Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pre-war vs post-war came up in another thread and instead of hijacking the thread further (which was originally about apt searching in Inwood) I thought I would start a new one.
When I first started looking for an apartment, I absolutely would not look at anything post-war, since I was looking for the pre-war feel and construction (I thought). In my experience, most post-war, at least in my price range, has only 8 foot ceilings and MUCH smaller rooms. And in the neighborhood I ended up in, even the post-war buildings are barely post-war -- built around 1950 so they are nearly 60 years old. Basically, not only are they smaller and more cramped feeling but they also don't necessarily have any of the really modern conveniences of a brand-new building.
I did end up in a pre-war, and I do appreciate the high ceilings, really spacious rooms and breezy feel. However, there are some things I started to appreciate about modern amenities after living here for awhile without any. I also realized that while the walls are really solid and don't let noise through, the same cannot be said for the ceilings and floors. You can hear every footstep.
I started to covet my neighbors' high-rise with the concrete floors and the views from above (even though the apts have 8 foot ceilings).
Then I visited a friend's apartment nearby. She lives in a "modern" construction 6-family builidng - the short ones with the kind of ugly balconies. It's not a brand-new building, maybe built in the 80s? And I have to say that while I thought the foot-fall noise in my building was bad, it is 10x worse in hers. It also seems like it's kind of built of cardboard; it just doesn't feel solid at all.
And lastly I visited another friend's new $3 million condo in a "green" building in the financial district. Amazing. Huge windows everywhere, a beautiful great room with the kitchen and living room combined, closets everywhere...solid feeling.
So, this leaves me confused. I thought I could count on the pre-war/post-war category to help me determine where I would want to live (not that I'm going anywhere soon) but I have realized it just depends on the building!! And how much money you can spend on rent or mortgage!
Pre-war vs post-war came up in another thread and instead of hijacking the thread further (which was originally about apt searching in Inwood) I thought I would start a new one.
When I first started looking for an apartment, I absolutely would not look at anything post-war, since I was looking for the pre-war feel and construction (I thought). In my experience, most post-war, at least in my price range, has only 8 foot ceilings and MUCH smaller rooms. And in the neighborhood I ended up in, even the post-war buildings are barely post-war -- built around 1950 so they are nearly 60 years old. Basically, not only are they smaller and more cramped feeling but they also don't necessarily have any of the really modern conveniences of a brand-new building.
I did end up in a pre-war, and I do appreciate the high ceilings, really spacious rooms and breezy feel. However, there are some things I started to appreciate about modern amenities after living here for awhile without any. I also realized that while the walls are really solid and don't let noise through, the same cannot be said for the ceilings and floors. You can hear every footstep.
I started to covet my neighbors' high-rise with the concrete floors and the views from above (even though the apts have 8 foot ceilings).
Then I visited a friend's apartment nearby. She lives in a "modern" construction 6-family builidng - the short ones with the kind of ugly balconies. It's not a brand-new building, maybe built in the 80s? And I have to say that while I thought the foot-fall noise in my building was bad, it is 10x worse in hers. It also seems like it's kind of built of cardboard; it just doesn't feel solid at all.
And lastly I visited another friend's new $3 million condo in a "green" building in the financial district. Amazing. Huge windows everywhere, a beautiful great room with the kitchen and living room combined, closets everywhere...solid feeling.
So, this leaves me confused. I thought I could count on the pre-war/post-war category to help me determine where I would want to live (not that I'm going anywhere soon) but I have realized it just depends on the building!! And how much money you can spend on rent or mortgage!
Thoughts?
I believe that the prewar/postwar categorization is a quick rule of thumb guide but as you've come to realize there's much more out there than a back of the envelope analysis would conclude.
In housing, there's always a tradeoff - whether we're talking single-family detached with yard, townhouse, condo, co-op, hi-riser, six-unit family building, and so forth. Many times here in NYC one's budget pretty much determines choices for us. And there are times when one outgrows the choices of several years ago and now desires something different/more compatible with one's present personal, financial, social, family needs and affordability.
I do believe that there are even prewars and then again prewars - if you know what I mean. Different quality, size, esthetics even WITHIN the same category. Take those awesome prewars on Central Park West. They can differ substantially from prewars in another part of town.
Many people do like the really modern buildings as opposed to older postwars. Then there are some really ugly modern unappealing structures going up, e.g., in many parts of esthetic and beautiful Forest Hills. The NY Times recently ran an article examining neighborhood resentment to several McMansion type mutifamily, multi-unit apartment buildings sprouting up in that area. Many longtime residents are aghast at some of the buildings that some developers/immigrants from Uzbekistan have been constructing without regard to the existing neighborhood characteristics. It's a very volatile subject in Forest Hills these days.
You are right, Henna, there's more to real estate out there than simple categorization would lead us to conclude.
Henna, there are many factors at play, such as if there have been any renovations, how much was spent, quality of workmanship and material. This also goes for new construction as you pointed out your friend's building built in the 1980's.
At the end of the day, you have to check out each apartment/condo and see and hear for yourself. Some of the pros/cons won't be evident unless you live in it, so maybe you can poke around some local nabe blogs or talk up some locals at a cafe or other spot to get better insight.
Generally, the proportions and design elements (if intact) in a pre-war make it so much more desirable than the modern low ceiling, parquet floor apartment of the post-war period. Now, there are differences in quality, and some modern buildings do echo the pre-war aesthetic in craftsmanship and materials, but it's the exception that does this, not the rule.
One area where some pre-wars are lacking, however, compared to the modern ideal is in the kitchens, and as lifestyles have changed and it's not as common to have a live-in housekeeper today, those with the small maid's rooms off the kitchen can combine them into a larger and more modern space within the envelope of the pre-war apartment. Of course, this is in an ownership situation, since you cannot alter a rental in such a way.
Most pre-wars are sought-after because of the hallmarks of quality, whereas some post-wars are sought-after for the same elements and the amenities of the building. Pre-war apartments were overengineered, whereas many of the post-war were adequately engineered. During the post-war building boom, many formerly standard hallmarks of residential design were streamlined for ease of construction and speed, but over time, they can be a little lacking, comparatively. Pre-war apartments are generally more home-like with features such as intricate moldings, some with real fireplaces, the wood floors, etc. that would have been accoutrements found in many single family homes of the period, whereas the post-war houses are so streamlined and contemporary that they feel as if they are apartments, not homes stacked to the sky. Today, however, there are some show-stopping modern designs that are executed with an eye to quality, bridging the gap between the two, but this phenomenon is at the upper end of the market.
There are a good number scattered throughout the city. Some examples from the immediate post-war years include Fordham Hill Towers, the Winston Churchill, River Point Towers, Waterside, Penn South, 640 Fifth Avenue (before the recent redesign) just to name a few. Fordham Hill, however, was in the international style, a movement that began in the pre-war years towards streamlined development style with little adornment, that helped to form the basis of the post-war apartment style.
Edit: 923 Fifth Avenue is also another good example of a post-war building, as is the Skyview complex. Lincoln Plaza and Concourse Village are also some good examples. Later, more modern, higher-end buildings like 15CPW, and especially 535 West End Avenue are using more of a mixture of the two, underscoring the quality of the pre-war with advancements in modern construction and conveniences.
Prewar, in terms of real estate, is anything built before WWII. So that's anything before 1939-1940.
In NYC many buildings are prewar but as many have pointed out, the quality of the prewar construction can vary. Even some post war buildings especially if they are built before the 1970s were also constructed with strong quality. The main things are the solid walls and hardwood floors and the beautiful crown and baseboard moldings. The rare details like leaded glass, wood framed windows and solid doors are what people were usually after.
I personally prefer prewar construction or mid century construction (1950s-1960s) because I prefer the quality construction and period details that aren't found in the modern construction. Also the size of the apartments.
Now, this preference is a big deal in this city I think. But I would never feel this way say in the Southeast where the homes are constructed well and usually contain moldings and beautiful details despite being brand new.
Last edited by vitalove; 09-11-2008 at 07:27 PM..
Reason: Forgot about space. Thanks for the reminder, SeventhFloor.
I assumed all of them were prewar. Especially where I live. Here buildings looked really decayed and alot of them dont have elevators or intercoms.
Also what do the the post war buidlings look like?
My building was built in 1920 btw.
Im curious.
the older neighborhoods of the city.....like harlem, around your way, and brooklyn. queens doesnt have as much pre-war, and staten island probably has a handful if that.
__________________
"The man who sleeps on the floor, can never fall out of bed." -Martin Lawrence
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
