By Gus Saltonstall
A more than century-old Upper West Side building on Broadway is slated for demolition, according to permits filed earlier this week, and as first reported by Crain’s New York.
The demolition permits for a four-story building at 2160 Broadway, on the corner of West 76th Street, were submitted to the city on March 10 by the property’s owner Aleksandr Finkelshteyn, according to the Department of Building’s portal.
Finkelshteyn, primarily a Brooklyn developer, purchased the property in December of 2024. The building, which was originally constructed in 1920, most recently served as a First Republic Bank location.
There are currently no additional permits filed to give us a hint on what Finkelshteyn might have planned for the address, but a marketing pamphlet for the property advertised the following to prospective buyers.
“The offering [building] will be delivered vacant, which presents a rare opportunity for an investor or commercial end-user to control one of the most prominent and centrally located corners on Manhattan’s Upper West Side,” the marketing pamphlet read. “Featuring 110’ of wraparound frontage and 68’ in height, the property offers tremendous street presence for retail and signage exposure.”
The marketing materials also referenced the building’s 13,280 to 17,700 feet of unused air rights.
There is not a specific timeline for when the demolition will take place.
West Side Rag could not find a contact for Finkelshteyn.
Subscribe to West Side Rag’s FREE email newsletter here. And you can Support the Rag here.
Manhattan Towers Hotel – 2162-2168 Broadway (now called the Arthouse Hotel) occupies main property that loops around 2160 Broadway. Service entrance for “Manhattan Church & Towers) is on 76th street side. You can still see original inscription above doors.
History of this property is yet another wonderful taste of UWS history.
https://daytoninmanhattan.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-manhattan-towers-hotel-2162-2168.html
Do you have any historic preservation in NYC?
Looking at the photo, of a nondescript renovated building with what seems absolutely no redeeming archtectural featues, can you really rationalize preservation?
More important question to ask would be about air rights and the fate of adjoining tenants’ rights.
Buyers of 2160 Broadway most certainly purchased property due to large amount of unused floor area ratio (FAR) or aka “air rights”. Sales and marketing material explicitly mentioned unused air rights.
There are no “tenants” affected, only shareholders of 2166 Broadway who reside in apartments facing Broadway.
As noted by previous posters shareholders of Opera Apartments should have purchased adjacent property if they were that concerned about potential future development.
Correction:
Manhattan Towers Hotel became the Opera co-op apartments at 2166 Broadway.
Shareholders with units facing 2160 Broadway likely will soon lose lot line views as whatever plans for redevelopment of property most certainly are for a much taller structure than currently exists.
I know that building has been there forever but any intelligent NYC apartment buyer (and competent attorney and real estate broker) makes sure that there is zero chance that something can be torn down and rebuilt right outside their window.
We actually looked at a unit in 2166 Broadway that faced north and they were just beginning construction on one of the new buildings on 77th. We quickly realized that we would be facing a construction site and then possibly a wall outside one of the windows and lost interest. In that case, construction was already underway so it was 100% obvious. But either way, you need to do your homework.
This article and the comments are very helpful. I’m curious what are the air rights for this space? Have they been sold? If not, how high can they go?
Unused air rights are still attached to property (as they would be), that likely was reason seller paid $8.5 million.
https://traded.co/deals/new-york/retail/sale/2160-broadway/
No one spends that kind of money for building alone in such a situation. They bought property for land and redevelopment potential.
Building is being delivered empty and most importantly that includes of any residential tenants.
As for how tall any new building could go off top of my head would say at least tall as Manhattan Church and Tower building next door.
I’m sorry but there is no such thing as potential buyer of con-op or condo making sure of anything regarding adjacent property.
Current condo owners or co-op shareholders equally have no say regarding possible redevelopment of adjacent site unless condo or co-op board is prepared to buy said property themselves.
When Broadway Garage building that stood at 2148-2158 Broadway was sold back in 2008 and land redeveloped shareholders the Owl co-op should have realized NYC’s red hot RE market had arrived on their doorstep.
My thoughts, too. My first thought was of those residents whose views are in jeopardy. How upsetting it would be knowing you may be looking out from a now darkened room directly into a wall several feet away.
B.B., thank you for your insight, as always!
YW..
We do our best.
In keeping with similar buildings of era the Opera offered very large units. How many have retained original configuration over years cannot say.
Courtesy of Columbia University Library archives: https://dlc.library.columbia.edu/nyre/projects/17705
Just that 4 story building is slated for demo? I gotta say, I think we can let that one go.
You wouldn’t say that if it were your apartment about to have lot facing windows sealed and bricked over.
No one will dare go on record publicly, but one huge reason behind “saving” West-Park Presbyterian Church is residents of buildings on either side don’t want to lose lot line windows and all that comes with having such views.
If building in question is a co-op once word gets out adjacent property is going to be redeveloped removing lot line views value of affected units decreases. How steep of a hit is anyone’s guess, but never the less value will certainly decline.
The residents don’t own their view, so I don’t see a problem here…
Agree many West Park opponents are motivated by not losing their views – this is BAD for NYC and we shouldn’t let the church continue to deteriorate around us or spend a dime of public funds to subsidize the view of residents when new apartments would provide more property tax revenue for the city and customers for local businesses.
Maybe the co-op board of the Opera should have explored buying the air rights of 2160.
Anytime you start talking about anything that will involve special assessments on co-op shareholders it rarely goes smoothly.
Not every shareholder can write a check for several hundred thousand to pay off special assessment. That and or they cannot afford what would be a large increase in monthly fees passed by board to collect revenue in aid of servicing debt taken on to purchase an adjacent property.
Mind you it has happened previously when shareholders or condo owners are motivated enough.
https://cooperatornews.com/article/chelsea-condo-owners-halt-tower-project-by-paying-11m
They can do something about it or they can whine about it.
If they’re going to charge an arm and a leg for the new rentals can they at least use decent materials to construct it? The glass and particle board pop up “luxury” condos with a Nespresso machine in the lobby and a treadmill on the roof is getting old and sad.
People seem to be desperate to believe that “they don’t build things like they used to!” These new buildings are not built of particle board – why would anyone buy them if they were? (I think because people really want to imagine the people who buy these things are clueless Steve Martin in The Jerk types who don’t have money but no taste?)
Most people are unlikely to tour one of these buildings and see for themselves though so they continue to believe what they believe. But you can verify for yourself that none of these new buildings will have ugly, inefficient window air conditioning units like the $10 million plus apartments at the most classic Old Money buildings on the Upper West Side like the Apthorp.
Old pre-war buildings can and have upgraded their HVAC systems and or allowed residents to install some sort of central AC to replace those horrid window units.
Where that doesn’t happen is usually because of landmark status which makes any alterations that affect façade difficult to impossible to get approval, and very expensive if you do.
the Apthorp, the Dakota, The Astor, and rest of grand pre-war buildings on UWS, UES and rest of Manhattan that are landmarked suffer from this problem. In fact it’s pretty common across Europe where say in Paris, France no one is going to be cutting holes in walls of those grand Haussmann buildings to install AC or anything else.
Late Greta Garbo’s Sutton Place apartment shows what can be done with pre-war buildings and central AC. Entire apartment not only has central AC but HVAC system is separate from rest of building. https://rodmanpaul.com/about-that-greta-garbo-apartment/
I hate central A/C – it’s drafty, makes the air dry, and puts my allergies into overdrive.
In paris you cannot build above a certain height because THEY HAVE ZONING LAWS THAT MAKE SENSE
I’d appreciate these comments so much more if you could just level with us and be transparent about having an investment in projects like these; so you send out a bunch of invalidating comments anonymously like you aren’t aware firsthand just how cheap the new units are to try and justify it. Have some more respect for yourself and the people in your community by just being honest about it all.
I don’t own any real estate because I was born after 1980, but I would love to be able to one day! I agree it would be nice if everyone said what they paid for their homes and how much they are worth today!
Said information is public knowledge. You can find records either by using ACRIS or looking up property address on DOF website.
You might as well ask developers to hire all union American citizen labor while you’re at it. That isn’t going to happen either. *LOL*
It’s a shame we sold the city out to look so cheap
History of 2160 Broadway.
Went down rabbit hole trying to find out why 2166 Broadway didn’t own adjacent property next door at 2160.
Turned out one had things bit muddled (sorry about that).
Property at 2160 was not part of church at 2166 Broadway that became Manhattan Towers Hotel. Rather was developed in 1906 to become the “Jones Speedometer” building. When completed the structure was a gorgeous monument to Art Nouveau design.
This explains why “Manhattan Church & Towers” building loops around 2160 Broadway from 77th to 76th streets.
By 1940 interior furnishing company “Friedner & Ebstein, Inc.” occupied lower level of 2160 Broadway. Building was altered 1950, 1953, 1957 and 1968 which totally removed all traces of its once grand features.
A string of restaurants in succession occupied ground floor of 2160 Broadway; Kinsley’s restaurant, Bertha’s Mexican restaurant in 1993, Xando Coffee and Bar in 1997, and Cosi in 2005.
Jeff Martin Studio once occupied second floor providing aerobic classes to everyone from Broadway dancers to UWS housewives.
https://daytoninmanhattan.blogspot.com/2019/01/a-mutilated-marvel-jones-speedometer.html
Jeff Martin Studio used 215 West 76th address which is rear entrance for 2160 Broadway.
Sidney Biddle Barrows (yes, that Ms. Biddle Barrows) once worked as receptionist for Jeff Martin Studio. How about that for UWS lore?
https://archive.ph/4J43b
I briefly taught there as a High Impact aerobics instructor back when I had a mullet and sported lycra bike pants and bright, white Reeboks LOL! Those were the glory days of the group fitness craze.
I’ve never had more fun working out than in Magnus’s Jeff Martin aerobics class.
Jeff Martin is still around apparently giving classes and doing personal training.
I moved to NYC in 1988 and went to many aerobics and step classes at Jeff Martin studio! Very fond memories of the tension right before class to get a good spot and the thrill of feeling the entire building seeming to shake when the packed classes would rock the house! I usually took classes from Hilary Coley and Patricia Moreno.Going there made me feel like a cool New Yorker for sure!
Another piece of Old New York will be destroyed for crap. The way of America…
Just because a building is old doesn’t make it special. What exactly about this building is worth preserving?
Some people say that our (so-called?) housing crisis is an effect of too many restrictions on building new housing.
We have a housing crisis about as much as we have a diamond crisis.
I’m curious too. Perhaps you could explain what you would consider to be a housing crisis. I do consider it a crisis when prices are too high for most working people and many middle class people to afford.
Curious what makes you say this. Maybe you could be transparent with us; when did you purchase your home?
Perhaps you haven’t experienced how unaffordable NYC has become especially for families.
NYC Department of Finance tax photos from early 1940’s showing 2166 and 2160 Broadway.
One must look at 2166 Broadway from a distance (as in tax photo linked above) to appreciate what developer and architect did with building.
Not owning 2160 Broadway they left lot facing side of building bland and bare, which is natural. However on both 77th and 76th street sides of building thanks to setbacks and terraces even if apartments did one day lose lot line windows all may not totally be lost.
In linked tax photo above you can see the old Broadway Garage building that stood at 2148-2158 Broadway. Property was sold back in 2008 (IIRC) for $75 million USD. It is now the “Laureate” apartments using 2150 Broadway address.
What happens when every space is filled by developers and every airspace continues with building up up up?. Can’t anybody stop this exercise in destroying the beauty of Manhattan. How is it that London and Paris and Montreal have managed not to lose their charm despite being large cities?
Manhattan’s being destroyed by developers. It’s really a shame. And that’s such a pretty building that they’re tearing down. Greed is out of control at the expense of beauty.
Have you been to London lately? They do have plenty of tall buildings (including some that seem so massive that I can’t understand how people can tolerate living near them).
Change happens. It’s hard while it goes on, but we do need more space for more people, and often these new things that are initially unacceptable because they are unfamiliar become familiar and even beloved.
Preservation is important – but it has to be balanced with development. We aren’t insects in amber, we are members of a growing population that needs homes.
I’m confused… this building holds a shuttered bank and previously housed a number of unremarkable businesses. It’s nothing special, and certainly not my idea of a beautiful building. if the site can be redeveloped for apartments (possibly even beautiful ones!), then the UWS will be better for it.
What we see today of 2160 Broadway is a building totally shorn of all its original charm. Look at pictures in links one has provided to see what old girl looked like before various “renovations”.
Yes I had seen those pics, thank you for sharing the link. Don’t think that changes anything about the potential benefits of a new building.
Well said. Broadway ought to evolve, but most buildings that replace the old are just too tall or ugly, eroding its wonderful space and proportion.
And none of the newer buildings from the 70s, 80s, 90s, or after, look any more appealing now than the day they opened. If anything they look worse.
I don’t expect any of the newer ones to be any different. So sad that owners and developers can’t do any better.
I wonder if there are photos of the bldg as it was originally built. It apears to have been altered quite a bit.
Nothing special to keep here. Hopefully some housing.
That is a century old building? It is already ruined.
It’s a travesty what has been allowed to happen in the city. San Francisco stopped this nonsense decades ago.
San Francisco has its own troubles. I’m not sure I would hold them up as an example of success.
If you were in SF prior to 1970, you’d realize how much they have wrecked things— salesforce monstrosity among others— the hilly skyline is gone…
What has happened to young people trying to afford a place to live in San Francisco?
In 50 years there will be very few buildings of this height on the UWS.
Good. This is Manhattan
Inshallah!
I agree that whatever character the building may have had is already gone. However, I also agree that air rights are the really important question, and the blocking of light and view to residents next door.
I bought an apartment with lot line windows once. I knew it when I bought it. I certainly hoped that the neighbors would never build, but I never thought I would have the right (moral or legal) to stop them, and when they did, it wasn’t actually so bad. We still had enough light and enough air, even though it wasn’t as glorious as it had been.
You can’t buy an apartment knowing that your neighbors have the right to build and then complain when they use it. If it’s essential to you to have the building next door stay small, you need to buy where the neighbors have already given up (or been deprived of) the right to build.
Since 19th century NYC has specifically and expressly defined what rooms in multi- family housing must have windows along with access to light and air.
https://fontanarchitecture.com/legally-required-windows/
Developers of 2166 knew these requirements when building was planned and designed things accordingly.
If you go to Columbia University library link one provided above and look at floor plans will be able to see which apartments face west lot line and what windows might be affected by development of 2160 Broadway.
As originally designed and built 2160 Broadway would have complimented that other Art Nouveau beauty just up street, the Hotel Belleclaire which went up just a few years before.
https://daytoninmanhattan.blogspot.com/2012/04/1903-art-nouveau-hotel-belleclaire.html
I’m looking at a 1927 photo of the building slated for demolition. It actually had an exceptional bit of character, especially along the roof which has since been removed. It would be wonderful if the new building was in keeping with the historic buildings surrounding it.
One’s thoughts exactly.
As originally built 2166 complemented 2160 who in turn fit right in with Hotel Belleclaire across the street.