House of the Day: Bring Your Bathing Suit

house
Here's an interesting one for discussion. A four-story brick townhouse with charming mansard roof on 3rd Street between Smith and Hoyt, just up from where we were on Sunday. Only a couple blocks from the Gowanus Canal (not sure whether that's a selling point or not), the interior of the house appears to have lost much of its original charm, judging from the fact that the one indoor photo is of an exposed brick wall. Additionally, the old parlor floor windows, which used to go to the floor, have been replaced by smaller aluminum windows. The most notable feature (once again, not sure whether it's a good or bad thing) is a swimming pool that takes up the entire back yard. The listing first grabbed our attention because the price looked pretty low for 3rd Street. After mulling it over, now we're not so sure. Any good comps for this place?
19 Third Street Townhouse [Brooklyn Bridge Realty] GMAP P*Shark

Comments

Been on market for long time - listed with cobbleheights also. They have additional indoor photo of dated kitchen.
Maybe same house I saw year and 1/2 ago -if it wasn't this one it was one of the group with mansard roof on 3rd- if so- not very good condition.
My take is rental property that LL is in no hurry to sell because low expenses and high rents.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 7, 2006 12:05 PM

Posted by: Anonymous at June 7, 2006 12:07 PM

When it comes to small brooklyn backyards, pools are rarely appropriate. One huge problem is liability. Getting insurance for a house with a pool is very costly. Plus the cost of installing and maintaining, your probably spending about $1000 bucks an hour everytime you take a dip. The only pool that I've seen work in Brooklyn is a lap pool in a Ditmas Park house on a 100' x 100' lot. I imagine most potential buyers would want to take the pool out plus it looks a little murky.

Posted by: Nelson at June 7, 2006 12:09 PM

looks like an above ground pool with decking all around it filling the small yard. waste of a garden imo.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 7, 2006 12:44 PM

The biggest issue with this house, imo, is location -- 3rd Street is a relatively busy thoroughfare, and buyers who want to live in CG and can spend upwards of $1 million want a more typical quiet CG block. It's been on the market for a long time, and I have friends who have looked at it and just can't see spending that money for the location. The pool is really irrelevant. Lots of homes in CG have pools -- there was a piece in the NY Times a year or so ago about it and I know people who do. It tends to be the older families whose kids grew up spending long summer days in the back yard pools. Someone will either remove it, or keep it if they like it (and my money's on them removing it), but I think it's irrelevant to the price.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 7, 2006 12:59 PM

So what should price be? Seems 150-200k cheaper than other needing work houses on more desirable blocks.
3rd st isnt Carroll but it isnt a horror.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 7, 2006 1:54 PM

i saw this one in december and the price hasn't budged at all, so i don't think the seller is exactly motivated. it is very awkwardly carved up, and needs a bunch of work. the owner lives, or used to live, next door, and had this garden walled off from the house so he could access the pool. easily fixed, but emblematic of the way the whole place has been chopped up. i don't think it makes sense at all at this price, considering the time/trouble/buckage it would take to make it right, and then you'd still be on a less-than-ideal block. i bet it'd move at 1.2.

Posted by: looking at June 7, 2006 2:05 PM

I'm sure would move at 1.2M. That would be far cheaper than anything else in comparible 'need work' condition of this size even on 'fringe' blocks of CG.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 7, 2006 3:52 PM

i've actually swam in this pool several times. the multi-tiered deck is lovely and was the place to be in the summer. some seriously wild girls lived there. good times.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 7, 2006 4:01 PM

to me thats a sweet location. but i gots no money!

Posted by: armchair_warrior at June 7, 2006 4:37 PM

i lived at 15 Third St for years, yes there are quiter streets but the noise never bothered us......17th 3rd st is in a family fued, no one lives there full time so we really had two back yards 15 and 17, it was a great duplex rental we had $2100

Posted by: Anonymous at June 7, 2006 6:04 PM

To 4:01 p.m.: swum

Posted by: PPSer at June 7, 2006 11:12 PM

My idea back yard would have a lap pool, a hot tub and a tiki bar.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 8, 2006 12:19 AM

I've seen the house... a looong time ago when it first came on the market. Like February I think. Structurally it seems okay but it doesn't present well for a number of reasons. 1) the current residents are extremely messy and cluttered; 2) it could be four nice 1BRs, or two nice 1BRs and a nice duplex, but will need a full gut reno. Layouts changed, walls moved and kitchens... well the kitchens are almost nonexistent now, so kitchens will need to be added; 3) that pool. You can't tell from the photo but there's actually no access to the pool from the house - it's connected to the house next door, which is where the current owner lives. I was told the pool would be removed upon sale, but what kind of yard is under there? I think the pool turns buyers away from what might actually be a pretty good deal. The owner should just get rid of the thing and clean up the remains of the yad, and this place would get snapped up.

Maybe.

Posted by: Anonymous at June 8, 2006 1:19 AM

We've been through this place several times, all the while trying to rationalize why we should stretch to buy it. It has a beautiful facade (although the windows are extremely annoying) and the building/lot sizes are great, but the total gut nature of the necessary renovation is daunting. Each floor, except for the vacant parlor floor, is an occupied rental, but they're in worse condition than my fraternity house was. The floors are angled dramatically enough that I was tempted to bring in a few superballs to see how far they'd roll from each corner. The ceilings are sagging in many places too. I guess this would be a good place for a developer, as he/she could spruce up the units economically enough for some suckers to rent them out for a bit more money per month. But if your family wants to make this into an owner's triplex with a garden rental, I hope you have the stomach (and the wallet) for a huge job. Oh, did I mention the pool (read: cesspool)? The worst part is that a deck has been built around it, and the backyard has been separated so that the garden rental has a small outdoor space. How do the upper tenants access the lido deck, you ask? They don't. The owner of the building also owns the building next door, and she built a stairway to this lot's pool deck from there. Maybe that arrangement wasn't to her liking, judging by the science experiments fermenting in the pool now.

With all this said, I ask you: what is this place worth??? Really 1.2?

Posted by: BA at June 8, 2006 7:50 PM

« Washington Avenue: This Could Be Huge Wednesday Photo of the Day »

June 7, 2006

House of the Day: Bring Your Bathing Suit

Comments

Post a comment