House of the Day: 38 Berkeley Place

When we see this pristine, 4,000-square-foot brownstone on Berkely Place priced for $2,195,000 it makes us worry for some of the houses in other nabes like Fort Greene or Carroll Gardens that are trying to get the same price. Before everyone goes all nutso on us, Yes, we realize not everyone wants to live in Park Slope with baby strollers, blah, blah, blah, but the fact remains remains that the North Slope above Seventh Avenue is one of two true blue-chip areas in Brooklyn. Seeing a house as large and in as good shape for this price in this area makes us wonder about the comparable ripple effect through outlying neigborhoods. And what does this say about the overall market downturn? Our guess is this would have been $2.6 million at the peak which would imply a decline of 15% or so. Are you buying our analysis?
38 Berkeley Place [Warren Lewis] GMAP P*Shark
40 Comments
By it's me on October 2, 2006 12:19 PM
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 12:31 PM
It isn't a 20footer but yeah when I was looking intensively during spring and summer I would guess this place asking for $2.8+ and taking $2.6, instead of asking for $2.2
so that looks like a 20% drop in ask, although WL supposedly does this to generate interest so perhaps if someone offers ask, it is a 15% drop.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 12:35 PM
btw i don't really understand how the layout can work as a two family and as a one family it would appear to need re-thinking.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 12:36 PM
Quality House!! Reasonable price. Sanity at last...
This is the beginning. New homes on the market will have to be of this type of quality to garner $2MM+. No more fixer-uppers, or 3-4 family conversions.
By Anon on October 2, 2006 12:42 PM
I also covet this from afar - it's just beautiful.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 12:46 PM
For what its worth, seems this is between 5th and 6th Avenues, not in the primo area above 7th Avenue. I think this is in School District 13 and across the street from an elementary school, which I think is one of the better in that district, but not PS 321.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 12:51 PM
I prepaid for your analysis about a year and a half ago. I think declines in the primes will siphon back SOME buyers previously priced out. Some of 2005's Bed Stuy/Crown Heights shoppers may now be looking at Clinton Hill/Fort Greene. Clinton Hill/Fort Greene >> Park Slope. PSlope >> Manhatttan. Granted, some of the stuff thrown on the wall will stick. Historic Brooklyn will have grown on some shoppers/owners and they will stay. But I do think there will be a considerable flight back to the Gotham if things continue like they are.
$.02
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 12:54 PM
I also love the house (based on the picture) although I am a bit annoyed about the double duplex layout, alas I would need about a further 30% price drop before I could even consider it. BTW, I do not agree with the analysis on pricing. This location is below 6th Ave (11217???) so not sure if it should command the pricing of "prime" Park Slope.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 1:06 PM
Get real 30% drop?? Back to 2003-044 prices?? Don't think so... This house is across from the school/playground and would never have been $2.8 mil. in the hard market of 2005... It would have been $2.395 mil. or about 10% more than WLR currently has it listed for. The North Slope is hot right now, much more in the way of transactions North of $2mil. than in Central Slope.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 1:19 PM
To Anon (1:06 - 1:09).
I was not suggesting that the market would or should drop by 30% - it was just a creative way of saying that the house was out of my price range. Please so try to read the post carefully before you pen an "outraged" response.
By west on October 2, 2006 1:41 PM
Yeah, this is between 5th & 6th. I agree that it wouldn't have been 2.8. You would need to be above 7th and in 321 to have asked that. 2.3m seems much more in line with top-o-the-market price.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 1:44 PM
1:06,07,0-- you need to actually read the comments before going all wacko. The poster was not saying there had been a 30% decrease. However your 10% figure is ridiculous. This is asking about 19% less than what I spent on a similar house in a simlar spot almost two years ago. You can BS all you want, but there is no esaping decreasing prices.
By west on October 2, 2006 1:44 PM
Went to the site--above link doesn't work--it is really beautiful! Probably would have been 2.5m.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 1:52 PM
I bet it goes for $2.5 in a bidding war.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 2:05 PM
i'll take that bet!
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 2:12 PM
bunch of .....
can't you just live in your house, enjoy, make babies get older and then sell it? that way you will make money no doubt and you won't have to spend time writing this stupid things.If you were renting for the past few years, you also would have lost money, so what if we all stop gaining money on equity for a while? not big deal, we still have a nice place to live iv.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 2:15 PM
Given that they have already had 2 open houses, I doubt that there will be a "bidding war".
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 2:25 PM
What's the highest prices anyone knows of for houses below 6th Avenue, like this one, that have sold are currently for sale?
By Miguel on October 2, 2006 2:25 PM
I've bought two properties from WL over the past 10 years, and I can safely say that each one was considerably under-priced by design. WL loves to get the bidding war going. They are the anti-Corcoran (i.e. Corcoran loves to stretch the asking price beyond limits and cut back if there are no takers). WL prices it to move fast.
1st time, I got my bid in and locked up the property before anybody could blink. 2nd time I was not so fortunate -long, drawn-out, bitter, bid war.
I would take bets this gets bid up to $2.3mm, unless there is something unusually off-putting about the location.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 2:43 PM
I disagree that Bed Stuy/Crown Heights shoppers miraculously become Clinton Hill/Fort Greene shoppers. The first neighborhoods still carry a pretty steep discount on the others. Just because there's a blip in the marketplace doesn't mean people automatically have an extra $600K+ to spend on a house.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 2:53 PM
North Slope means closer to Flatbush Ave, South Slope means closer to the Prospect Expressway. Not above or below 7th Ave.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 2:59 PM
If WL is so good at pricing houses to move, then how do you explain all the listings that have been siting on the market for months, including one property on Garfield Place (prime PS) that looks like it is in pretty good shape.
Has anyone actually been inside 38 Berkeley Place. Is it in as good a shape as the pictures imply.
By anon on October 2, 2006 3:06 PM
i'm frankly surprised at how low the ask is on this, even factoring in the WL approach. it's beautiful, and on a prime block (whatever people say, it's still center slope, and 5th avenue restaurant row and proximity to the subway are actually a plus for a lot of younger buyers). the elementary school it's zoned for is supposed to be up and coming (and has a bunch of celeb writer kids if memory serves).
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 3:37 PM
Used to be only prime, park block center slope houses and brooklyn heights homes commanded super high premiums. Now at the prices they are at many people would rather think outside the box and get out of those more stuffy (aka: overpriced) areas. After all at these price points they are probably thinking private school for their kids (if they have any) anyway. North Slope is kind of grimy to me. Wouldn't want to be that close to Flatbush. Otherwise I'd buy across Flatbush just in the beginnings of Prospect Heights and get the same house for $500k less. I think the new buyers are assuming there is prestige in being in the "Slope" but most old-timers don't consider that a prestigious buy because it's so far from the park. Whatever. If you like it and you have the % buy it.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 3:38 PM
7th Ave in the slope is now starting to grow old and smell stale. All the activity is down on 5th. In a few more years 7th will be all cell phone stores, and subway sandwich shops. 7th Ave is dirty noisy and over crowded. 6th Ave. has no commercial stores and many beautiful churches- it is an oasis compared to 7th Ave. I would never want to live near 7th.
By west on October 2, 2006 4:06 PM
Is that really true that WL deliberately underprices? Their house listings seem high to me. Also, I don't think that tactic will work in a cooling market. No more bidding wars. People will just automatically bid 5 -10% under that deliberately low price. If brokers don't accurately price their properties now, the houses will just sit.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 4:14 PM
‘This Isn’t A Bust, It’s A Correction’
A housing report from the New York Sun. “Soaring construction costs are putting the squeeze on the city’s private developers, real estate experts say, threatening New York’s housing boom. The president of Newmark Knight Frank Capital Group, James Kuhn, called construction costs ‘the single biggest problem in New York right now.’”
“He added that the costs will put pressure on the bigger, more ambitious, and long-term projects, including Forest City Ratner’s Atlantic Yards. ‘When it was started, we were in a very, very bullish condo market,’ Mr. Kuhn said. ‘When it gets approved, will we be in a market that justifies construction at a number where you will be able to sell units?’”
“A residential developer, Jane Gladstein, said that increasing cost and softening demand means developers have to evaluate opportunities more conservatively. ‘The buoyancy of the last several years gave a false perspective on reality,’ Ms. Gladstein said. ‘We’ve had a sobering six months.’”
“The president for the Partnership for New York City, Kathryn Wylde, said that construction costs are a problem born from the city’s recent success, and that eventually the market would correct itself as construction drops off and prices fall.”
“‘At some point there will be a collapse and a lot of suffering, and contractors and labor will be available at relatively low cost,’ Ms. Wylde said.”
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 4:45 PM
As for it being close to 5th Avenue, simply considering what avenue we ourselves prefer for restaurants and shops - we MUCH prefer 5th Avenue. It's fresher, hipper, more going on. I never shop on 7th Avenue. My pharmacy is there, that's it. Anyhoo, am just saying some people especially younger couples, won't preceive being near 5th Avenue as inferior.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 4:47 PM
Plus Peter Saarsgaard and Maggie Gyllenhaal just bought a house closer to 5th avenue than 7th avenue. Shows the appeal to younger buyers.
By sylvia on October 2, 2006 5:10 PM
sarsenhaal moved closer to 5th ave? then it's official: 5th is the new 7th.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 5:19 PM
I agree with an earlier poster who mentioned that this is not really a two -family. It may have a two - family c/o, but it is configured as a 1-family.
I've always wondered whether there is a premium or discount applied if a house is a single family. For this house, I think the garden floor could be converted to a 1-beroom apartment. My guess is it would take about $75.0 k to do the conversion. Assuming you could rent it out for $1,500-$1,600 a month you'd have annual rental income of $18K-$19K which could cover about $275K of mortage. With a purchase price of $2.195 million + $75K of renovation cost your all in is about $2.27 million which means your're paying $2.0+ million for a triplex. If someone is going to pay that amount of money, I think they'd just look at the house as a single family at $2.195 million.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 5:25 PM
Who the hell is Peter Saarsgaard and Maggie Gyllenhaal
By west on October 2, 2006 5:38 PM
sarsenhall? oh my.
I would think there is a discount for a single family (unless maybe in the Heights) as the promise of rental income seems to induce sellers to price higher...For instance, there's a premium when a two-family comes on the market in Lefferts Manor since almost all the houses are zoned one-family.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 6:11 PM
I understand the benefit of extra income with a two-family, but at what price. For the Berkely Place house the value of the rental is about $200k ($275K amount of mortgage it can service less $75K renovation costs). Assuming a purchase at ask, your getting an owners triplex for about $1.995 million ($2.195 price less $200K rental value). I'd rather just by a single family for $1.995 million (if I could) and avoid the hassle of being a loandlord.
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 7:01 PM
How about closing costs?
Shouldn't they clock in at abou 100k on a 2mil property?
By Anonymous on October 2, 2006 8:30 PM
*choke*
Really, that much for closing costs? I dunno, ours was $8K for our $850K house this year.
By west on October 2, 2006 8:38 PM
1% "mansion" tax kicks in at 1mm. Find me a mansion in Brooklyn for a million dollars!
By Anonymous on October 3, 2006 8:27 AM
7th avenue is slowly changing...ie Sweet Melissa just opened and a Tempo Presto is coming. As commercial leases come up, more trendy stuff will improve 7th avenue.
By Anonymous on October 3, 2006 11:38 AM
This is a great house. I think the price is very attractive also.
However, it is near 5th avenue. At the peak of the market 2 years ago, this house would have garnered $2.4MM (maybe). A similiar house between 7th and 8th would have been $2.9MM to $3.1MM. 5th avenue, however, has changed more than 7th avenue (for the better). Therefore I think this house is a steal! Is it landmarked?
By Anonymous on October 3, 2006 11:08 PM
The house on Garfield that WLR tilts a little.. there is an underground stream running near it.. This is why it has been sitting so long. The house would not have been 20% more one year go.. Possibly 10% more. It will probably sell North of $2mil. but just barely
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Good question - don't have an answer but I covet that house. Those colors in the living room - just...wow. I can see myself living there and never wanting to leave. Let me get back to the grind writing this movie trailer I'm working on so that I can one day make it so, LOL!