« Mill Building Closings Have Begun. Really. Friday Blogwrap »
June 29, 2007
Open House Picks
Clinton Hill
275 Washington Avenue
Brooklyn Properties
Sunday 12-2
$3,500,000
GMAP P*Shark
Carroll Gardens
337 Hoyt Street
Corcoran
Sunday 2-4
$1,600,000
GMAP P*Shark
Greenwood Heights
713 6th Avenue
Betancourt
Sunday 1-3
$959,000
GMAP P*Shark
Bay Ridge
437 Bay Ridge Parkway
Century 21
Sunday 1-3
$789,000
GMAP P*Shark
Update: A reader just dropped us a note to inform that Pratt has already sold 275 Washington to a developer who's splitting it into three tax lots: the carriage house, the side lot, and the house. He's now selling just the house for $3.5 million. As for the other two lots? Condos. This should be interesting. We'll be watching this one like a hawk.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/1498
Comments
3.5 for that ch house is a joke this is the type of price that makes a house sit on the market forever and greedy sellers deserve it.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 12:31 PM
I don't understand how they're pricing the CH house. Didn't the Pfizer mansion go into contract for $3.2M? That house has over 10,000 square feet (versus 5760 for this one), a double lot with parking space for 2 cars and enough leftover outdoor space for a decent backyard.
Well, enough griping b/c it's not like I could afford either one but it's nice to dream....
Posted by: Emily at June 29, 2007 12:41 PM
the ch house is own by pratt. don't they need dorms?
Posted by: armchair_warrior at June 29, 2007 12:44 PM
Methinks this is the large mansion recently owned by Pratt Institute.
The property has a huge side yard (do not know if this is included) and not too long ago had a carriage house with apt. on Hall St. (do not know if this is included). If all that is in the price, maybe priced right.
Posted by: George at June 29, 2007 12:49 PM
275 Washington in Clinton Hill is a double lot too. I'm not sure if they are selling that with the mansion. Also, the lot goes from Washington to Waverly, so if you got all of the land, you'd have the equivalent of four brownstone lots.
I pray that an individual buys it for a family home as opposed to breaking it up into condos. I personally think it is more of a light filled, functional and inviting house vs the Pfizer building. I've dreamt of this place... ah well. :)
Posted by: lp at June 29, 2007 12:52 PM
actually I think it would be a nice condo conversion. its nice to dream that someone with 3.5 mil to blow would chose this house in clinton hill as opposed to other options but this house isn't as grand as the pfizer place and it doesn't have as much significant history attached at that house sat for a while. I'd find it hard to believe that someone would just buy this as a family home and preserve it. the only way to dream of making it worth your money is to turn it into condos and at this prices I'm all for it. everyone wants to cry about these brownstones that aren't being preserved but where are ppl to buy who can't afford these ridiculous prices? they need options too. I assure you these holy preservationist are the same people who will put their 13ft wide brownstone on the market for 2 million and think someone won't chop it up to make their money back. there are tons of people who appreciate the architecture of the brownstones but because of the greed of ppl in real estate they're priced out so they need more options. if I had the money I'd totally turn this into nice apartments and try to preserve as much detail as I can.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 1:02 PM
I'm loving the house on Hoyt, but Vicki, please...re-do the photos! They are out of focus. Agents and owners....stop the madness! You're getting paid millions for these homes and some of the renovations are half a mil. The camera is an important tool to market these houses...learn to use it or hire someone who can!
Posted by: Photo Nazi at June 29, 2007 1:31 PM
overpriced.
lets see how many asinine justifications based on its location we get
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 1:32 PM
^^CH that is
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 1:33 PM
Hows 789k for the bay ridge limestone with a possible rental? the street is busy.. I don't know what the values are in bay ridge.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 1:50 PM
Washington Ave is 7,808 sq ft; so $448 sq.ft.
Expensive in $ terms but not in terms of value...
I guess the question is how impactful having a condo building right next to you is going to be...
I still am amazed by the comments on this board with the knee-jerk "greedy", "overpriced", "stupid" commentary. Without being too much of an ass, $3.5MM is an odd-lot to many people and the rest of you just have to get over it. For god's sake they are selling 900 sq. ft. studios in Dumbo for $1MM...
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 1:54 PM
The 7800 sq ft I think includes the carriage house on Hall....so if true about dividing the lot this house is between 5700 sq ft. or $625 sq ft.
But I do agree - people comments are knee-jerk without any real apples/apples comparisons.
It is either -that neighborhood is not my taste so property is worthless or
you can get house in better neighborhood for same amt - but they don't account for size, condition, detail or anything. Real estate appraisers they aren't. Arm-chair critics they are.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 2:03 PM
I think the pfizer mansion is a valid comparison. that house was much more grand and much more significant and it sat on the market for what seemed like forever. more so, when it finally moved it didn't sell for this price. obviously those two houses aren't exact comps but thats exactly the point there are no comps in ch for this kind of money because this house is overpriced. speaking in terms of square footage may be rational in some cases but the fact of the matter is I doubt people who are interested in buying this property are solely taking that into account unless its an investment. they'll take into account other (possibly better) things they may be able to purchase for that kind of money and for 3.5 million a person can do a whole lot better!
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 2:08 PM
well i guess all the people who said it is overpriced and would not sell are now proved wrong. it did sell and is on the market again on a smaller lot. beware of all this overpriced talk. don't let it scare you out of the market. the market is hot right now.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 2:12 PM
Ok...game on 2:08...pretend you are my broker and I've got 3.5MM to spend..lets see the "whole lot better"
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 2:15 PM
re: Hoyt St. - $1.6 seemed like going price for that area/size(20x40') unrenovated house for 4 story. This one is 3 story.
Guess market still very strong or too high a price.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 2:21 PM
Hoyt Street would be priced correctly if there was another 1000 square feet of living space in the offering.
Posted by: crouchback at June 29, 2007 3:13 PM
Carroll Gardens prices are running amok - I know that place, it's rather dumpy, it will probably get asking
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 3:22 PM
CG house is not in good school zone, so that may make the price more of a stretch.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 4:19 PM
2:15pm -- I'm totally with you on that. There is nothing better. yeah, it's overpriced at $488 a sq foot for something that will take a minimum of $250 a sq foot additional investment (for a real low-end level renovation) to restore.
On the other hand: there's nothing like it, and I mean that in terms of architecture, provenance, location -- both now and potentially -- and sheer uniqueness.
If I wanted a large house of myself and hand a total of 6 mil to spend, I'd dive into this.
But this is def something i could see some computer millionaire or young celeb having fun with. Tons of money, youth and coolness.
ON THE OTHER HAND:
I really hate Wash Ave, esp that stretch. The building right next to it seems kinda sad (large apt building, neglected, dirty). And the traffic's pretty intense, it's not one of those gorgeous side streets.
My 2 cents
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 5:43 PM
2:15pm -- I'm totally with you on that. There is nothing better. yeah, it's overpriced at $488 a sq foot for something that will take a minimum of $250 a sq foot additional investment (for a real low-end level renovation) to restore.
On the other hand: there's nothing like it, and I mean that in terms of architecture, provenance, location -- both now and potentially -- and sheer uniqueness.
If I wanted a large house of myself and hand a total of 6 mil to spend, I'd dive into this.
But this is def something i could see some computer millionaire or young celeb having fun with. Tons of money, youth and coolness.
ON THE OTHER HAND:
I really dislike Wash Ave, esp that stretch. The building right next to it seems kinda sad (large apt building, neglected, dirty). And the traffic's pretty intense, it's not one of those gorgeous side streets.
My 2 cents
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 5:43 PM
I can usually spell. This keyboard is kicking my as. See?
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 5:46 PM
Re: Hoyt. Looks like the realtor saw 1899 listed as the date the house was built. You would think the realtors would know that a house listed as 1899 might have been built well before or even shortly after that date. Not a safe representation as to the actual age of the house. Not that it matters much with respect to the house but it undermines credibility.
Also, while I am among those readers of this site who thinks realtors job is to provide me with operfect pictures because I have no plans to visit the house, the Hoyt Street seller would be better served by pictures that focus on the overall feel of the interior, not decontextualized closeups of plaster details. That way, people will want to see it who feel attracted to the space. Ceiling medallions and summer covers are nice but no one starts there in deciding whether a house is worth looking at.
See the 6th Ave house photos for a comparison.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 29, 2007 6:46 PM
it's laughable that the sixth ave. house (at 21st street!) is being marketed by the broker as "south slope." it's two blocks from the cemetery for pete's sake.
Posted by: z at June 29, 2007 8:26 PM
Hmmm, Anon 5:43, I'm surprised at what you said about that stretch of Wash Ave. I don't know it real well and I don't know the building next door to the listed place but I think that stretch is quite nice from walking it many times on my way to both the G and C trains. And it may be a fairly busy street but not too bad actually, not even as bad as dekalb i think. I'll have to check out this place this weekend . . .
Posted by: lemlar at June 29, 2007 9:28 PM
the clinton hill house gets zero sunlight. good luck with it.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 30, 2007 2:00 AM
ive been in the house and its worth every bit of 3.5 mill. its one of a kind
Posted by: anon at June 30, 2007 8:57 AM
lemlar, I just mean there's too many of those large oppressive apartment buildings (super ghetto).
Whereas deklab, though busy (I'd hate to live on it, unless it was right on Ft Greene Park) is cute as a main street. It has that small town feel, cafes etc...
But you can't really compare dekalb with Wash. Wash is a side street, not commercial, whereas dekalb is a bus route, restaurant row, etc. Don't see any mansions on it.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 30, 2007 1:45 PM
Analysts haven't come to a consensus to explain why mortgage rates and associated bond yields have gone on their up-and-down trajectory of the past few weeks. One thing is clear, though: The housing market is swooning.
According to the National Association of Realtors, the pace of home resales has slowed dramatically -- down 10.3 percent in May compared with the previous May. The number of used houses on the market is a record 4.43 million. That translates into an 8.9-month supply.
Half of the houses resold in May cost less than $223,700 -- a 2.1 percent decline over the median price of $228,500 a year earlier. On a year-over-year basis, median resale prices have gone down 10 months in a row. That's a sign of a genuine housing slump. Inventory is at record highs, the market has not see a downturn like this in decades.
Posted by: Peenuckle at June 30, 2007 4:20 PM
I just can't imagine why they would sell with the dopey firm of brooklyn properties. The brokers and the way they do business is back in the stone age. I'm sure the listing will have to be taken over by corcoran or someone else to even get close to asking.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 30, 2007 5:05 PM
ghetto? what the apartments filled with writers, college professors, civil servants, & small business owners? do you have any ideas who your neighbors are? where are you from? it must be horrible to live in your little uninformed box. your assumptions are disturbing.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 30, 2007 8:44 PM
Anonymous 5:05pm, that was a shameless plug for your firm, you guys really do think people are stupid.
Posted by: anon at July 1, 2007 12:28 PM
Actually I was the 5:05 plug and I worked at Brooklyn Properties and it is
the truth. It is a stretch for that place of business to pull this price in a nieghborhood they barely have a presence in. Hit or miss.
Posted by: anon at July 2, 2007 8:44 AM
I was wondering they chose Brooklyn Properties as well -- and why no floor plan?
I saw the garden on the Clinton Hill garden tour some years back and it was magnificent, so I was thinking that $3.5 million for the house, garden and carriage house was actually a good deal, all things considered (not that I can afford it). But for the house alone? I don't think so. And what a shame that most of the woodwork inside the house has been painted white.
Posted by: Pakr Sloper at July 2, 2007 5:51 PM
Some of the nicest buildings are sold by BP. I mean, the real gems (mansions esp). They usually need some fixing up, but thier stock is way more interesting than the conveyor belt renos offered by corcoran.
As far as the ghetto-ness of the Washington Avenue buildings, I wasn't referring to the people who live there, just the way they look. Don't take it so personally. They just look depressing, no matter how many profs and civil servants live there.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 2, 2007 7:26 PM
that 6th ave house is about 200k over market. the house is TINY. the front is nicely done and the cornice is nice, i have walked by it many times. but i would be SHOCKED if it goes for over 800k.also the backyard is tiny. i doubt the whole house is over 1000 sf. so suddenly greenwood hts is $950/sf?? also the house is next to a big glass distributor warehouse.
Posted by: jon at July 3, 2007 8:08 AM
The house was once owned by a couple who moved to a trailer park section of the south slope.
Posted by: stonersquad at July 3, 2007 8:55 AM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.