Issue 116 – Super Tall Power Towers vs Refined Boutique Luxury

New York City is known for its uber-luxurious high-rises. The super tall tower power has reigned supreme in the city and been the dominant sale product in the Manhattan skyline for years. This is no surprise; these massive, eye-catching properties are known for their longevity, services, and views. Cities can’t grow wide, but they can grow high.

The term “super tall” (or sometimes “supertall”) generally refers to buildings rising over 300 meters (about 984 feet), and more recently, even higher to 1000 feet! NYC has seen a series of these developments, especially during the 2010s boom, as the demand for luxury living and commercial space surged.

Over the years, other towers have continuously followed, bigger and grander, and are driving the current market. A more recent standout includes One World Trade Center, completed in 2013, which stands at 1,776 feet and symbolizes the city’s resilience. We can’t forget some literal powerhouses — a new breed of super tower that proliferates in prime Manhattan areas. Forerunners such as Time Warner Center and 220 Central Park South, where billionaire Ken Griffin purchased a four-floor unit for $238 million (!) in 2019, are known for their record-breaking sales. Gary Burnett’s 157 West 57th Street — often highlighted for its height and luxury — is part of this trend, representing a new wave of super tall luxury residential buildings in the city. Likewise, 111 West 57th Street (Steinway Tower), Central Park Tower, 432 Park, and 53W53 have become their own comps amongst the skyline.

With even more buildings preparing their rise, several publications have begun asking: Are extremely tall, amenity-laden towers still de rigeuer? Just this fall, James Barron of The New York Times posed this question: “Does Manhattan Need More Luxury Towers?” The New York Post explored the latest crop of soon-to-be shimmering behemoths, namechecking a 1,100-foot-tall luxury skyscraper on Billionaires’ Row at 41-47 West 57th Street to be built by Sedesco, with Related planning another at 625 Madison Avenue, reaching 1,200 feet.

The point of these super tall towers is to provide incredible views, superior services, and a central location — for example, proximity to Central Park.

Given the height of these super tall towers, one has to wonder about their structural soundness. Then, of course, there’s the matter of their infamous sway, determined by the developer.

While impressive in many ways, one potential drawback of buying into one of these power towers is that some buildings have experienced significant repercussions from illegal dealings or cutting corners, thus compromising the caliber of the buildout. A prime example is 432 Park Avenue, which has been under tremendous scrutiny ever since some of its façade began falling off the building! That discovery is in conjunction with ongoing leaks at 157 West 57th Street and 430 Park Avenue.

However, aside from very occasional snafus, people are still drawn to these stratospheric icons because of the promise of views for days. These power towers set the bar higher and higher — quite literally. People also like to buy into the newest and most exclusive places, and these buildings tend to host that cachet of clientele, commanding prices alongside a level of service that cannot be replicated anywhere else.

Investors seeking envy-inducing pieds-a-terre, and general folks who want a piece of The Big Apple at the highest level, are arriving in droves to snatch these properties up at whatever the price.

Buildings offering curated amenities, especially health and wellness services such as infrared massage, cryo-air, purification, green rooms, meditation rooms, a spa menu, and massage, do well. Add to that: Developments featuring reclaimed woods, renewable sources, and prestige addresses (notably Fifth Avenue) or locations (like Gramercy Park or the Flatiron) are garnering sky-high pricing and big-time buyers.

That said, those with different budgets and sensibilities will not be left out. Smaller, more customized projects have a prominent place in the New York City luxury market as well. These “Make-A” boutique residences lack the skyline profile but are highly desirable for their locations. Examples include: 150 Charles Street, 100 Barrow and Naftali’s project on West 10th Street, 80 Clarkson Street, 140 Jane Street, and 400 West 12th Street. These have less of a literal and figurative revolving door and even greater exclusivity and privacy.

People looking to buy in the best downtown neighborhoods also want properties with unique qualities that set them apart from the mainstream. Case in point:  A sprawling loft space with soaring ceilings can still sell for a huge profit despite being in a non-doorman building. Furthermore, some buyers will consider the location so desirable that they don’t need the flash and dazzle of a super tall tower or its sizable staff.

A potential downside to a smaller, esoteric boutique condo is that it might not attract the typical investment-market clientele. In other words, some buyers care much more about having a doorman and full staff than others.

A comprehensive piece on Brickunderground a while back focused on the pros and cons of buying in a luxury boutique residence. In it, the author pointed out these swanky little gems offer more privacy and less scrutiny by staff, but “expenses will likely be higher as there are fewer owners to split costs. And if you happen to dislike any of your neighbors, they can be harder to avoid in a small building, with one elevator, for example.”

In addition, common charges could end up being higher on average because they are distributed among fewer units, and according to an expert source in the article, “The biggest issue is that boutique buildings have fewer amenities than larger buildings, and this could affect the marketability or resale value of the unit.”

Although there is no official count of “luxury towers” as the definition varies, NYC currently has 319 total skyscrapers, of which at least 17 are super tall buildings. The exact number of boutique projects is also unknown but just as high. As the current ambassador of a power tower at 53 West 53rd Street and someone who has sold in myriad boutique condos, I can say that each offers its own unique assets. The specific personality of the luxury buyer determines which residence is the best fit.

However, to answer the aforementioned reporters’ questions: The bottom line is that super tall towers will never be fully replaced in New York City by boutique residences or any other property type. These iconic structures are here to stay because of the incredible views — something one can only get by building upwards.

Issue 125 – The $5 Million Question: What’s Actually Worth Owning in New York Right Now?

The New York real estate market is entering a period where the old rules of valuation are becoming less reliable. Price per square foot and comparable sales still matter, but buyers are weighing those factors differently — rewarding some attributes while quietly discounting others. The question is no longer simply, “What did the apartment downstairs sell for?” It’s “What are buyers willing to pay a premium for now — and what have they stopped paying for?”

I could identify at least seven factors being repriced in Manhattan right now: outdoor space, views/greenery, turnkey condition, monthly carrying costs, new development versus resale, second-home ownership, and the increasingly important distinction between a great apartment and a great building.

Confusing matters for buyers is that the NYC market is sending contradictory signals. Manhattan inventory is changing by price band, mortgage rates remain challenging nationally, and NYC’s new pied-à-terre tax is creating another potential dividing line in how buyers assess ownership costs.  

In the luxury zone, one way to test those shifting valuations is what I call “The $5-Million-Question.”

I can take $5 million and show clients what that buys today in six completely different versions of New York: Think:

  • $5M on Central Park West
  • $5M downtown
  • $5M in Brooklyn
  • $5M in a new development
  • $5M in a great prewar co-op
  • $5M for something compromised but spectacular

Same amount of money. Same city. Radically different value.

The questions to ponder are:

  • Which one would I buy?
  • Which one would I avoid?
  • Which one has the greatest upside?
  • And which one will be easiest to sell five years from now?

That comparison is more revealing than a market-wide statistic because it shows what the same $5 million actually buys — and what it might be worth to the next buyer.

On the surface, the questions are simple. In practice, answering them requires a sophisticated analysis — price per square foot, carrying costs, taxes, liquidity, buyer pool, neighborhood trajectory, architectural quality, and exit strategy. Buyers should seek out an expert broker not only for information but also for interpretation.

For a long time, value was assessed through familiar metrics: price per square foot, comparable sales, neighborhood, floor, light, views, condition, and building pedigree. Those factors still matter. But buyers are now weighing them differently. We are in a repricing phase — not necessarily of New York City as a whole, but of the individual components that define its value.

At Central Park West, $5 million typically trades square footage for permanence: park frontage, architectural significance, scarcity, and long-term stability.

Downtown, the same budget may secure a more contemporary product — larger windows, amenities, and outdoor space — but often at a higher price per square foot and with higher ongoing costs.

In a new development, $5 million buys condition, services, and immediacy. The question is how much of that price reflects a “new development premium,” and whether the resale market will recognize it when the time comes to exit.

In Brooklyn, the same capital can deliver scale, outdoor space, and architectural character that would be significantly more expensive in Manhattan.

None of these is inherently superior. The real questions are: What are you actually buying, and who will want it next? That second part is often underweighted: Which market is offering more rewards?

Based on buyer behavior, several attributes are becoming more defensible:

Light and views are not replicable. While layouts can be changed, exposure and outlook cannot be transformed.

Functional outdoor space is valuable. Usable terraces connected to living areas are materially more valuable than secondary or awkwardly accessed outdoor areas.

Strong floor plans are key. The pandemic reinforced that usability matters as much as size. Proportion, flow, and flexibility are now critical.

Condition has always mattered — now more than ever. High construction costs and uncertainty have increased demand for finished product. However, there is a ceiling — buyers will not indefinitely overpay for someone else’s design choices.

Low carrying friction is persuasive. Taxes, common charges, assessments, and long-term building health are now central to valuation. High monthly costs can materially impact resale liquidity.

Scarcity can be the tipping point. A strong apartment does not need to be perfect. It needs to be difficult to replicate.

So, where would I be most cautious today?

I would be disciplined about paying a premium purely for newness. New does not hold value on its own — architecture, location, and scarcity do. I would closely evaluate buildings where carrying costs are disconnected from underlying asset value. I would avoid trophy pricing unless there is a true trophy attribute. And I would be careful about pricing that is anchored primarily to renovation cost.

A $2 million renovation does not translate into a $2 million increase in value.

The market does not reimburse cost. It prices outcome.

If I were allocating funds at this level, the guiding principles should be: light over finishes, proportion over decoration, irreplaceable views over amenity packages, and ultimately, best-in-class units in proven buildings over average units in trending ones.

The strongest purchases do two things at once: they function as exceptional homes today and remain desirable assets tomorrow. That means thinking about the exit before the entry — and recognizing that New York isn’t one market, but a collection of micro-markets defined by neighborhood, block, building, floor, and orientation.

While real estate is inherently emotional, value is what remains when emotion fades.

Whether the budget is $1 million, $5 million, or $25 million, the question is ultimately the same: What is actually worth owning?

That is the question the next phase of the market will answer — and it will reward analysis over generalization.

Recent Reports

SUBSCRIBE TO THE KATZEN REPORT

UP-TO-THE-MINUTE PULSE ON REAL ESTATE