374?

R356

Fifteen West 72nd (Mayfair Towers) are what they are; 1960's new construction for middle classes (who were at that time fleeing city in droves).

White brick facades were all the rage from 1950's through 1960's for NYC new construction. Trend may have continued well into the 1980's for all one knows. However recently many buildings have replaced those white bricks with more traditional red.

How the Mayfair came to be....

By 1960's like many grand pre-war buildings on CPW and elsewhere, the Dakota was facing troubles on several fronts. Developer Louis Glickman offered $4.6 million for the Dakota (out bidding William Zeckendorf Sr. by about $100k) which was still a rental building. Since going up the Dakota (again as rental property) had several owners, and Mr. Glickman was second to last on a long list. Idea was new owner would pump money into the Dakota for repairs, maintenance, etc...

Part of deal to buy the Dakota Mr. Glickman also agreed to take the empty parcel of land behind (formerly rose gardens and tennis courts, but now used as parking lot), which he did. However less than a year later Mr. Glickman sold the Dakota to residents (who promptly formed a co-op), and the land to developer who built the Mayfair which opened in 1964.

The Mayfair opened as a rental building, and since it went up before 1972 units were surely covered by New York's rent regulations (rent stabilization). This likely may have prompted (as with many other buildings at the time) the Mayfair to under go conversion to a co-op in 1980. However depending upon type of plan (eviction or non-eviction) rent regulated tenants would have been allowed to remain if they did not buy their units.

There was a huge wave of co-op conversions in NYC during 1980's, and many of the grand pre-war buildings on UWS that didn't convert previously (say in 1960's) were still full of rent stabilized tenants. This includes grand buildings along CPW like the Langham .

So when looking at pictures of interiors for 15 West 72nd street keep in mind it may be the Green's apartment all over again. People who bought back in the 1980's, didn't do much with the place, now it is up for sale.

Furthermore for those not from NYC, if you want to understand the differences between UWS co-ops and the white glove buildings of UES, quick glance at the Mayfair's bylaws make things clear.

Mayfair Towers allows:

Pets are welcome Rentals are allowed Pied-a-terre permitted No age restriction on purchase, co-purchasers with children are permitted

Pets often aren't a problem for UES buildings; but the rest is another matter.

Strict co-op boards frown upon rentals, pied-a-terre use, and whole co-purchaser thing. You might find one or more in buildings east of Lexington, but Fifth, Madison and Park are another matter.

R360

Regardless of source (hose or sprinklers) there is going to be water damage to apartments below regardless. Main question will be how far down things go, and that largely depends upon extent of fire versus what it takes to put it out. You aren't going to be fighting a major fire in a high rise with multiple fire extinguishers. High rise buildings may not have sprinklers, but do believe they are required to have standpipe for water to fight fires.

Fire at old Deutsch Bank building shows how bad things can get.

Interesting read (for those who live outside of NYC) from local media about the Dakota, and by extension era of grand pre-war multifamily buildings. Article in a way also tells why city shall never truly see likes of such buildings again. Stern is doing his best to recreate some elements of pre-war, but building codes, zoning and other changes mean that ship largely has sailed.

Late Carol O'Connor (Mr. Archie Bunker) lived at the Dakota.

Good God, is there no one from entertainment world Dakota's board didn't approve? *LOL*

Late Jean Stapleton (Edith Bunker) lived further south in West 60's

Did Sally Struthers live farther south, on Staten Island?

Droll, very droll.

Ms. Struthers lives out in Los Angeles IIRC, and no AITF was not filmed in NYC, but "Television City in Hollywood".....

R373

Yes, John & Yoko owned multiple units at The Dakota.

I want to see Connie Chung and Maury's apartment. In the video below, Connie explains that she had her own Dakota apartment. When she married Maury they bought a different unit together. Andy asks them several questions about living there, "in that building". It starts around 7:45.

I had a friend who lived Gilda Radner's old place and another friend at Richard Zanuck's apartment, just below Yoko.

Radner's apartment was on 72nd street, low floor and so dark during the day. But there was such a feeling of quiet and peace at the Dakota.

Judy Garland's former apartment at Dakota was recently up for sale. Listed for $16.5 million......

I found that interesting r386 I recently read that there was no evidence that Judy had ever actually lived in the Dakota. It was said that it had just come down in the building's lore that she had lived there. Curbed left open the possibility. Many other websites were stating it as fact that that was Judy's apartment.

[quote]The pad is also rumored to have been the home of an even more famous resident: Judy Garland, who allegedly called the place home for an undetermined period of time at an undetermined point in the apartment’s history. We’ve dug into it and couldn’t find a record of her residency—if you’ve found otherwise, drop a comment.

Roberta Flack's apartment suffered from some very unfortunate interior decorating. No wonder price kept being chopped; listed for $9.5 million in 2015 (with no interior photos), was relisted in 2016 at $7.5 million.

Unit finally sold in January or 2018 after a further chop down to $5.8 million. Buyers were Stacey Bendet, the CEO of fashion line Alice + Olivia, and her husband, Disney scion Eric Eisner. They plan to combine RF's two bedroom apartment with a nine room unit adjacent to create one larger apartment.

Now here's the payoff; other apartment purchased by Mr. and Mrs Eisner is the "Judy Garland" unit next door to Ms. Flack's. By recombining the two apartments another one of the Dakota's full CPW length apartments will be restored to original configuration.

R335

Will give you River House is so far away from things that it might as well be in East River or Queens, but to be fair Sutton Place area once was (and still sort of is) home to a very active gay life.

At one point there were several gay bars from about East 58th down to the 40's going from Third east to First avenue. Famous rent boy stroll was around 53rd and Third or Second avenues.

Other than that tons of gays lived and still do live in area. Freddie Mercury had an apartment at 425 EAST 58th street, and according to elder gays one knows Peter Allen and some other famous gays lived in area as well.

Today while the only gay bar remaining is Townhouse; Sutton Place still has a decent gay presence. Largely interior decorating/designer crowd, but others as well.

You can see bits of Freddie Mercury's old Sutton Place apartment in link below. It was sold after his death pretty much "as is", with everything that could removed. Steve Fabrikant bought the place.

LOL R390, I know Sutton Place area as popular with well-off suburbanites who moved into the city, post-kids. Seemed like a lot of my friends grandparents lived around there or in Lincoln Towers on UWS.

R361, the apartment I grew up in is fairly similar, only we had a third actual bedroom. For most of my life the maid's room was sort of a useless room, it was alternately a play room,a guest room, a home office, and (mostly) the room where we put things we didn't know what to do with.

When I was in college, my parents finally bit the bullet and opened it up and made a really big kitchen.

As others have noted, moving pipes and plumbing around in a co-op is not easily accomplished.

R317 Uma's place looks like a collection of hideous sitting rooms.

R388 Roberta's place is the most boring beige... I was expecting something with more personality. The mirrors and lighting in the living room are starting to look dated.

R367, please, as is (or r372). For my taste a good Dakota apartment can't be beat.

I don't like the Dakota's apartments, the style isn't for me. They just don't match the grandeur of the building's exterior. The wood paneling doesn't impress, give me that French chateau look or mid-century colonial interior.

[quote]Uma's place looks like a collection of hideous sitting rooms.

Wonder if that was the real estate photos during sales. It looks like it's an old lady's home and she bought it from romance novelist Barbara Taylor Bradford. The "bar" room looks like a movie set of a Victorian brothel.

R375

Am not R374 but can tell you one of the most grand of CPW buildings, the Prasada is at 65th and CPW.

Antonio Banderas recently put his apartment in building up for sale.

If AB's place is too small, there is Jon Stryker's double penthouse apartment on market for $48 million

Ceiling of lobby/entrance of Prasada is worth price of admission alone. You can't recreate this today for love nor money.

960 Fifth. Needs no work - unless you're a philistine. Asking $48M, recently noted as sold.

Yes, the furnishings are a little upstairs at the Kennedy White House (it was home to C. Douglas Dillon, Kennedy's Secretary of the Treasury and before that ambassador to France), and on on the market for the first time in 70 years, but fairly perfect (except that price.) Even some of the furniture and some of the art are okay (the Frenchy stuff and some of the W. & J. Sloane's and oddball pieces (that headboard). I would be no headache at all to the coop board.

Just in case some of you don't know the name Jon Stryker; he is one of *the* power gays of New York.

R394

Am with you on that one; have never understood why developer went all in with French chateau for facades, but then all that wood for interior. Cannot recall many if any French apartments from early last century having same look.

Why would Bacall's apartment sell for close to $20 million more than Flack's? That doesn't make sense.

Antonio is certainly committed to his color scheme.

LB's apartment sold for $21 million, while RB's unit went for $5.8 million a difference of $15.20 million.

Ms. Bacall's apartment was twice the size of Ms. Flack's (4000 square feet versus 2000).

LB's apartment was a three bedroom with three and one half bathrooms. While Ms. Flack's seems to have only one full bathroom and a water closet. See floor plans below.

Ms. Bacall's unit was a larger apartment, and IIRC mostly faced CPW. Also IIRC it was one of the apartments not so badly chopped up if at all. We know from above post/listing that RB's apartment was once part of the larger one next door, but was separated to make a smaller (and cheaper) unit.

When you add up what buyer paid for both RB's and the adjoining apartment, it comes close to or maybe even over $21 million.

Floor plan of Lauren Bacall's old apartment.

R403

He was still married to Melanie Griffith when place was purchased, so unless it was redecorated after he gave her the push, the former missus likely had a hand in decorating the interior.

[quote]Why would Bacall's apartment sell for close to $20 million more than Flack's? That doesn't make sense.

R402 A big difference in price but at least some is easily accounted for by physical differences.

Bacall's former apartment is 4000 sq.ft.; 4th floor, fronts on the park, has a very good plan with large public rooms, 13' ceilings, 3 bedrooms/3 baths, and original details intact. Flack's former apartment is 2000 sq.ft., 7th floor, fronts on 72nd (with a good oblique view of the park from a nice if narrow balcony), has a good plan with okay public spaces, 12' ceilings, 2 bedrooms/2 baths, and retains some original details though everything was painted white (and covered with mirrors in the public rooms). All of the original apartments were unique in plan and detailing ; from the sixth floor and above start diminishing in some of the decorative details, slightly in the case of Flack's place, but much more so above hers, and the tenth floor was converted to living space long after it was built.)

Glenn Close visited Bacall at The Dakota . . .

Both former lovers of Len Cariou, btw.

G's former Beresford apartment. "Originally the parlor floor of a magnificent duplex."

[quote]We know from above post/listing that RB's apartment was once part of the larger one next door, but was separated to make a smaller (and cheaper) unit.

Buyer beware.

Apologies r404. Your post wasn't visible when I posted very similarly (out of sync, DL or me.)

R407

R410

No worries, none at all.

R407

Tagging onto.... when originally built most if not all of residences for Dakota were on middle floors. The eighth and ninth floors were reserved for sleeping and bathroom facilities for servants (and for laundry). A 10th floor was dedicated to a children's play area, laundry drying, and water tanks. The first floor was reserved for private dining facilities.

Clark family (heirs of original builder Edward Clark) really let Dakota go to rot and ruin. It wasn't until after the 1961 sale (1974) to new co-operative (see above post) that residents began pouring money into the place to bring it back.

Each apartment has their own chimney for fireplaces, and they all were inspected (small cameras were sent down each one to examine and document damage), the subsequently rebuilt. No easy feat as it meant all those lath and plaster walls had to be broken open, then rebuilt/restored to original condition.

New windows were fitted, deteriorated steel in courtyard and other areas replaced......... All this funded by assessments to individual shareholders , which is one of the banes of living in co-op. Work still goes on as recently announced the Dakota installed a fittness center/gym somewhere in building.

Nureyev owned the apartment above Lauren Bacall; so am guessing he had another full CPW length unit. By all accounts it was grand like his other several residences (Paris, St. Barts, etc....)

For you girls that like a good read; here is a New York Magazine piece from 1997 about the (then) real estate "power brokers" of NYC.

It is truly amazing how things have changed in many ways since, but some bits are still same.

R413 Nureyev's apartment was grand. Sorry for the link to Pinterest but it has more and better photos than I could find elsewhere.

It is interesting that nearly 100 years after WWI and Great Depression put an end to many of those huge full floor (or half floor) apartments, a new generation of "robber barons" with more money than God are attempting to put things back together.

When you walk past the Prasada, Beresford, Apthorp, and other grand pre-war buildings of UWS it is hard to imagine apartments that ran nearly entire floors.

Though decidedly lower on social scale than UWS (which itself is lower than UES), other areas of Manhattan full of huge pre-war apartments are Washington Heights and Inwood. You can throw Morningside Heights into that mix as well.

All areas am happy to say are well represented by gays who have been up there for ages. Ditto for theater people/performing artists. All lured by (by Manhattan standards anyway) affordable housing, but also fact areas are easily reached (to some extent) by two subway lines that run up the west side from theater district/Broadway, Lincoln Center area, etc.....

The floorplan makes far more sense to me than most of the other grand CPW view apartments (The Dakota??).

The kitchen needs a major renovation - open the three rooms (breakfast/kitchen/butler's pantry) into one.

This book is great for anyone who wants to see original floor plans.

Now here is the kicker; for all that pre-war fablousness; the Grinnel is essentially low income housing.

Yes, you read correctly, the Grinnell is a Housing Development Fund Corporation (HDFC) co-op. Program was launched by NYC in 1970's when city was a much different place to stabilize burnt out and or dear derelict buildings.

As myself and others have noted the UWS and indeed west side period right up through Harlem towards Washington Heights/Inwood was in large part basically slums. People were fleeing the city, NYC was near or truly bankrupt, crime was rampant, etc.....

Riverside Drive was developed to compete with Fifth or Park avenues on UES. It never truly happened, and post Great Depression the area slowly declined. More so further north you got away from UWS up through Harlem and points north.

Many of the grand pre-war apartment houses became SROs or basically low income housing. Landlords put nil to little money into properties, so they simply began to fall apart. This was if they didn't abandon them totally....

R399, The apartment at 960 Fifth, the Dillon apartment and was sold for $47,000,000.00. Already closed. 960 is a ten times building so in order to be considered , you must be worth 10 times the purchase in liquid assets, not counting art or other real estate. The buyer, who is well known is easily worth 50 times the selling price, not counting her parents.

[quote]As myself and others have noted the UWS and indeed west side period right up through Harlem towards Washington Heights/Inwood was in large part basically slums. People were fleeing the city, NYC was near or truly bankrupt, crime was rampant, etc.....

Oh please. It was not "in large part basically slums".

In the 1970s, the Upper West Side up to 96th did have it's problems it was laced with SROs, there was crime at night as there was all over the city, Amsterdam Avenue was problematic...but most of the UWS was still wonderful.

Riverside Drive, West End Avenue and CPW were among the most desirable residential avenues in the city. They were just as beautiful then as now.

Columbus avenue had a rebirth in the latter half of the 70s. It was lined with restaurants and outdoor tables. It was like a European avenue filled with people in the evening.

I remember River Side park filled with people on nice days. And filled with people sun bathing.

A lot of the big apartment houses on B'Way were no longer what they once were, but B'way still had movie theatres, Zabars, book stores, the Beacon.

The UWS was filled with actors, musicians, opera singers, dancers. It was hardly a slum.

[quote]latest Powerball winner Tyrone and one of his baby's mommas along with six of his kids

Thoroughly unnecessary, R190. The current crop of Dataloungers who have to put something racist into every post, regardless of topic, are a scourge.

Thanks, R421. Yes, the cash reserve requirements can be formidable. Buying into them is not for the would-be house poor. Of course the flip side is that coops, even at those (ticket) prices represent a good value compared to condos. Some buyers are put off by the nature of coops with owners not "owning what is theirs" but rather holding shares of a corporation in which all your neighbors have a financial interest in your "leased" apartment (and you in theirs), by high fees and the volatility of assessments, by admission requirements, and by restrictions on alterations, etc. But the best coops are to some buyers' eyes inevitably better than the best coops, and yet cheaper on a square footage basis and offering something (architecture, community, exclusivity/privacy, take your pick) much more difficult to find in a condo. There are some great condos with excellent architecture that don't feel corporate and have the lingering smell of a developer's brochure and slick new finishes, but not so many.

The Dillon apartment at 960 Fifth is fairly faultless (if I had warehouses of money, times ten).

At the other end of spectrum (Jackson Heights) you have same issues. People with money moving into middle (or working class) co-ops and wanting to add amenities and other upgrades. Long time residents who are often older and perhaps on fixed incomes aren't exactly thrilled, nor see need.

R421

Am I understanding you correctly? In order to buy in that building you must have cash on hand of 10 times the purchase price & that apartment sold for $47 million?!

The mind boggles! There can't be that many who this applies to= she's worth 50 times that not counting her parents.

Do tell.

Wasn't Needle Park on the UWS, I think 72nd and B'way?

R426

Yes, R421 is correct. Buildings want to see some sort of financial stability to ensure once you've bought you'll be able to afford monthly common charges and so forth.

If you win Powerball or have an inheritance of say $50 million, you couldn't buy that apartment for $47 million. Board won't allow it because once you've shot your wad on purchase (including closing costs, etc....) you won't have anything left over.

Keep in mind liquid assets does cover a pretty wide range; it does not have to be cash in bank. Board just wants to satisfy themselves what a person could lay hands upon easily if required. Obviously a trust isn't liquid asset if you cannot get at the principle amount.

Mr. Jeff Bezos selling shares in Amazon and getting billions in return is a good example.

"Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos sold roughly $990 million worth of stock at the end of last week, new filings show. That's in addition to the $1.8 billion worth of stock he sold the last three days of July. Bezos previously said he would sell $1 billion in stock each year to fund his space company, Blue Origin."

Co-ops get away with lots of things that might be and or are purely discriminatory. They usually manage to defend themselves against most claims by pointing to perfectly sound reasons for this or that policy. Unless something has changed co-ops in NYC aren't even required to disclose exact reason someone is turned down.

R426

Verdi Square (aka Needle Park) has been taken in hand by a newly formed non-profit "Friends of Verdi Square", and in similar manner to Central Park Conservatory have worked to bring the place back.

Place has been spruced up, rats gone (or at least well controlled), and the place now holds various events besides being fit for original purposes.

Rex Reed must have saved his money and/or invested wisely to have been living at The Dakota since the 1960s.

Mr. Rex Reed bought at Dakota in 1969, paying $30k for his apartment. Please read this entire thread and you'll understand why so little was paid, just ten grand less than the Green's forked over for their much larger apartment nine blocks north on CPW at Beresford.

For the record adjusted for inflation $30k in 1969 would be $210,364.58 in today's money, a 601.2% cumulative inflation rate.

Mr. Reed's apartment certainly is worth more than that today, so he (or his estate) is pretty well set.

His estate? Wife and kids?

R432, Not to worry . . . Rex is the picture of health.

R433

My dear "estate" is what one leaves behind upon death; relict and or heirs are another matter.

In NY if one dies alone and without a spouse or close family, link below is how things pretty much go.

Am more than usually sure Mr. Reed has made arrangements for disposition of his estate (as did Mrs. Wrightsman in another thread), so even without children or a spouse some one or thing will benefit from Rex Reed's estate.

Does anyone know if Reed has a longtime companion (as they once called them)

R436, He does not.

Appears Mr. Rex Reed's apartment is on one of the higher floors (8 or 9) and thus carved out of former laundry and servants sleeping quarters. It probably is "cozy" (real estate babble for small or even tiny), but it is in the Dakota......

R437

There isn't enough booze in the Townhouse bar to make someone that blind. Even rent boys have limits you know. *LOL*

Have never warmed to RR personality wise; she is just one of those Mary types you want to whack with a bat every time she opens her mouth.

Rex Reed wasn't bad when he was younger.

Who wouldn't hit that?

R428, they do not answer to anyone actually. Any reason that they give is the reason that they give. Their plan is both ying and yang. It was well known that during the slump of 2008/2009/2010 nightmare - the elite Co-Ops were able to weather the storm. Condos came before and after and good for them (yet they can never be on those choice intersections or have the ideal views either). Still, the best addresses seem to do just fine. No issues; no problems.

Man, that library in R339 penthouse is gorgeous. I’ve saved the photo for inspiration.

It is gorgeous. Unfortunately it's for all the residents to use.

[quote]Their plan is both ying and yang.

Jesus Christ! Are you fucking retarded? For the love of Pete, it's "YIN and yang" you moron!

Did you run out of Cheerios, r445?

My current fantasy fave. Like a Stickley house inside of a NYC co-op.

R447

Only thing I like is the Art Deco bathroom.

R447 Your first floor is at street level right on the sidewalk.

The shutters in that photo are open, but you'd need to have them shut day and night.

And the windows have bars over them.

So the rooms are going to be dark and depressing. And that dark wood ceiling certainly won't help.

You'll also spend a lot of time dusting, unless you have a live-in house keeper. Not to mention the noise.

Oh... and please read the above in the voice of Rachel Dratch as Debbie Downer.

R449

Know building and area well, it is really rather quiet (much as one can get in Yorkville) and lovely.

Plenty of people from all demographics live in ground level apartments in Manhattan. From white glove pre-war buildings to run of the mill tenements and or whatever else. Those bars are there from another time in NYC when crime was far more rampant. If you have seen sitcoms or movies meant to depict 1970's New York City you'll know plenty of ground or even higher floor apartments had those accordion folding window gates. Those are rarely seen nowadays in all but the worst areas.

Such units usually sell or rent at a discount because not everyone wants to live in a goldfish bowl, and or have other concerns.

To my mind one instant advantage of living on ground floor is one doesn't have to worry about neighbors below. Thus can walk around with heavy shoes (or high heels), drop things, have guests, etc... without worrying about someone banging on floor (your ceiling) or otherwise complaining about noise.

I'd never want to live on the first or last floor of an apartment house. They each have their own problems and dangers. Funny though when you drive or walk through neighborhoods that are mostly private homes you can look in the windows and see the families eating, watching TV, doing whatever people do . I could never be comfortable with that. I I had a private home I'd have it locked up like a fort with metal covering the windows. No neighborhood is 100% safe. I love where I live, on the 8th floor of an 18 story building. No fire escapes, no terraces or balconies. No way for anyone to get in the window, no building as high nearby to even look in the window and our doors are made of thick metal. I also have 3 high security locks on my door, just in case.

Unless I was rich and could afford a ton of armed security guards all around the property I could never live in a private house.

[quoter]while mom and kids may be out East for the summer, dad still has to work and stay in the city most nights.

Add a hot blonde in a white pleated dress and you have the plot for "The Seven Year Itch."

So far listing at the Beresford hasn't moved. OTOH several blocks south at 220 CPS there has been a flurry of sales activity.

Once again proving new construction condos are eating pre-war co-op's lunch;

And for other NY'ers, the homeless, they are being sent to live in places in other states that their local Board's of Health label unfit for humans to live in. God this fucking world sucks!

220 Central Park South doesn't do anything for me. Then again, I haven't seen the interior of any of the "good apartments". The master bathrooms are nice though.

You could always ask Sting to give you a tour of his place at 220 CPS

R455

Give it a rest; NYC spends more taxpayer dollars on homeless than any other major city in country. This includes putting them into brand new construction at steeply discounted rents that are basically capped.

You work hard all your life only to find your neighbors are same people you moved away to avoid.

r457 I need not see another Sting residence.

r456

Say what you like; but have to give Sting credit; guy emigrated to USA, settled in NYC and plaid the game (real estate) well while still continuing with his primary passion, music.

Of course native talent like Bon Jovi have done well for themselves as well in real estate.

Plaid should obviously be "played".

Sorry...

Hideous, R459. To have sold for $50M, I might want a nice staircase, and one that wasn't wrapped around an inopportune structural column. The apartment was pretty dreadful; I see why they abandoned ship.

To be fair, they have had other places that were quite different and quite nice, like the London house they sold off [link] in a downsizing a few years ago.

Still have to had it to Sting, flipping that place at 15 CPW for almost twice as much paid; nice bit of gains there.....

Since it seems none of UES co-ops will have them; Mr. and Mrs. Neumann are going across Central Park......

Mr. Neumann's face looks to have been assembled from spare parts. It doesn't all come together properly. And he looks like a creepy fucker.

r455 there will always be poor people and NYC, as an immigration hub, was never a become of charity or friend to the homeless. It's a money obsessed world renowned city that's getting more and more expensive by the day. There are middle class people struggle to remain in NY, so there is little appetite to worry about homeless people since they pay relatively little in taxes, might not vote, and can be a strain on social services. The people buying the apartments on this thread are paying the lion's share of the local taxes to go towards NY's social services so we shouldn't pooh pooh them for having the means to purchase a grand home.

Can one of you kind sirs start a Tasteful Friends thread for San Francisco high end homes and provide a link?

Much appreciated

For R467, a San Francisco thread

R466

Please; current administration and city council are bending over backwards to serve the "homeless", poor, or whatever in name of equality. They've been shoveling out taxpayer money for everything from free feminine hygiene products to recently Metro Cards, and a lot in between.

City also forces developers to include housing for poor and homeless in new developments. So you can be paying $$$$ for an apartment in Chelsea, near High Line, Far West Side, or whatever and right next door is Tyrone (formerly homeless, rap sheet, works at Mikey D's) , his baby's momma and their three kids , paying $$ or $ (maybe even nothing when city subsidies are calculated). Worse these people cannot be touched ever. Even if they don't pay rent for months and or otherwise cause issues.

r469 that's called a good solution. Since no one wanted to offer their neighborhood for affordable housing units, just place these people in every neighborhood. Still, I don't see those $20 million high rises making a space for a low income resident.

R470

City can only force low income housing upon developers/landlords when they seek or obtain something from them directly (tax abatement, zoning variances, etc...). Doing otherwise runs up against taking clause of USC.

Thus developers who can build as of right don't often bother with "inclusion bonus" or whatever that forces them to accept low or moderate income housing. All of development along "Billionaires Row" for instance is as of right, so no owners in 220 Central Park South and other buildings down there won't be bothered.

You're a fucking racist R469. And many of the so called affordable apartments in NYC are 2500 a month. Yeah, a real deal for the very poor and homeless. In the meantime our wonderful NYC mayor is shipping the homeless, including women with children, to other states and they house them in housing that has been declared by the authorities in these states as unfit for humans to live in. De Fucking Blasio is just another Republican pretending to be a Democrat. And he thought anyone would vote for him for president.

[quote]Appears Mr. Rex Reed's apartment is on one of the higher floors (8 or 9) and thus carved out of former laundry and servants sleeping quarters.

Since it's probably larger than the original space you mention, "carved out of" doesn't seem right.

Perhaps "cobbled together from"?

R471

As a non NYer where exactly is "Billionaires Row"?

See:

R475

I never envisioned Billionaire's Row to be skyscrapers. I always thought they were grand mega mansions that were preserved. Example: Epstein lived in what was a mega mansion.

Learn something new every day on DL. Thanks!

Huguette's dolls to be auctioned off next month

R476

Got back into city Christmas holidays with family late yesterday afternoon. Went out to run errands and around Columbus Circle area (57th Street/Central Park South) kept noticing all these tourists and transplants staring up at the tall new buildings along Billionaire's Row.

Generally ignore such things and went on about my business. Came out of Time Warner building and still seeing people looking up decided to see what was going on.. Due to weather area all those tall buildings were shrouded in fog starting one third or so way up until tops. We're talking a soupy mess that must have made seeing out impossible or for not very far.

r276 r277 The Murphy couple who opened up the apartment in r276 are also the purchasers of Bob Weinstein's apartment. It doesn't look as though much can be done to open up their new unit.

This article mentions them as the buyers and when I googled them, the AD article from their prior Beresford renovation came up.

That floorplan is INSANE.

It is odd, R480: for the large size, but also for the slightly disconcerting relationship of it's two stories, the lower floor twice as large and, in the two-story "half" the room arrangements only vaguely correspond one floor to the other. Roth was talented at exterior massing and some other aspects, but I never quite like his interiors - the proportions wrong, the detailing not well conceived, and the plans lacking evident orderliness.

What home did Weinsteins wife get in the divorce?

Like former Mr. and Mrs. Bob Weinstein UWS townhouse better, well at least going by interiors.

Why did the Weinstein brother have such difficulty selling?

R484

Who knows; guilt by association (the brother), bad market timing and or things are soft, etc....

There is only a limited number of buyers for these townhouses, Conn estates and UWS white glove co-ops or condos.

That being said same basic rules regarding real estate apply even at rarefied levels.

One, just because you drastically over paid for a property, it doesn't mean someone else will when time comes to sell.

Two, when a property is priced correctly it generally will sell; if it isn't usually it won't, or will take longer.

Update: The listing in the OP says it's down to $19.5 million.

Nobody with $19 million plus $10K per month is looking to buy a place in NYC for the foreseeable future.

Not all show business people live on the Upper West Side, you know.

Took awhile but apartment is finally in contract (at full asking price) as of 23 April 2021.

Guess all that noise about wealthy abandoning Manhattan just isn't wholly true.

The original asking price was $24 million.