I went to the house rather early yesterday morning – at about 7:45, just after the sun came up. I walked into the house and it was pretty warm inside despite the fact that it was 42 degrees and windy outside and we don’t have heat in our building yet. Given that the sun had just come up the warmth wasn’t due to solar heat gain either…

Besides a few light bulbs on, and a small heater down in the uninsulated part of the cellar (to keep the pipes from freezing) there wasn’t much the the way of heat sources, yet the house was still warm. It was a little on the chilly side, but we like that – that’s pretty much how we want to keep the house during the winter months. Cold enough to warrant wearing a light sweater or hoodie, but not so cold that our hands get cold.

It appears the heat was coming from the building next to ours – 166 West 123. Despite the fact that 166 is sandwiched between two cold, unheated shells it remarkably has no insulation in the party walls. I can’t imagine what their heating bills must look like – they’re radiating so much heat that it’s enough to keep multiple buildings warm. All the buildings next to them have to do is insulate well and trap 166′s heat.

I would feel guilty about having our neighbor heating our building for us but it’s costing them less than when our building was open to the elements and the party wall was freezing cold. The core principles of conservation are Reduce, Reuse, Recycle. To that end we’ve Reduced our neighbor’s energy usage, and Reused their radiated heat. It’s pretty much a win-win.

Even without a sweater I found the temperature yesterday to be pretty comfortable. What that means is that we probably won’t need to turn the heat on in our building until it gets down into the 30s and even then it doesn’t look like we’ll need much heat.

The moral of the story is closed cell foam is pretty incredible – and while it’s a bit more expensive upfront, it’ll save us far more money than it cost.

UPDATE:

It’s gotten colder since I wrote the post and I’ve figured out the house is comfortable down to roughly freezing. I was comfortable at 35 degrees outside with a 10 mph wind, but it was maybe 5 degrees too cold when it was 27 outside with a 14 mph wind. Even at 27 out the temperature wasn’t that bad. A hoodie or sweater would have made it comfortable enough except hands would have been a bit cold. And as a temperature for sleeping – it could even get colder inside with a proper down or wool blanket.

UPDATE #2

Today we finally got thermometers. The temperature outside was 32 degrees but inside it was 51 degrees on the parlor floor (the coldest part of our unit) and 52 degrees near the window in the cellar of the rental unit (the coldest part of the rental unit). That’s pretty sweet – we get 20 degrees of heat off light bulbs and from the warm wall with the neighbor. We also noticed at lower temperatures the heat gained is even more.

I think I’m going to be pretty comfortable with the house set to the high 50s during the day and the high 40s at night. That means we won’t need to turn on the heat until we’re in the high 30s (day) or below freezing (night). We’ll see what temperature we can get away with when we actually move in…

There’s an inherent problem with rehab loans which means the contractor is more likely than not to run into cash flow problems…

With a rehab loan there is no payment until the work is done. And even then 10% is held back until the end of the project. The holdback protects the bank and the home owner, but it creates a difficult scenario for the contractor. The 10% is supposed to be his profit and holding it is supposed to be leverage to make sure he stays around and completes the project. But if problems arise the holdback could mean that he doesn’t have the cash flow to keep the project progressing. Deadlines can be missed, and costs can start piling up.

With most contracting arrangements the contractor gets a deposit at the beginning of the project and that deposit is his cash reserve to help him get through the project since he’ll need to pay for certain things in advance. Thing is, with a rehab loan there is no deposit. This means you need to make sure going into contract that your contractor has a substantial amount of cash in his bank accounts and/or that he has good credit and access to substantial lines of credit. If you’re financing part of your renovation in cash you may be asked to give a deposit on the entire job – not just the portion you’re doing in cash.

One significant risk is if line items come in over budget. In that case the amount over budget will come directly out of your contractor’s available cash and could create cash flow problems.

Another potential problem is if your contractor needs money to cover losses on other jobs or if he didn’t pad the numbers enough to have money to cover G&A items like insurance. In both of those cases his available cash will get depleted and he will start having cash flow problems.

If you ask your contractor to bond the job (ensuring that sub-contractors are paid for their work and don’t put liens on your property) – the bond money will also eat away at available cash. But, contractors who have the cash to bond jobs probably have cash they need to keep the job on track.

When the contractor’s cash flow starts getting tighter you’ll start seeing progress on your job slow down. And the slower it goes the worse the problem becomes since fixed costs are still incurred even though work isn’t getting done. Gradually the contractor can dig himself into a pretty deep hole.

Finances and managing money are a big part of contracting – contracting is far more than just doing good work. The ideal contractor will have a “money guy” who will watch the budget and the cash flow like a hawk and make the contractor stay on budget. If you’re selecting a contractor make sure there’s a money guy that’s part of his team – that could be a construction manager (a “CM”) or it could be a project accountant. Stay away from any contractor who doesn’t have a money guy as a senior member of his team.

Rehabbing a place is difficult enough even when everything goes smoothly. But it can quickly turn into a nightmare if your contractor has financial problems.

The other day we went through an SRO-restricted townhouse which did not have a certificate of no harassment. In talking to the broker afterwards the broker insisted financing SROs without certificates of no harassment wasn’t a problem – that they did it all the time. She even cited two that were closed this year including one that was uninhabitable. When I pressed the broker on details the answer was vague but insistent (and even a little condescending).

So I called someone I know who’s a bit of an expert on financing townhouses and SROs and we talked through what might be happening. His take on it is exactly what I expected…

An naïve buyer shows up at one of the broker’s open houses, they’re told the house a legal 1 to 4 family, and hence mortgageable. [The paperwork I was given when I went through the SRO said it was a legal single family, but the broker had conveniently "forgotten" to put their logo on the document so misinformation couldn't be traced back to them.] My mortgage expert and I suspect the following then happens… The buyer is gently guided through the process of buying the townhouse. The broker sends them to particular real estate lawyer, a particular architect, and a particular mortgage broker. The lawyer doesn’t tell the buyer the problems with the house or if he does he downplays them, the architect doesn’t mention potential problems with DOB, and the mortgage broker picks some unsuspecting bank in say the midwest who has no clue what an SRO is and what limitations that puts on the property. A 203(k) mortgage is then obtained, the sale is closed and everyone gets their commissions.

Unlike the loan we got, 203(k)s do not require approved plans at closing. After they’ve bought the place, the buyer goes to DOB to get their plans approved and is told they need a certificate of no harassment since their building is SRO restricted. The worst case scenario at that point is they have to wait 3 years to apply for the certificate, then construction takes another year. Meanwhile they have an uninhabitable building so they’re paying rent on top of say a $6,000 mortgage for a building they can’t use. They can’t afford the payments, so the bank forecloses and they lose the money they put into the building and their credit is ruined.

I’m not saying the worst case scenario is typical, but my mortgage expert friend has seen things like that happen. Banks who write a lot of rehab mortgages in the New York area insist on a certificate of no harassment to close the loan – they don’t want their loans going bad.

Unfortunately that’s typical of the dirty side of Harlem real estate and it doesn’t just hurt the buyers and the banks (and tax payers who’ve insured the loan). It hurts our neighborhoods since buildings don’t get fixed up – they sit there and deteriorate and reduce our quality of life and are a drag on our property values.

If you’re looking for a Harlem townhouse there are a few things you can do to protect yourself.

1. Work with a buyer’s broker who has experience in the Harlem market – like me
2. Deal directly with a local bank who has lots of experience doing rehab loans in Harlem. If you can’t get the loan past them, you may be exposing yourself to risk.
3. Get your own real estate lawyer and make sure they understand issues surrounding NYC SROs really well. Don’t do anything that your lawyer says you shouldn’t do.
4. Check the SRO status even if the building is 1 to 4 family. Check with both DOB and HPD.
5. Try to get approved plans before closing. At a minimum file the plans and see what DOB will require for approval.
6. If at all possible, buy the building in cash. At least then if you have to hold the building while you wait for a C of NH, you won’t be making mortgage payments (and you can get a loan that doesn’t require PMI).

For an all cash buyer it can still make sense to buy an SROs without certificates of no harassment IF they buyer understands what they’re getting into and they’re prepared to wait for the certificate. OR if they’re able to bring the building to an acceptable point under “repairs and maintenance” and they can do those repairs all cash. In fact all cash buyers are the only people who should be buying these buildings.

There’s a lot of gray area between the worse case scenario and the best case scenario. The building could be rentable and the rents could cover the mortgage while the owner waits for the certificate. Or the building could be habitable and the owner could pay a handsome mortgage to live humbly while they wait for the certificate. But sometimes the worst really does happen. Rehabbing a townhouse is hard enough – you don’t need to add to the stress by picking the wrong building.

Every now and then I encounter a buyer who is cavalierly working directly with every listing broker they can find. They don’t seem to understand that parts of Harlem real estate are a still a bit like the wild west and bad things can happen to good people (even people who think they know what they’re doing). Things are much better than they were back in the day, but when you’re looking to buy in Harlem it helps to have a team of people watching your back.

I was talking to our mortgage guy at Wells Fargo the other day, and on top of the rehab loan amounts going down over $100K on September 30, there are now restrictions on using rental income to qualify for a mortgage.

We qualified for our mortgage by taking our incomes and adding 75% of the expected rental income. Only with that rental income were we able to qualify for our mortgage. Now people getting loans have to prove that they can pay the mortgage payment out of their own pockets with no help from rental income. That’s a huge barrier.

Take us for an example… We’re not rich, we just invested well when we bought our coop back in ’98 and walked away with (barely) enough to buy a shell nearly “all cash” when we sold our coop in ’09. We were pushing the debt-to-income ratios as it is. Come October the $930K loan we got would drop to $800K, and then the $1,500/mo (75% of $2,000) that we calculated in as rental income wouldn’t count. That would drop the loan we would qualify for by almost another $300,000. We just couldn’t do any sort of renovation for $500K. It would have stopped us dead in our tracks.

There are exceptions to the rules. You can count the rental income if 1) you can show that you’ve managed rental property before, and 2) if you’re a first time home buyer. You can also ask for an exemption if there is an established rent roll for the building and the tenants are staying put. But of course, that’s never the case with shells undergoing major renovation.

All of this is because the banks are worried about the borrowers covering the first few months of mortgage payments. So I asked if an escrow could be set up to cover those months – the answer was ‘no’…

The thing is, even in a case like ours (which pushes the limits) the numbers really do work once a tenant is in place. We’ll be paying slightly more for 3,000 sq. ft. in a townhouse than we used to pay for our 1,350 sq. ft. coop – and rental income is a big part of the reason why the numbers work as well as they do.

What this means for Harlem townhouses is fewer of them will get renovated and the renovations that are done will be lower end “rental grade” renovations. It also means more investors doing renovations and fewer owner occupied townhouses. All of those factors have a direct negative impact on the community.

As always, if you’re affected by the new changes – talk to one or more mortgage experts to see if there are loopholes you can qualify for to get around the rules. There may be factors I’m not familiar with that will affect whether you qualify for the mortgage you need.

I thought this interview with Richard LeFrak had a lot of truth in it…

The take-aways are:

• There’s a glut of single-family homes across the nation. Values are still 10 to 15% higher than they should be and are likely to continue to decline.
• Rental properties are doing very well right now since people are afraid of being trapped in a bad investment if they buy, so they’re renting.
• A lot depends on the City. If the City has job growth its real estate market is fine (e.g. Washington D.C.)
• Commercial real may be going back into a bubble. Low interest rates are what’s spurring the investment.
• New York City is doing pretty well.

MAJOR CORRECTION: I’m going to sticky this post for a few days. Max loans aren’t going down nearly as much as I thought they were. So the situation isn’t all that dire. It’s worse, but not all that much worse… Essentially the limits on conforming loans are going down just 15% after September 30. I’ve stricken the parts that were wrong, and put corrections in italics.

The big news today was that it seems there’s bipartisan support for lowering the loan limits for Fannie and Freddie in high cost areas like New York. Assuming it happens, it could have a rather profound effect on places like New York – and it will particularly affect Harlem townhouse shells where many of us depend on the higher loan limits to make the numbers work and the banks avoid the risk of renovation loans.

Right now in NYC, you can borrow up to $729,750 for a 1 family home without having to get a “jumbo” mortgage – that will drop to $417,000 $625,500. For a 2 family you can currently borrow up to $934,200 – that will drop to $533,850 $800,775. For a 3 family you can currently borrow $1,129,250, but that will drop to $645,300 $967,950. (And so on…)

What that means is that fewer people will be able to buy townhouses since they won’t be able to qualify for federally insured mortgages that cover enough of the costs. They will have to try to get mortgages from banks that will require much larger down payments, higher incomes, and overall much less risk for the banks. There already is no such thing as a jumbo renovation loan – so renovation loans will really dry up are less likely to cover the cost of renovation come this fall. Somewhat less demand means real estate prices will could drop slightly (because of this). Properties like shells that are particularly risky will probably see the biggest drops are the most likely to be affected.

This is major will have real effects on Harlem townhouses…

Those of us who have already bought will could see the prices of our homes drop in value since there will be less competition among buyers slightly fewer buyers will be able to get the size of loans they need.

People who are buying will find it somewhat harder to get mortgages that cover all the expenses. A lot of people just won’t qualify. We wouldn’t qualify be able to do the renovation we want to do under the new rules. It doesn’t mean the buyers can’t afford the homes. Our place will actually be quite affordable once it’s all done. It’s just that the renovation process is a risk no bank wants to take on.

My advice to people who own shells that are on the market is SELL NOW! realize after September 30 the value of your place may go down even further. If you’re holding that property after September 30, you’re probably going to hold it for quite a while into the future and it will sell for substantially less money. Now is not the time to be greedy.

If you own a shell and haven’t closed on your rehab mortgage – do everything what you can to close the mortgage before September 30 - otherwise you may not be able to do as nice of a renovation.

If you’re in the market for a shell – that’s a tough one… After September 30 you may not be able to afford a townhouse at all. But closing on a rehab mortgage takes time. You need approved plans (which can take months to get), you need a contractor who’s ready to start, etc. And on top of it all it’s possible the place you buy could drop in value shortly after you buy it.

The same goes for renovated townhouses, but to a lesser degree – the situation won’t be quite as dire for livable places Renovated townhouse may not feel the hit much at all since jumbo mortgages will be available for them (just a little harder to get).

After September 30 cash will continue to be king (even more than it is now). You’ll need a large down payment PLUS pretty substantial income. It’s sorta sad really. The current crop of homeowners who are buying and renovating shells are often pretty regular Joes… A lot of them will just be priced out of the market.

I feel fortunate that we bought when we did and got our loan closed when we did. Yes, our place will most likely go down in value, but renovated places will fair better than shells since banks will be still be lending on regular, non-rehab mortgages. We’ve always taken a long-range view of the townhouse purchase. It will still be affordable for us after we get done. And I’m not sure any of this will matter in 15 or 20 years and we have every intention of living in our place for that long…

Hopefully something will happen to derail the support for these changes. It’s being implemented all wrong… They should take everyone down slowly. They way they’re proposing will hurt places like California and New York and not change anything for middle America. Hopefully common sense will prevail and none of this will come to reality. But from the sounds of it, it’s a done deal.

At our mortgage closing the other day our loan officer made an interesting comment – “there are no jumbo rehab loans”. Jumbo loans are really big mortgages that are bigger than Fannie Mae or Freddy Mac are willing to insure. They’re purely a bank product. People can still get regular jumbo mortgages, but jumbo rehab loans simply don’t exist – the banks think they’re too risky. The line between “conforming” and “jumbo” is determined by Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. Currently conforming loans in New York max out at $729,75o for a one family, $934,200 for a two family, and $1,129,250 for a three family. Where this comes into play vis-à-vis Harlem townhouse shells is that it limits who can buy and renovate shells and how the townhouses are configured. Let’s take a few examples and see how this plays out…

Harlem’s little townhouses – 12.5′ x 53 x 4 stories

Dotted all around Harlem are 12 1/2 foot townhouses where the original developer fit two homes on one 25 foot lot. These have 2,650 sq. ft. including the walls, 2,350 sq. ft. inside the walls (586 per floor).

If we assume $165/sq. ft. for an average shell, that puts the purchase price around $450K. Then add $530K ($200/sq. ft.) for a nice renovation and the total cost will be just under $1M.

Owners are probably going to want the entire house for themselves – 2,350 sq. ft. isn’t that much when you subtract the space taken by the staircases, etc. Since only $730K can be financed with a conforming mortgage that means the potential buyer needs nearly $300K in cash to make it work.

If the buyer converts it to two family then only about $100,000 of cash is needed, but then the buyer gets a pretty small space and won’t get much rental income since the unit will be pretty small.

The standard “smaller” Harlem townhouse – 16′ x 50′ x 4 stories

All over Harlem you see 16 footers that are roughly 16′ x 50′ x 4 stories (3200 sq. ft. total, 2880 sq. ft. internal sq. ft. internal, 720 sq. ft. per floor). These will probably cost $525K to purchase (plus or minus depending on condition and location), and cost $650K to renovate – so $1.175M in total investment.

Chances are the buyer will want to configure it as a two family – so they’ll need about $250,000 in cash to put down (minimum).

If they configure it as 3 family their unit will be less than 1,500 sq. ft. and they’ll lose the back yard and only have a roof deck (much less desirable for the owner). But then they only need about $50K down and they can go with low-money down FHA-backed 203(k) loan.

The popular 18 footers – 18′ x 55′ x 4 stories

18 footers are popular because they’re wide enough to have floor through rentals which are popular with developers. But putting developers into the equation ups the prices. They have about 3,950 sq. ft. (3,600 interior, 900 per floor). With developers in the picture I’d expect the cost to be around $710K for the building and $790K for the renovation – so $1.5M total investment.

Configured as a two family the owner would get 2,700 sq. ft. but would need $575K in cash to make it happen.

Configured as three family the owner gets 1,800 sq. ft., but loses the back yard and still needs $375K in cash to pull it off.

While a developer might make it 4 family, there’s really no point. The increased taxes on 4 family (compared to 3 family) and having just a small apartment make it not worth while to the owner.

The coveted 25 footers – 25′ x 52′ x 4 stories

25 footers are just elegant. The space in them is incredible – 5,200 sq. ft. total (4,800 internal, 1,200 per floor). Typically 25 footers have 12+ foot ceilings on the parlor floor so they just feel cavernous. They’re wonderful houses. But with that space comes higher cost… Probably $900K for the building, plus $1M for renovation for a total cost of about $1.9M.

The most spectacular configuration is an owner’s triplex over a ground floor rental. That would give the owner a 3,600 sq. ft., 6 bedroom house with substantial rental income from a legal two bedroom apartment. But they would need $1M in cash since the 2 family rehab loan maxes out at $935K.

The other configuration is two floor-thru tenants over an owner’s duplex. But with that configuration the owner still needs to come up with $775K in cash.

5 story townhouses

In each of the scenarios above it’s possible you could buy a 5 story townhouse instead of the more common 4 story. In some cases it makes adding a unit easier and more desirable since the owner’s unit will have an additional floor. But it ups purchase and renovation costs.

The bottom line

The bottom line is that the lack of jumbo rehab mortgages means that potential buyers either need a lot of cash or they need to be OK with not having a very big owner’s unit. That severely limits the pool of people who realistically are suited for rehabbing buildings. The other thing to note is that this is a bigger problem for bigger townhouses since the costs go up and there aren’t jumbo mortgages to offset the increased costs. Even the little townhouses can easily exceed the max amounts for conforming mortgages.

If you look at some of the posts I’ve had on what things are selling for you’ll notice the gap between shells and livable townhouses is bigger than you might think. I think part of that spread is due to what I just described above – the potential buyers for shells are limited because the loan amounts for rehab mortgages are limited.

But it gets worse…

The problem looming on the horizon is that politicians want to scale back Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. If that happens it means no more Fannie and Freddy mortgages. There are proposals to make this happen over the next two to ten years. NYC already has increased loan amounts because we’re in a high cost area. As Fannie and Freddie get scaled back all of that will just go away. In fact people think 30 year fixed rate mortgages will go away if Fannie and Freddie are eliminated or severely scaled back.

The politicians who are advocating getting rid of Fannie and Freddie aren’t thinking about what it will mean to neighborhoods with blighted buildings – but it will have a huge effect. They understandably want to  stop the federal government from taking on such big risks, but rehabbing blighted neighborhoods is a risk I think it’s appropriate for governments to take on since even if the mortgages default the community benefits. If Fanny and Freddy go away it’s possible next to nothing will get rehabbed in Harlem – or the rehabs will only be done by developers – not by homeowners who are investing themselves in the community. I’m not saying Fannie and Freddie are perfect, but very few Harlem townhouse shells would get rehabbed without them.

I was looking through The Real Deal the other day and they have an article on Manhattan townhouses…

Recession notwithstanding, the median sales price of a Manhattan townhouse jumped 13.2 percent between 2009 and 2010 … One reason for the jump is that, unlike condos, very few newly built townhouses have been added to the housing stock …

If you’re trying to choose between a condo and a townhouse the supply of each should be one of the things you take into consideration. Think twice about the fact that 1) it’s easy to find a condo or coop, but 2) difficult to find a townhouse. Limited supply = scarcity = higher prices. This will only become more true in the next 10 to 20 years as far more condos are built than townhouses.

The article goes on to explore why Manhattanites prefer new construction for their condos and old historic buildings for their townhouses…

In Manhattan, “new construction [townhouses are] not well received,” Miller concurred. “Gut rehabs are fine, but it’s got to have the bones and the façade.”

Failure to heed this preference can damage a house’s value.

“I’ve seen houses that had contemporary interiors linger on the market,” Desmond said. “One of the reasons people like houses is because they like the way they were built originally, with all the different kinds of woods for the floors and that kind of thing.”

When advising Manhattan homeowners who are renovating, he said, “I always tell people that you should keep as much of the original detail as you can … because that is what will sell the house.”

Well, we’re doing a contemporary interior inside a historic exterior – so not exactly following their advice. Then again we don’t have any original details and we don’t have the budget to recreate a high quality “original”(ish) look. I’d love to ask “Desmond” more details about his statement. Was the level of finish equivalent on the contemporary interiors? Were the contemporary interiors taste specific or dated in anyway?

One of my mantras in the design of our place was that the space not feel particularly dated in 10 years. We saw some (nice) townhouses on our search that were already feeling dated just 5 years after they were completed. There was on on 130th Street that had an “infinity” bathtub where the water came from the ceiling. A more classic bathtub with contemporary details wouldn’t have felt so dated.

There’s a difference between “dated” and “classic”. If you can manage to hit on something that becomes “classic” it won’t ever really feel “dated” – at least not in a negative way. Take Poliform / Varenna as an example. If you saw a kitchen they did 10 years ago, I’m guessing it would be difficult to tell it wasn’t done last year – they understand how to do a “classic minimalist” aesthetic.

The other way we looked at it was whether it’s easy to “freshen” up the space to make it more current. We wanted fixed elements to be classic and we’re OK with more replaceable elements being a bit more “on trend”. For example, I was worried about the design of our staircase until our architect proposed a staircase with removable panels. If the shape or materials we use become dated, we (or the new owner) can always replace them with something else without replacing the entire staircase. If the new owner doesn’t like the fact that we have open risers, they can fill in the space and have closed risers, etc. If the new owner doesn’t like our flush baseboards and lack of crown mouldings, they can add baseboards and crown mouldings over what we’ve done.

But I digress… The point of the article is that Manhattan is only so big and as the space in Manhattan becomes more valuable “extravagances” like townhouses will be come more and more rare. On top of that there’s a limited supply of historic townhouses in Manhattan and that leads to the prices of those townhouses increasing faster than other types of properties – especially when the interior feels historic as well as the exterior. Ergo, Manhattan townhouses are a good investment. I really do think Harlem will be the Manhattan neighborhood with the highest price increases over the next 20 years and I think the best investment within Harlem right now are townhouse shells. But that’s just my opinion – I’m a bit biased

Last night I started looking through ACRIS at our house’s history. I had looked at some of it before, but not really tried to fully understand it. It’s had a pretty rough life, though the records only go back to the mid-70s (when NYC was going bankrupt)…

1884 -Our house was built along with 6 others that are adjacent to it. We really don’t know anything about it’s early history.

1884 was also the year The Dakota was built at 72nd and CPW and about the same time that Thomas Crapper popularized the indoor flush toilet (we’re not sure whether our place had an indoor toilet initially or not). 1884 was also a mere 19 years after the end of the Civil War.

March 1966 – The building was given a vacate order because it had been vacant for over 6 months…

adm code above premises has been vacant and untenanted except for caretaker for 60 days or more, and cannot be reoccupied until a new certificate of occupancy has been obtained. premises has been vacant since aug 26 1965.

That vacate order still has not been cleared. What this means is that our building has been a troubled building for longer than I’ve been alive – pretty amazing, when you think about it…

April 1968 – Following the death of Martin Luther King, Jr., a race riot raged around our place with major disturbances along 125th Street in the vicinity of 8th Avenue (FDB), 7th Avenue (ACP) and Lenox Avenue. Mayor Lindsay was almost overtaken by an angry mob just a few blocks north of our place at 127th Street and 7th Avenue. Many stores were looted on 125th Street and Lenox Avenue. This riot was the last straw for many shop keepers who closed their stores permanently – deciding it wasn’t worth the risk to do business in Harlem. The next 10 to 20 years was the darkest time in Harlem’s history.

October 1975 – The City of New York went bankrupt. The fiscal problems that followed hit Harlem very hard.

November 1976 – Joseph Monroe (who lived in the apartment building next door) put a mechanic’s lien on the building.

July 1977 – Harlem was in chaos for two days during a city-wide blackout. While police protected most white neighborhoods, in Harlem there was widespread looting. Following the blackout Harlem looked like a bomb-out, war-torn city. More and more residents moved out of Harlem and landlords found it difficult to get enough rental income to maintain the buildings, which only made things worse. Ed Koch leveraged the blackout to get elected mayor a few months later. He put severe austerity measures into place that brought the City back to life fiscally, but those austerity measures cut vital programs in Harlem and made Harlem’s situation even worse.

July 1978 – Joesph Monroe wins his mechanic’s lien case and is given title to the building to settle the case. What’s most interesting is that it wasn’t clear at the time of the court order who owned the building. 4 owners were named (Kilroy Jones, Catherine Quillinan, Peter Quillinan, Percival E. Vasquez), but then there were a whole bunch of John and Jane Does listed. The fact that they didn’t quite know who owned the building says it was already a troubled building.

The tax photo from 1980 shows that the ground floor was in use as “The Happy Game Room” and the storefront had not been added yet. So apparently Joseph Monroe fixed up the building somewhat and had it operating reasonably well. It was a good thing the building had a caretaker during this time – considering how Harlem was hitting rock bottom during these years.

March 1988 – Joseph Monroe died and the building was sold by his estate to Zion Temple Church, Inc. for $40,000. What’s odd is the deed said $125,000 but someone crossed out $125K and wrote in $40K. How can you make an $85,000 adjustment to the price after you type up the paperwork for the sale? Something was off or shady about that transaction… [It's also worth noting that Zion Temple Church, Inc. was just incorporated a few months before - in December of '87. What legitimate church buys townhouses 3 months after coming into existence?]

This is when things start getting really interesting… In the mid to late 1990s, when the building was owned by Zion Temple Church, our building was a drug house. So clearly Zion Temple Church was at best neglectful, and at worse they were slumlords who were OK with the drug activity in the building.

March 1994 – The second vacate order was issued.

December 1997 – The third vacate order was issued. We guess it was around this time that a neglected child was found in one of the closets in our house. That alone would be grounds to get everyone out of the building.

July 1998 – The fourth vacate order was issued. We know there was a fire in the building around ’97/’98. We suspect this is when the fire happened and it was at this point that people stopped “living” (doing drugs) in the building.

What’s really sorta disgusting is that all of that happened while a church owned our building. Talk about “missions start at home” – if they were real Christians they should have started practicing their religion at the buildings they owned.

Curiously, one guy from down the block stopped by just after we bought the building and said he used to live in the building. Then he hesitated and said “well, I sorta lived there”. Given what “living” in our building meant back then – I’m just glad he’s alive and appears to be doing OK…

February 1999 – After owning the building for 11 years Zion Temple Church sells the property to “168 West 123rd St. Realty Corp” but the address is “c/o Maywood Capital” in Paramus, NJ. The sale was for $0. Maywood Capital was convicted for fraud in 2005… Quoting the Attorney General of NJ…

The defendants placed newspaper ads offering interests in “safe” mortgages. Joseph Greenblatt solicited investors in the states of California, Florida, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York, among others, to invest in residential properties in New York City that were in need of repair. The ads claimed the investments were ideal for IRAs, Keoghs, pensions and personal portfolios.

Corporations formed by the individual defendants would allegedly purchase properties for renovation and/or resale through Maywood Capital. Investor funds were purportedly invested in the entity owning the property and secured by mortgage interests in the property. In reality, many of the properties controlled by the defendants were over-mortgaged and did not produce the unrealistic profits promised to investors. In many cases, investors’ mortgage interests were never recorded or were extinguished without their knowledge so that new investments could be secured by mortgages on the buildings in question. In certain cases, the defendants did not even own the properties that they mortgaged to investors.

There was $42M in fraud and our place was in the center of it all since it was one of the buildings Maywood was telling it’s investors it was fixing up.

The fact that Zion Temple Church owned a crack house and sold the property for $0 to someone who was engaged in fraud makes Zion Temple Church appear to be party to the fraud. But honestly I don’t know what their role was – I’d like to learn more…

August 2002 – While the Attorney General of NJ hadn’t won his case yet, other things were happening with the building legally. I don’t know the particulars, but there was a court order and somehow Beulah Church of God In Christ Jesus, Inc. got our building along with 12 others in similar condition. If I had to guess I’d say they must have invested in Maywood and they got some of the collateral in return for their lost investment in the fraudulent scheme. But again, I don’t know what happened. I do know that one of the lawyers going after Maywood (James E. Hurley) was their lawyer and he helped them sell the buildings a couple years later…

November 2004 – Clearly Beulah didn’t want to actually own the buildings, so they sold them pretty quickly. The buyer of our building was “148 West 121st Street Associates LLC” which was c/o Tahl Properties (a big Harlem landlord). As you might guess from the name of the buyer Beulah sold both our building and 148 W 121 at the same time. The purchase price for both buildings was $1,130,434. That means the value of our building at that time was roughly half that.

July 2005 – Tahl Propp actually bought all of Beulah Church of God in Christ Jesus’ townhouses – they just bought them in several small transactions. Once all the legal issues were resolved Tahl Propp transferred ownership of all of the buildings under one LLC – TPE Townhouses Harlem.

Tahl Propp took out big rehab mortgages, but as a big developer the money just went into their operating budget. They started getting plans done on some of the buildings (including ours). They even pulled permits in 2007 to convert our building to two family and add a floor to the building. They did demolition, then stopped.

Then the market crashed in 2008 and Tahl Propp put all but two of the townhouses on the market.

March 2010 – We bought the place.

Apparently 168 (our house number) is supposed to be a lucky number in Chinese, but so far our building hasn’t had much luck. Since Dan’s Chinese maybe it takes a Chinese person buying a place to make 168 give you good luck… Then again maybe not – in talking to an expediter yesterday she said it sounded like we had been “particularly unlucky” in our dealings with the DOB. I’m hoping the building’s luck will change in the near future…

Construction is starting today! Later this afternoon I’ll go down to see the new construction fence…

It’s that time… We have to sign our life away and start a mortgage that’s bigger than I ever thought I’d have. It’s scary how much money the banks will give us – but at the end of the day once we’ve got our C of O and have rental income coming in, the numbers really do work (quite nicely, actually).

We were pretty set on a fixed rate mortgage, but weren’t sure whether whether we wanted to pay points to get a lower rate. Then after talking to our accountant I started wondering whether we should go with an adjustable rate mortgage.

Our options are:

• 5.5%, 30 year fixed, 1.25 points
• 5.25%, 30 year fixed, 2.5 points
• 4.5%, 7/1 ARM (5/2/5), 30 year term, 2.5 points

The trick with the 5.25% fixed and 4.5% ARM is that we have to come up with the money for the extra points at closing (1 point = 1% of your loan value). That will make our cash flow problem next year worse, but after about 7 years we’ll start saving money (compared to the 5.5% loan) because the lower mortgage payments would finally save more than the points would cost us.

Here’s how things work out (I’m using the mortgage calculator at HSH.com – it’s the best I found)…

March 2041 – regular pay off date for a 30 year mortgage

March 2036 – date we’d pay it off just by making biweekly rather than monthly mortgage payments (that’s a no brainer!)

February 2035 – date we’d pay it off if we went with the 5.25% fixed but paid the amount that would be due with the 5.5% loan and paid biweekly.

July 2032 – date we’d pay it off if we went with the 4.5% ARM but paid the amount that would be due with the 5.5% fixed, paid biweekly, and the rate never adjusted (unlikely).

I’m couching the discussion in terms of when we pay off the loan. Our goal is to pay the mortgage off as quickly as possible so we have the equity in our place to use to make another real estate purchase during the next real estate downturn (or the one after).

The biggest thing to notice is you can pay off your mortgage 5 years early just by dividing the payments in two and paying it every two weeks. I wish I had known that years ago. That’s a huge difference! That much we’ll definitely do, so the next question is how can we make it even shorter?

Paying extra points, but keeping the amount we pay the same shaves off just over a year. Given that it’s going to take 7 years to see the financial benefit and it makes our cash flow issues worse, I’m not so excited about that any more (it was the option we were planning on).

Going with an adjustable rate mortgage can have the biggest impact. But the problem is you never know how the rates will change. If they go up we could have big problems. The worst case is we couldn’t afford the house and had to sell during a slump. If the rates go down it could be great – we could pay the loan off even more quickly. We just don’t know what will happen and it’s an awfully big gamble. Dan and I have always been really conservative when it came to mortgages. We’re not gamblers. We’re the tortoise that gets there slowly but surely. Yes, it could almost shave another 5 years off the loan, but it just feels like too big of a gamble.

We’ll give the bank the final answer tomorrow morning. But I’m thinking we’re going with the 5.5% fixed rate with low points. It just makes the most sense for us.

One last note: If you’re renovating a townhouse and need a loan – contact Michael Stein at Wells Fargo (212/805-1055). Last I checked Wells is the only lender who are offering “conforming” (Fanny/Freddie) loans to rehab shells. Plus, Michael’s a great guy who’s literally worked with us for two years – telling us whether we could afford the mortgages for different types of properties, and then double and triple checking our numbers to make sure things went through smoothly.

Somewhat thankfully New York has been spared from much of falling home prices that have been affecting other parts of the nation. The value of our apartment has been flat for 2-3 years now, which is much better than the 30%/year declines in other places. With the crisis on Wall Street, who knows how long that will continue, but it’s shocking to see videos like the one below about how bad things have gotten in California…

What’s amazing is how much of people’s lives are being thrown in landfills – how they walk away from just about everything – even huge flat screen TVs. It’s sad that the charities don’t have their act together to take advantage of the opportunity and fill their warehouses with the household goods and clothing that people are going to start to need in an economy like this.

The country desperately needs a change in leadership. Let’s hope the leaders we elect in a month are up to the task.