Don't really know how the new test score works, but based on the old GRE if you're above 1400 i'd say you're not getting rejected because of GRE (at least for GSD). I've heard of people get in with 1200 in verbal+quant and 2 in writing (of course this person would've had an amazing portfolio). I think in most cases people retake the test to make themselves feel safer.

Honestly, Above 50th percentile is good for most arch schools. Big name, I'd want better... I think 166 is well above for verbal, and 159 is slightly above for quant, 4 is also above. Unless I am mistaken in my memory, I'd say you are in good shape from a GRE standpoint. People with much lower have gotten in.

GRE is not a very highly-weighted factor in M.Arch admissions at all, except when your high GRE scores are balancing a significantly lower GPA. 

Portfolio and references are several times more important.

When you retake the GRE all of your scores are still reported to the institutions, and different schools have different ways to deal with that: some only take the highest set of scores, but most average them, so re-taking them doesn't increase the average by that much. The effort would be better spent on your portfolio.

it's been more than a few moons ago, but when i was on the selection committee (as a student rep), the gre was just a hurdle to get over. there was a minimum the university had established - beyond that, it was rarely looked at or ever discussed in relation to an applicant. 

portfolio was first. essay second, recommendations third, grades fourth. i tend to think most institutions see grades as a more reliable indicator of potential success in the program. 

^People always underestimate the essay...

Why not call admissions and ask for the average score? They are more reliable than anonymous forum users. Good luck.