« More Wreckage on 15th Street, This Time Trees House of the Day: 387 Hancock Street »
October 16, 2006
Condo of the Day: 302 Washington Avenue
We were very bullish about the condo-ization of the corner brownstone at 302 Washington Avenue when we wrote about it mid-construction last April. At the time, we got the sense it was going to be more of a historic restoration than it now appears. The brownstone exterior was nicely restored but, now that the units are on the market, the photos of the interior finishes are leaving us a little limp. Prices are at the high end for the neighborhood - $750 a foot - but not unreasonable if you buy into the idea that these are top of the line. We haven't been inside, but the apartments just don't feel as special as we had hoped.
302 Washington Avenue [Warburg Realty] GMAP
302 Washington Avenue 2 BR [Warburg Realty]
302 Washington Looking Very Promising [Brownstoner]
Comments
I don't know, that triplex looks pretty nice to me. But 1.75mm? That seems more than a little steep. How close is this building to the A/C train?
Posted by: west at October 16, 2006 12:03 PM
Pretty close to subways. And very pretty! Lots of light, good layout, charming details, good location, nice finishes. Steep price, but given the givens, makes sense. I'd be tempted it if I were in the market for this size space.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 12:30 PM
ANON 12:30 SOUNDS LIKE THE SELLER
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 12:31 PM
I'm 12:30 there. I can see how you think I sound like the seller, but trust me, I'm just in the front row with popcorn. I sold a similar apt in Boerum Hill last December, and bought a larger space in PS in May, and I'm all wrung out. Now I just like to watch.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 12:35 PM
it's a bit of a hike to the C train , like 4 long blocks. not a realistic walk for most ppl. G is closer. prices are on the high side. i doubt any of these 4 units go for asking. that carriage house is nice, but for $1.7mm, it's a reach.
Posted by: ltjbukem at October 16, 2006 12:38 PM
"pretty close" haha
pretty close to the "G" and "C", fun in the winters for sure. But not close to A unless runs local.
I dont like location too much but apts seem ok. But not too special - too much stuff on mkt these days.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 12:39 PM
this is relatively close to trains, but not that close, the closest train is the G train and otherwise it's a short walk to the A/C or further to the Q downtown. 12:30 does sound like the seller, "given the givens", "but trust me, i'm just in the front row with popcorn". give me a break. you can buy a whole brownstone in ft Greene much closer to trains for less than that.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 12:43 PM
I think the underwhelming impact of the interiors results from not having made a hard-and-fast decision about what they wanted to achieve. The layouts are modern but the finishes are SORT OF traditional (the bath vanity is awful; looks like Ralph Lauren gentlemens club style circa 1989). Appears to me as though they wanted to cover both ends of the spectrum and wound up with a blah middle. Had they gone full-on modern or much more historical, it could have been wow.
Posted by: Rascal at October 16, 2006 12:44 PM
"the apartments just don't feel as special as we had hoped."
Sheesh, b'stoner, I just don't get your aesthetic. These are some of the nicest listings I've seen on this site. I know you don't want to post photos of your renovated interiors, but how about just the kitchen? Just so we--I mean, I--could have some idea where you're coming from.
Posted by: ShowUsYourPhotos at October 16, 2006 12:54 PM
Can anyone understand why the maintenance would be so high? Those are co-op, not condo numbers. Do condos carry an underlying mortgage like condos? Excuse my ignorance but I've never lived in a condo before!
Posted by: west at October 16, 2006 12:56 PM
Those are high numbers for common charge. Usually when condo have such high figures its because they have a doorman, fitness center etc... Doubt there is anything like that involved here. Condo's do not have an underlying mtg.
Posted by: anon0505 at October 16, 2006 1:03 PM
i love the windows in the triplex...
the bathrooms and kitchens are not my taste, but overall it's too hard for me to tell the quality of the details from the photos
Posted by: lc at October 16, 2006 1:05 PM
Hard to tell quality by pictures since there are only a couple and they're tiny. Could be nice. Could be crap. Can't tell.
Why would they use marble on bathroom walls? Don't 99% of buyers these days prefer Waterworks style tile?
Marble bathrooms reak of Miami Beach and cheeseball guidos.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 1:07 PM
The triplex looks pretty nice, but I can't imagine spending that much money for absolutely NO outdoor space. They clearly built on the entire footprint of the property--I suspect some of these units aren't very sunny for big chunks of the day.
Posted by: tinarina at October 16, 2006 1:32 PM
I think the color of the bricks are ugly as well as the stoop color. It really destroy the historical look.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 1:36 PM
Rascal hit the nail on the head. It feels like the developers weren't quite sure how they wanted to go--modern or traditional--so the result just doesn't wow us. Chances are it's all good quality (in terms of materials, workmanship, etc) but it just felt more schizophrenic than we had imagined.
Posted by: brownstoner at October 16, 2006 2:52 PM
wouldn't worry about dark most of day with all those south facing windows.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 2:55 PM
This building is about the wierdest color pink since that Pepto Bismal place in Park Slope a week or so ago. The paint job on the back part is kind of nasty too.
The DeKalb Ave. bus runs right under the building. Nice and quick to connect to the trains in downtown Brooklyn, I guess, but I bet that could get kind of noisy.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 3:12 PM
This seems aggressively priced to me. Bedrooms are tiny. Some of the design choices seem a bit odd too.
Isn't that a busy corner too?
Posted by: Brennan at October 16, 2006 3:45 PM
They are OK; one nice thing is that they are bright. But they are pretty expensive. Also I don't like the triplex. I really cannot imagine why anyone would pay that kind of money for Washington Ave and not buy a building instead.
Posted by: anon at October 16, 2006 3:59 PM
used to live on the SE corner of wash & dekalb, and yes it is very noisy. b38 is convenient but loud.
Posted by: crude_futures at October 16, 2006 5:00 PM
WTF, a cherry and marble vanity with a white medicine cabinet?
Posted by: Anonymous at October 16, 2006 6:51 PM
it looks to me like they ran out of money and consequently used lower end finishes. either that or they just got worried about profit and did the same. then they set the sell price super high so someone will think they're getting a deal when it's reduced.
Posted by: TonyTone at October 16, 2006 8:48 PM
Well that sounds about right, doesn't it? I'll go to the Open House and report back.
Posted by: west at October 16, 2006 10:33 PM
"Impeccably restored"? What about a cornice? Looks naked.
Posted by: despina at October 17, 2006 12:49 AM
TonyTone wrote: "it looks to me like they ran out of money and consequently used lower end finishes"
Except on the outside, the crappy wierd brown sand paint was one of the first things they did.
So it has to be corner cutting from the very beginning.
Posted by: Anonymous at October 17, 2006 11:34 AM
All this is why I don't understand why buyers always want to buy places that have already been painted and kitchen and bath installed. Ideally for me, I like the guts and the structure to be in great condition, and to do the finishing details myself. But it seems buyers want the kitchen and baths fully 100% finished. As for me, I can't wait to put in the new kitchen, entirely the way I want it, in our new house. I'm looking forward to it. (Even though I'm prepared for the joys of slow shipping of cabinets and no-show contractors!)
Posted by: Anonymous at October 17, 2006 3:02 PM
I went to the open house last weekend and looked at the triplex (which has an entrance on Dekalb) and the 3 bedroom ground floor/parlor floor duplex (which has entrance on Washington). I was underwhelmed. Not in a million years would I spend that kind of money on those places, and I would imagine that I am their target market. The triplex has some wonderful details but the layout is not the most desireable. You enter into a pretty stair hall -- a windowed den is up a few stairs to your left, and the living room is through a door to the right. Eat in kitchen is downstairs with a bathroom on that level also. NO dining room. Kitchen seemed nothing special to me. Thought the cabinets were ugly, personally. Three small bedrooms upstairs. Original wainscoating in stair hall and stairwell remains, as well as gorgeous tile just inside the door on Dekalb. As I recall, the living room has beamed ceilings - pretty - but there is no detail whatsoever upstairs and the closets are the cheapest possible slatted folding-door variety. I mean, I had closet doors like that in the first studio I ever inhabited in New York. Ugh.
The duplex 3-bedroom also had what I consider an inconvenient layout: kitchen on ground floor with another den-type room off it, living room on parlor level with non-descript bedrooms in back. Despite being in a historic house, this apartment felt like any old sheetrock development to me.
Posted by: fortgreener at October 17, 2006 9:10 PM
close to the G, a walk to the C, nowhere near the A. that said, it's on a prime neighborhood block. i can't speak to the interiors, but i suspect it's very Condo-y, in a bad way.
Posted by: janelle at October 23, 2006 12:24 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.