« On the Cambridge Reno Blog: Color Choice Open House Picks: Under $1 Million Club »

December 16, 2005

Diversions: Bath, New York For $90 a Foot

house
To provide you with one of those "What the Hell am I doing in New York" moments, we thought we'd show you what $490,000 buys you in the middle of nowhere (okay, upstate actually). In Bath, NY, you get 5,600 square feet of Greek Revival goodness set on 21 acres dotted with 150-year-old spruce and maple trees. Most of us would be hard-pressed to earn a living up there but maybe some of you creative freelancers could take the plunge.
Bath Estate [Historic Properties] GMAP

Comments

It looks like its a suburb of Corning, where Stuben glass gets made. (they have a facinating glass museum there)

Posted by: marc at December 16, 2005 10:59 AM

and the property taxes are...........

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 11:06 AM

nevermind the taxes.....how much to heat this place?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 11:15 AM

Take it from a long time Ithaka resident, Bath is out there.

I find Albany and Chicago prices to be the most depressing. Albany has amazing 125 year old intact brick townhuoses, ten minutes from the capitol for like $250K. Chicago, still the second city, but prices are a 1/2 to 1/3 of Brooklyn.

Posted by: bkborn at December 16, 2005 11:29 AM

There's a program that runs occasionally on HGTV. The name of it escapes me right now, but it essentially compares what a certain dollar amount ($500K as an example) will buy you in three or four different regions of the U.S. The results are truly jaw-dropping, especially when they include the NYC area in the comparisons. It DOES make you wonder...what are we doing here and we could be living like royalty somewhere else for the same money and most likely with a better quality of life (less stress, less penny-pinching, more time with family, and the list can go on and on).

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 12:13 PM

And in Chicago, wages are comparable to here.

Posted by: JoshK at December 16, 2005 12:28 PM

And in Chicago, wages are comparable to here.

Posted by: JoshK at December 16, 2005 12:30 PM

It's f-ing cold in Chicago though.

We sometimes think about where else we might live, but Brooklyn can't be beat.

Posted by: clinton hillbilly at December 16, 2005 1:16 PM

I live here. It's great. Perfect in every way, but it's extremely expensive.

My friday pet peeve is all the neighborhood shilling that goes on at this site. Relax. You bought the best house at the best moment, in the most up and coming hood on the nicest block in the best borough. You win. It's still expensive (maybe outrageously so) relative to lots of places in spite of your choice.

Posted by: bkborn at December 16, 2005 1:40 PM

Clinton hillbilly and bkborn: Of course, you're 100% correct. But still, that HGTV program is quite an eye-opener, and it makes you think. Nevertheless, I've lived in (Brownstone) Brooklyn all my life and can't think of anywhere else I'd want to live.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 2:21 PM

There are plenty of buildings comparable to Brooklyn Brownstones in Chicago, except in cleaner and safer neighborhoods. Plus the new housing stock in Chicago is booming compared to New York, they just keep putting up new units on the market, its really astounding.

Posted by: Ferrer05 at December 16, 2005 2:32 PM

Come on, you live in Brooklyn, one of the most beautiful city in the world in any sense, everybody talks about it and everybody loves it, I guess you have to pay the price for something like that, I think you should be a bit more proud of the fact that you live here otherwise you might be wright, move!

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 2:55 PM

What's good about this house? It's an abomination.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 2:58 PM

I like Brooklyn, but I'd rather be in Rome. London is nice, too.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 3:00 PM

I agree - Rome wins...or Sienna.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 3:17 PM

The Amalfi Coast...heaven on earth.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 3:42 PM

A villa in the rolling hills of Chianti would be my choice.

Posted by: BB at December 16, 2005 3:53 PM

Brooklyn is great, but its certainly not one of the most beautiful cities in the world. Lets try keep ourselves remotely tethered to reality.

Posted by: Ferrer05 at December 16, 2005 4:03 PM

You're right NewYork isn't those most beautiful (not old enough and topography a bit flat) but most exciting city maybe and some of NYC most interesting and prettiest neighborhoods are
in Brownstone Brooklyn.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 4:32 PM

I sold my place in Brooklyn 2 years ago for 25 times what I paid for it in 1984. I bought a very nice little house in the Shenandoah Valley, Virginia–not far from where Brownstoner was vacationing last July. I miss NY, but when I'm indoors with WNYC streaming over the internet I could be back in Brooklyn, without the sirens and my downstairs neighbor playing his stereo too loud. It's a tradeoff for sure and I wish I could have both, but on those days when I start to get depressed about it I walk outside and it's so damn beautiful down here that it's hard to stay blue...and oh yeah, I'll never have to work for somebody else again...ever.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 4:37 PM

I vote for Paris!

Posted by: Park Sloper at December 16, 2005 4:37 PM

Compensation levels in NY are significantly higher than compensation in chicago by any measure. Compensation for people buying brownstones in brooklyn heights or park slope for north of two million dollars are drastically higher than compensation levels for people buying in comparable neighborhoods in chicago. Obviously many jobs pay relatively similar in new york and chicago, but it is the wide gap at the upper end that contributes to the eye popping prices on brooklyn brownstones as compared to housing stock in chicago.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 4:39 PM

De gustibus non disputandum. That said, some time ago I noticed that whenever I returned from some far-off city that I've had to visit for work and my coworkers asked me what I thought of it, I very often found myself talking about the visual attractiveness of the place. After a while, it dawned on me that perhaps it was not the case that these cities were particularly exceptional in this regard, but rather it was something about New York. NYC generally (and Brooklyn specifically) has a lot to recommend it, but to me it has to be one of the most physically unprepossessing major cities in the world. I'm with Ferrer05 on this...

Posted by: Ben at December 16, 2005 4:44 PM

Shenandoah Valley anon -- are you saying you moved because you retired, or you made so much selling your house that you were able to retire? If the latter, that must have been some house.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 5:00 PM

Seriously. Put the Kool-Aid down you swirly eyed zombies.

Brooklyn is nice, but there are much better housing values out there (the point of the entry). As much as I might find Paris and Rome and Capri beautiful, I am not moving to these places anytime soon. I speak english and I am an American citizen. Chicago or Albany or even Bath, NY are worth marvelling at the rock bottom real estate prices and asking oneself if they could be livable places.

Posted by: bkborn at December 16, 2005 5:19 PM

While Bklyn may not be all that asthetically attractive as a whole, there are certainly some standout sections of brownstone nabes like Brooklyn Hts, Park Slope, etc. that make me think I've been transported to a quaint old section of a European city like London or Paris. Of course, that would be where the brownstones sell for +$2MM, so I concede that this part of Bklyn is not exactly affordable to the masses in quite the same way as a view of the Shenandoah Mtns would be availble to everyone, including those residing in the trailer park down the hill.

Posted by: Miguel at December 16, 2005 5:43 PM

I'm not sure what the point of the entry is. NY is expensive? Real estate outside NY is cheap? This is news?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 6:16 PM

Ditto regarding Albany which, lest we forget, is the capital of our great state and not exactly the end of the earth. Here's a current listing for an 1848 townhouse in one of the downtown historic districts:

"Intact & Restored Early Victorian. Greek Revival Interior w/ Crown Italianate Molding, Recessed ceilings, Pocket doors, Wide plank floors, Classical American Empire pillar & scroll mahogany newel post. 5 matching black marble mantels. Elec all updated, most plumbing replaced. Extraordinary Views. 2 Story Carriage House."

Asking price is $259,000. I know the owner and have been in the house. Really fab house and neighborhod. Certainly comparable or even better than the $5 million Greek Revival house featured on 'Stoner this week.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 6:21 PM

Oops, it was only $4.2 million ... A million here, a million there, and pretty soon you're talking real money.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 6:29 PM

Clarification re the Albany listing. It's a four-story, single family townhouse AND a two story carriage house for $259,000 ....

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 6:30 PM

No can do the Paris/London bit -- I need my sunlight! Nobody ever said to move to Paris for the weather -- never too cold, never too hot (with a few recent exceptions thanks to global warming, but we're suffering too), just cloudy and depressing for weeks at a time. And yeah, it stays light until 10 pm in the summer, but you pay for it in the winter when it's dark by 3:30.

And I couldn't stand living on the mainland for the first time in my life.

There is nothing more beautiful than the golden afternoon sun in New York on the amazing buildings around us.

Tucany is nice too, while we're at it.

Posted by: babs at December 16, 2005 6:43 PM

The thing that kills me is that NYC could be so much nicer if we simply dealt with our automobile/traffic/public space problem. If we started reclaiming lanes of street space devoted exclusively to the storage and movement of automobiles and giving it to bikes, express buses, pedestrians, cafe tables, merchants and maybe even light rail -- NYC would top any European city.

Posted by: blat at December 16, 2005 7:19 PM

Hmm, I didn't really think my comment would provoke an insult, but in response to bkborn–Since I suppose I still consider myself more a "New Yorker" than anything else having lived there for 30 years it puts me in an odd position of having to point out how parochial your comment about "trailer parks" is. It's ironic that "sophisticated" New Yorkers can be as bigoted as any Red Neck given the chance. The fact is there is no trailer park down the hill from me, but when I lived in Brooklyn it was easy enough to look out the window and see somebody pissing against a building–and worse. As I said in my post "It's a tradeoff". I loved living in Brooklyn–Williamsburg specifically. However, (and I know people are sick of hearing about this) as Williamsburg became a theme-park I started to question what I was doing there. In response to another poster I sold my place for 25 times what I paid for it. I paid 50K. Maybe that's not a lot of money in NYC, but as I said, using it wisely I think I can live off it for the rest of my life. I really didn't mean to say that it's better down here than in NYC. Of course, it's a question of what you value. Personally, time is the most important commodity for me and now all of my time belongs to me–and the view is spectacular. In response to Miguel–of course it's not news that NY real estate is more expensive than other places, but I think a strong case can be made that for reasons that are not entirely logical the balance has gotten way out of whack in recent times.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 7:33 PM

Ooops! I think I may have addressed my responses to the wrong individuals by mis-reading the "Posted by" headings. So, apologies to anybody I accidentally insulted and to those I was addressing...you know who you are.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 16, 2005 7:38 PM

No offense taken.

Thanks for the info Anon 6:21

Can we all let that sink in for a moment.

Imagine living in the palace described for a mortgage payment of $1400/month. That's a pretty grim studio in NYC.

Doesn't that have a little appeal?

In addition, I understand Albany is a rising real estate market and was like the 2nd most "creative" mid-sized city according to Richard Florida. And, only 2 hours 20 minutes to NYC for $35-$45 on Amtrak. It's hard not to think about it a little.

Posted by: bkborn at December 17, 2005 1:39 PM

And if there's ever high-speed train service between Albany and NYC ...

Posted by: Anonymous at December 17, 2005 7:03 PM

As far as the comment about Chicago above, it may (I don't know) be true that there are more people at the upper, upper, end. There are many extremely rich people there - Lake Forest is one of the countries wealthiest suburbs.

But, for the average earner, they can get a lot more housing than the same person here. There are far fewer limits on housing growth and development than there, and therefore, the lower prices. Cost to purchase are much closer to cost of construction there.

Posted by: JoshK at December 18, 2005 10:03 AM

People actually respect Richard Florida's opinions? The man seems like he pulls things directly out of his ass. His "creative class" would eat itself in five years. Hell, BINGHAMTON is on one of his lists.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 18, 2005 5:54 PM

Ok, forget Richard Florida then (whoever he is.) The fact remains that you could buy a 19th century brownstone/townhouse/rowhouse in Albany or some other old city for a pittance compared with Brooklyn. And that would often be a house with original details, in its original configuration, and not carved into parts to help pay an absurd mortgage.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 18, 2005 7:21 PM

My husband lived in Albany for several years( including the first 2 we were married)so I spent a good amount of time up there. Center Square, where he was less than 2 blocks from the Capital, had a nice, funky vibe. I loved when they closed down Lark St and had bands playing outside the different bars. I referred to it as "Brooklyn" without trains. We were even just a few blocks from an Olmstead designed park.

I really liked living(p/t) in Albany, however the property taxes seemed really high. Also winter from October til mid-April was a deal breaker for me. I remember one year they had a major, road-closing snowstorm on Oct 4th. I came home to Brooklyn and it was in the 70s.

Posted by: Nativegal at December 19, 2005 5:52 AM

We all over-remember the winters of our youth. I'm not trying to turn this thread into Albany boosterism, but the winters just aren't that different than NYC.

Back to the topic at hand, this is what Brendan Gill has to say on the blurb for a book on Albany's architecture:

"Cities manifest pride in their accomplishments by means of their architecture, and Albany is no exception. By the early 19th century, as the capital of the most populous and most prosperous state in the Union, it quite rightly undertook to put on airs appropriate to its station. Led by the exceptionally gifted architect Philip Hooker and his colleagues, Albany assumed a grandeur rarely looked for in a small upstate city — indeed, it may be said to have put to shame cities many times its size."

Posted by: Anonymous at December 19, 2005 7:40 AM

Pardon my effusivenes, but this was a fabulous thread.

Richard Florida wrote "The Rise of Creative Class," which is a deeply flawed analysis of the labor market trend to toward creative work. He has a creative class index that ranks cities based on the number of creative workers. While there are a lot of problems with the book, the index is based on the percentage of the labor market that is made up of various types of educated workers from the census. "Brownstone Brooklyn" would certainly rank high. Albany ranked high which was a surprise to many. Although, other state capitals with universities like Austin and Madison were also high on the list.

Suffice it to say, two years ago I would never have imagined living in Albany, but 50% rises in real estate prices demand some perspective.

I actually work in an office where relocating to Albany is an option for many of my co-workers, and several of them have made the move recently. Some have sold appreciated property and some were priced out of NYC, and bought their first homes in Albany. All of them are happy with their choice although the adjustment has not been without its challenges. Unfortunately, they have all chosen to move into the suburbs and have bought relatively insipid homes compared to the ones in the city center.

Posted by: bkborn at December 19, 2005 10:17 AM

If you were to pick where you live based soley on the real estate you could get for the money and nothing else no one one would choose Brooklyn. Most people I would think are in Brooklyn for other reasons. They may choose to live in a brownstone or whatever but they didn't look at the whole United States and say I'm moving there for a brownstone.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 19, 2005 11:10 AM

I'm sorry, but ... Albany? I just can't see living there.

Posted by: Park Sloper at December 19, 2005 12:46 PM

This thread started with a photo of a mansion on 21 acres in Bath, NY, selling for less then 1 BR in park slope. Are you people all nuts? You don't wanna know what you could get for a million bucks. Fugeddaboudit.

Bath is a very nice town. I just bought a 3 BR cottage on a lake about 10 minutes from Bath. I couldn't buy space in a PS garage for what I paid. I'm not moving there yet, but I have a primo vacation home. Meanwhile, I rent in CH.

Oh yeah...they have good schools, great supermarkets, and the finger lakes region is known for it's wineries. No traffic, or transit strikes...and you never hear a siren, car alarm or gun shot.

Posted by: finger lakes at December 20, 2005 12:48 PM

I lived in Geneva, NY. (Finger Lakes) Beautiful city, cheap houses, blah, blah. Big deal. Different type of people.

Posted by: Anonymous at December 20, 2005 1:17 PM

As a current Brooklyn resident originally from Bath, let me note this: the town's former middle school recently sold for $200,000, cash on the barrelhead. Oh, and property taxes are something like $10 per.

Posted by: Brad at January 11, 2006 12:43 PM

Mike 18 real young boy http://www.mike-18.int.tf/

Posted by: Mike 18 cute cam boy at June 8, 2006 11:31 AM

« On the Cambridge Reno Blog: Color Choice Open House Picks: Under $1 Million Club »

December 16, 2005

Diversions: Bath, New York For $90 a Foot

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions