Pomander Walk
10 Pomander Walk, within the private passage between West 94th and West 95th Streets, between Broadway and West End Avenue, on the Upper West Side, Manhattan
Upper West Side
BBL 1012420009 · BIN 1080423
- Year built
- 1921
- Type
- Cooperative
- Floors
- 2
- Landmark
- Designated
Every recorded sale at this building, 2004–2026
Bedroom-by-bedroom medians, the full transfer record, and how units trade against ask.
- 2BR median
- $875K
- Recent range
- $573K – $915K
- Listing discount
- 1.0%
- Recorded transfers
- 57
Own an apartment here? See what it would sell for.
A Private Pricing Opinion — what your apartment at Pomander Walk would likely sell for today, what it costs to sell, and what you’d walk away with — reviewed personally against condition, exposures, renovation quality, and the competition actually on the market.
Pomander Walk is a planned Tudor Revival enclave designed by King & Campbell for restaurateur and developer Thomas Healy in 1921. Its central feature is a private pedestrian street lined by two-story cottages. The development's name and atmosphere came from the stage play Pomander Walk, reflecting Healy's interest in the theater.
The complex occupies the interior of an Upper West Side block between 94th and 95th Streets. Its low buildings and planted passage produce a distinctly different form of apartment ownership from the surrounding avenue apartment houses. Residents purchase cooperative interests in a shared property, including homes that occupy a single floor and homes created by combining floors.
The enclave became an individual city landmark in 1982 and is also within the historic-district extension designated in 2015. Its continued low-rise form is central to its architectural importance. The substantial difference between its built floor area and the zoning allowance does not make the cottages an ordinary redevelopment site.
Architecture and unit composition
LPC describes a 27-building complex, with 16 two-story cottages lining the through-block pedestrian street. Other buildings face the adjoining public streets. Brick, stucco and half-timbering create the varied surface treatment, with gables, small entrance hoods and multi-pane windows giving individual fronts their own composition.
The cottage architecture works at a small scale. Stoops and doorways face the walk, and planting occupies the narrow spaces at the building fronts. The individual entrances form part of a single designed streetscape, which is one reason the landmark designation covers the enclave as a whole.
The residential arrangement has changed within some of the cottages. Separate upper- and lower-floor apartments have been combined into whole-house layouts. An architect-documented renovation joined two floors, opened portions of the interior and introduced roof-level daylight through carefully placed skylights.
Such combinations create a different ownership experience from a single-level apartment, while retaining the cooperative structure. Interior stairs, the position of bedrooms on separate floors and the use of the roof volume distinguish these homes from the smaller flats. The individual cottage frontage does not by itself establish whether the home occupies one floor or the whole structure.
Building operations
The private pedestrian street is a shared part of the property. Its surfaces, gates, planting and the many individual building fronts create a maintenance program spread across a group of low-rise structures. The visual consistency of the walk depends on work being coordinated across those separate fronts.
Landmark oversight is especially consequential here. Changes to roofs, windows, doors and exterior materials affect the composition of the enclave. Published coverage of a cottage combination described close LPC review of a skylight designed to remain invisible from the exterior.
The property began as rental housing and converted to cooperative ownership in 1984. The association's tax lot contains the larger residential complex, so the Class 2 classification applies even though the individual cottages are low-rise. No building-wide tax abatement is identified.
Recent sales
Recent transfers at this building, curated by The Roebling Team research desk. Prices are the transfer amounts recorded with the NYC Department of Finance; apartment-level detail is checked against the building’s own file in The Roebling Research Library before publishing.
| Date | Unit | Apartment | Price | PPSF | vs. Ask |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2026 | 3 | 1 BR · 1 BA · 450 sf | $572,500 | $1,272/sf | -4.4% |
| Jan 13, 2026 | 1 | 1 BR · 1 BA | $915,000 | +2.2% | |
| Nov 13, 2025 | 1 | 2 BR · 1 BA · 600 sf | $850,000 | $1,417/sf | +13.5% |
| Aug 18, 2023 | 20 | 2 BR · 1 BA | $900,000 | -4.3% | |
| Oct 19, 2022 | 262 | 1 BA | $459,000 | +0.0% | |
| Apr 12, 2022 | 20 | 2 BR · 1 BA | $855,000 | -2.3% | |
| Mar 17, 2022 | 17 | 2 BR · 1 BA | $999,000 | +0.0% | |
| May 14, 2021 | 16 | 3 BR · 2.5 BA | $2,499,000 | +0.0% |
Market read. Most recent trades (2026) cleared a median $1,272/sf across 1 sale. Median listing discount 1.7% from the last ask — a recurring negotiation gap worth pricing into any offer or listing strategy.
The retrade record
Lines that have traded more than once in the public record — the building’s appreciation arc, apartment by apartment.
Full closing history with price-per-square-foot over time, the complete retrade record, and every line that has traded.
Sales sourced from NYC Department of Finance recorded transfers (BBL 1-01242-0009) and verified listing data. Apartment-level facts (line, condition, asking-price context) curated and cross-verified by The Roebling Team research desk. Not all transactions cross-verify with ACRIS records — sponsor and LLC purchases sometimes record at stipulated values rather than market price; square footage on co-ops is not officially recorded, figures shown are approximate.
At the recent median sale of $850K (3 transfers since 2024), a buyer putting 25% down would pay about $11,738 to close, or 1.4% of the price.
- Mansion tax: $0
- No mortgage recording tax or title insurance on a co-op purchase
- Attorneys, lender, building fees and filings: $11,738
Assumes a resale (the seller pays transfer taxes), a $4,500 attorney fee and a mortgage on the rest.
Keep up with Pomander Walk and its market
The Roebling Report, monthly: Manhattan sales data and analysis, including buildings likePomander Walk. Unsubscribe anytime.
We’ll use your email for The Roebling Report and note your interest in this building. See our privacy policy.
What to know if you’re buying
A cottage exterior can contain separate cooperative apartments. A purchase should be understood by its actual floor configuration and proprietary-lease premises. A whole-house look from the passage says nothing about whether one owner holds both floors, the roof volume or the adjacent planted space.
Comparable buildings
- 680 West End Avenue: a nearby prewar rental building for buyers comparing conventional elevator living with Pomander Walk's cottage form.
- The Wester York: a cooperative on the same block, offering a taller apartment-house setting within the historic district.
- 675 West End Avenue: an established prewar cooperative with a comparable overall association size and different building organization.
- The Halsworth: a prewar cooperative for comparing period architecture and larger apartment-house circulation.
- The Stanton: a nearby full-service cooperative alternative for buyers prioritizing staffing and elevator access in the same immediate area.
More Upper West Side buildings
- 10 Riverside Boulevard (One Waterline Square) — condominium by Hill West Architects
- 10 West 66th Street (Park Ten) — 1969 co-op
- 10 West 86th Street — 1925 co-op by Emery Roth
- Waterline Square — condominium by Kohn Pedersen Fox (KPF)
- 11 West 69th Street — 1927 co-op
- 11 West 81st Street — 1908 co-op
The neighborhood
For the full corridor — architecture, transit, and pricing across Upper West Side — read The Roebling Team Guide to Upper West Side.
The full playbook — what goes in the package, how boards read your financials, the interview, and the timeline — plus sample cover, reference, and personal letters you can adapt.
How to read the facts on this page. Items attributed to an offering plan describe the building as it was offered at that filing — unit mix, square footage, the amenity program as planned. They are not a statement about how the building operates today. Tax and compliance figures are sourced separately to current City records and carry their own dates. House rules, staffing and fee policy can change by board resolution without any public filing: treat every policy line here as a starting point for diligence and confirm it with the managing agent. Where this page compares one building or neighborhood to another, that is our analysis of the recorded record — it names the measure, the period and the sample it rests on, and it is an observation about medians rather than a prediction about any particular apartment.
Considering a move at Pomander Walk?
Request a private building brief with the relevant comparable sales, current and off-market availability, and an apartment-specific view of value.