Open House Picks

I don't think I would ever sell Washington Avenue if it were mine.
Great porch!
BTW - I click on Adelphi- MasseyKnakal and get another BrooklynProperities on St Marks.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 12:03 PM

funny 'bout that house on halsey. i saw it last summer when it was on the market with another realtor for 599k. they accepted my offer of 525k, but after a second look-see i passed. months later, the house was re-presented to us at 499k.

now, at corcoran, it's 675k. makes one wonder - when househunters complain to corcoran about the high prices, they invariably blame the seller.

doesn't look that way to me!

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 12:17 PM

No offense intended, but 2.3M to live in Clinton Hill? You'd have to be a real house slut to go for that. I'd take the 6th Avenue place for 300K less and be in a nicer (personally) nabe.

That said, I love the tub. As long as the inside is newly enamled (which it looks to be), the crusty outside is cool.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 12:30 PM

i love the nabe and all but $675k for that place on halsey seems insane. it's small and looks to be a gut job, considering they call that kitchen "renovated" and don't show any of the bathrooms.

washington ave looks amazing, lots of interesting details, both old and new. but man is that expensive.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 12:34 PM

As I said, if you're a house slut, than 2.3 for the Washington ave place is not so bad. While the 6th Ave place isn't covet-worthy, the location is. And prime CH isn't worth 2.3 in my book. I'm one of those people who will compromise on the house rather than the area. Obviously, there are those who care more about the house than the location. But Brownstoner, for 2.7 you can get a really nice place in Prime Slope so I fail to see how even a total house slut would pay that for Washington Ave.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 1:18 PM

675k between Ralph and Patchen would not be bad if you were say on Macon or the house was in impeccable condition. Halsey is a terrible block with the buses running down the street. It like living on a freeway. What is most annoying about the house on Halsey is that it sold for 500k a few months ago. I am not opposed to flippers but for God's sake, couldn't they have done something to that ugly a-- facade. I mean really.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 1:26 PM

OH MY GOD! A new fetish. I'm in love with that Queen Anne! That broker had a gorgeous one on FG park and it's gone. (They took the pics down and everything.) Hope this one lasts a little longer.

I totally agree that it would be great as a condo. I still wouldn't be able to afford it, but maybe I'd know the kinds of people who did live there. And then mooch.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 1:43 PM

Oh, and another thing: I LOVE THE INTERIOR DESIGN. I wouldnt' change a thing. That steel door .. . hot.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 1:46 PM

"I'm one of those people who will compromise on the house rather than the area."

Yeah, that's going to fall on deaf ears in this board. ("But Fresh Direct delivers there!" "But you can send your kids to private school!" "But I'd rather eat out in Manhattan anyway!" "But safety is totally a block-by-block issue!")

My dream house would be the Washington Ave house -- picked up and moved to park Slope. Given that that's not going to happen, both places seem reasonable, for people with entirely different priorities.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 2:02 PM

Clinton Hill vs. Park Slope seems a tired competition. Those of us who prefer Clinton Hill may do so for reasons of wanting to live in a more racially diverse neighborhood, and are hoping the huge housing stock of apartment buildings and post-war co-ops keep it that way. That said, if all the houses in Clinton Hill, and on this site, are over 1 million, it kind of isn't fun anymore. Maybe there can be a Junior Varsity Brownstoner site for those of us more interested in the financially achievable and less interested in the truly over-the-top?

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 2:07 PM

There are totally legitimate reasons to live in Clinton Hill other than as a second or third choice to Park Slope. There are plenty of people for whom it might be first choice, whether for diversity, housing stock, or whatever. But those people are fewer -- if that weren't so, the Washington house would be selling for $4.5M, and the 6th Avenue house for $900K.

But you read this board, and you'd think that people were fleeing eastward across Flatbush by the thousands, while only an unlucky few were left behind in PS, BH, CG and so on.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 2:17 PM

Although I pray for a housing correction, I add to the position that that extra special clinton hill listing is very well priced. It's consistently expensive with it's comps.

Also, CH adds driver value. It's much easier to park here than in PS.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 2:27 PM

ltjbukem--I'm with you. That house is awesome. I don't know why everyone on this site is so caught up in the whole Henry James thing. It's 2006 people, lots of rooms with dark wood molding is so two centuries ago. My dream house would be a Dwell (magazine) house on PPW.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 2:31 PM

ltjbukem - I like that Sackett Street house. Looking up on propshark they got quite a steal 2 years ago. I know it was major mess - but still!
Yet if I had that much and wanted modern I think I'd for for on of the 14TOwnhouses on State St. 1st - not much more $ than this.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 2:33 PM

Glad to hear you guys are into the Queen Anne style. I own one of the few red brick Queen Anne Victorians in Park Slope. Not quite as wide as this one (20ft.), but still feels quite large. I love these houses and think they are much more interesting than the usual brownstone facade (not that there's anything wrong with brownstone).

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 2:45 PM

Totally unrelated to anything, but if anyone cares to see interesting modern prefab houses: http://www.thedwellhomesbyempyrean.com/Preview3/Navigation/Menu/2_menu.html

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 2:58 PM

I don't know, ltjbukem. That Sackett house, although it looks like it's good quality, is boring as hell. Generic flooring(I'm so sick of that thin strip blond crap), generic stairing, and an open plan that's trying to be loft .

I like buildings that are true to their nature, not dressed up to be something else. It's not a loft.

Interesting architecture, modern design, etc can (and should) go hand in hand with the character, beauty, and quality of old-world craftsmanship. It's a challenge to combine the two. But it has been done.

Dwell is mediocre. World of Interiors has far more interesting and challenging interiors. Dwell is into these pre-fab trend-oriented spaces, which in my opinion are devoid of personality and always look dated. I have nothing against minimalsim. But minimalism shouldn't be boring; it often has MORE character. Sackett house doesnt; it just screams "buy me - I'm easy".)

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 3:29 PM

3:29: Dwell isn't mediocre--it is affordable. The homes are $200 a square foot. World of Interior Homes are triple that. If you want a great modern home, you need an architect and a budget of at least 3M. What Dwell provides is good houses for under 1M.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 3:35 PM

ok- i'm going to swim against the tide and say I honestly think the exterior of the Wahinhgton house is not so attractive. even a little ugly. too much going on..too queen anne for me! but I know people here love that stuff...

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 3:50 PM

Me thinks you folks living east of Flatbush protest too much. What a defensive crew; sounds like you're still trying to convince yourself you made the right decision.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 3:58 PM

3:35 pm. I agree with you that it is for a different budget. But don't you think they also compromise on creativity? I look at W of I for inspiration, not to go out and purchase what they promote, but just to get that part of my brain excited and thinking out of the box.

I guess I just consider Dwell more of a catalogue. But I do see your point completely -- W of I isn't practical at all (even for rich people -- you can't go out and buy personal taste.)

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 4:05 PM

3:35 pm -- they = dwell. Dont you think that Dwell compromises on creativity, is what I meant.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 4:07 PM

I walk by this house on the way to work everyday. Been admiring it ever since I moved to the neighborhood. The adjoining houses are not as well kept up though. Also, there's a lot of overgrown trees in the yard. Am glad that it's on the market. Maybe the new owner will take better care of the yard. Even so, it's a great block. There are some real incredible/enchanting old-world mansions on the washington ave strip between willoughby and fulton. I like the neighborhood; no need to defend it; am in love with it actually; love strolling around or riding my bike on a nice day; real glad I made the decision to buy in the nabe even if it's just a studio. By the way, this house is across the street from the pfizer mansion.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 4:14 PM

4:07: Yes, I agree that the Dwell homes (and those they feature in the magazine) all look essentially the same, with minor variations. For the money, they are good houses--and a little personal style would make them great.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 4:40 PM

If it's in as good condition as it appears, the house on Washington ave will go for asking or above, easy.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 5:06 PM

Queen Anne rocks.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 5:48 PM

Ugly? You call that Queen Anne ugly? You should have your head examined.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 5:50 PM

Alright, already. I'll buy the damn Queen Anne. It better come with the faded armchair that cat is sitting on. Come to think of it, it better come with that cat.

Posted by: Anonymous at March 31, 2006 10:47 PM

Developerxx, thanks for the warning! I going to put my money into Fedders stock.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 8:41 AM

As long as zoning changes and landmarking initiatives protect the Victorian houses, I am all for luxury condos along CIA. That's exactly what needs to dovetail with the existing Victorian homes in order to bring in the (moneyed) population density needed to transform shopping districts such as Cortelyou Road. Coney Island Avenue is an eye-sore already. If the coops are even remotely tasteful (the one that's just been finished doesn't appear to have any Fedders units) then this could be a real boon for the area south of the Park.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 9:33 AM

And developerxx, thanks for crafting a post that, in no uncertain terms, reminds the audience as to why one should worry about the schooling of their child.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 11:12 AM

11:12, that was hilarious.

Schools are gonna improve with the areas. Unless you're planning to buy and turn around and sell in 5 years, I wouldn't worry about the overall value of your house. Unlike the mansion in Nebraska, CH is NYC.

I don't know about Coney Island, though. Even Park Slope's prices still amaze me. It's such a boring, far away land. That's just my humble opinion.

DEAR QUEEN ANNE SELLER: PLEASE SELL THIS TO A FAMILY NOT A DEVELOPER!!!!!!!! If you loved your house, and have to sell it cause you're moving, don't be greedy over the profit margin. Just sell to the person who'll take care of it and love it like you did.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 11:25 AM

Roberta, I have a child at 39, and while it definitely does not have the stellar reputation of 321, it's a good school nonetheless. Perhaps you have used 39 and disagree--a lot of people don't like the cramped facilities and the principal is less than inspiring--but it also has a lot of good teachers through the grades and often gets dismissed a lot on the basis of second and thirdhand playground chatter. I can't tell you how many people who have never sent a child there or even visited it have told me what a bad school it is. (Not saying that's what you're doing, obvs, since i don't know you, but it definitely happens.)

For that matter PS 10 and PS 282 in Park Slope are pretty good schools that are often overshadowed by 321. 321 also has a self-selecting population mainly of kids from high-income, privileged families, which--life being unfair--means that it inevitably is going to score off the charts on tests, etc. Not to knock it, but part of its success comes from quality, and part from demographics, which give it a student body of kids who are probably going to do well wherever they go.

All that said, I do agree that the house would be worth more if it were in the 321 zone--reputation is what drives prices.

No experience with the Clinton Hill schools so I can't speak for them, but good for them if they're doing well.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 12:01 PM

" The UWS (and Park Slope, albeit to a lesser degree) is as white bread as NYC gets (not counting, of course, UES). Might as well buy a house in Nebraska..."

I was with you up to here, but at this point thou dost protest way too much. You've clearly never eaten a bagel in Nebraska.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 12:33 PM

12:26 AND 12:33: You nailed it.

All the CH people I know are Williamsburgers who've made some money and want to get out of the hell hole of the collegetown environment of Bedford Ave. (Pratt's proximity gives CH a real student atmosphere, as opposed to the aging Real World characters who can't grow up. I live here, so I know -- but boy if I make some $, I'm moving to CH.)

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 1:20 PM

IZ, I understand that 113 has an annual open house in December for the next year's applicants. We know 2 kids who go there, one of whom has an older brother at Stuyvesant. It has a good writeup in insideschools.org and it's listed in the latest edition of the Best NYC Middle Schools book. Also an interesting web site: relc113.com

Kids there are eligible for the DOE's free prep program for the high school (Stuyvesant, Brooklyn Tech, Bronx Sci) test. That's a big plus I think.

They have 4 different programs in the same building--but not 4 different schools. Some sound more appealing than others.

I am not entirely convinced but my daughter is very happy to think she might not have to take the subway to middle school.

If the procedure is the same as this year, we will be able to list our District 2 schools in order of preference, and then apply separately to 113 since it's in a different district. I think we'll also apply to NEST although it's a difficult commute.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 4:27 PM

Does Developerxxx really not get that some people do look to live in integrated neighborhoods? For others of course it is a non-issue. I never wanted to live in Park Slope (although some my best friends etc, etc, etc). Trade-offs are what this housing thing is all about.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 1, 2006 4:55 PM

All this chatter about Clinton Hill schools... There's also a Prospect Park House featured above, and if people are worried about schools they should check out the area. 139 on Cortelyou and I forget the number of the school on Newkirk are both pretty good, and District 22 has an excellent (tiere) gifted programs, along with some gifted elementary schools not too far from the nabe. In addition, the middle school issue is not even a big deal here, as we have Hudde (which busses in the district) and its one of the biggest feeder schools to Stuyvesant in the city. And if you can't cut Stuy, then there's always Midwood (with more Westinghouse Fellows than anywhere in the nation) and Morrow, which ain't half bad... If people are really concerned about schools and want to go public, they should be looking in Flatbush. Even Slopers who want to go public have a tough time after elementary school... Out here the choices are better and broader than any where else in Brooklyn. See Squid and the Whale? Well the HS Noah Baumbach attended wasn't in the Slope - it was Midwood.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 2, 2006 10:05 AM

Good point about Midwood. As Bklyn schools go, I think (not 100% certain) that they are second only to St. Anns(Bklyn Hts), in terms of the number of kids they send to Ivys each year.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 2, 2006 11:16 AM

the great thing about the Queen Anne house is that it is sandwiched between two 'colleges' (St. Josephs and Pratt) that are only a block away. That's what I like about living in this neighborhood. It's destined to remain youthful, vibrant and a little artistic as time goes by. Pratt's campus is open to the public. It's a great place to walk around, sit and chat, etc.

Posted by: Anonymous at April 3, 2006 10:36 AM

But where do you recommend sending your children to school for the first 12 years?

Posted by: Anonymous at April 3, 2006 2:09 PM

Home schooling

Posted by: Anonymous at April 3, 2006 2:20 PM

u all suck

Posted by: Anonymous at April 3, 2006 11:04 PM