Condo of the Day: 11 Terrace Place

How about Friday Open Co/Op/Apartment posts?

there is much more interest in this than Friday open houses (not that friday open houses are not fun, but they are out of reach to 99% of readers).

given the much wider interest in six figure apartments I don't get why they aren't a regular. Pick a few from brownstones if you need to justify the site name.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 12:40 PM

these arent exactly in a prime location...definitely not prime WT..so i don't think a 25K price drop on one apt is indicative of the WT hood as a whole...houses close to the park are still in high demand

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 12:54 PM

Is the broker serious with that facial hair?

Yikes.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 1:11 PM

These are the developments that are going to be hit the hardest as the RE Market collapses. This is sort of way out there on the fringe with the only thing being close by is a cemetary.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 1:18 PM

25k price cut is not enough to spark interest in this. I went by the original open house earlier this year and you definitely need a car to live out there. The subway was about 15 mins away and there was nothing around there.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 1:23 PM

Love the view of the graveyard. Nothing like rolling over in the morning and enjoying a nice view of death.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 1:27 PM

Ick. That is absolutely the least desirable part of Windsor Terrace. I don't mind the graveyard at all. I do mind the Prospect Expressway being between you and any sort of amenity. Once again, ICK!

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 1:50 PM

I "love" the pic of the subway entrance at 15th and PPW on the Corcoran listing. Who are they kidding? This place is located b/w 20th Street and McDonald Ave.!

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 1:52 PM

There are price cuts on four units, not just one.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 2:16 PM

Oh great - another overpriced ridiculous listing from our "friends" at Corcoran. Next, they'll want me to pay $1.3 million for a 2 bedroom in Cobble Hill -- oh wait that is actually on their site. I look forward to a market collapse and these people having to get real jobs instead of defrauding their neighbors.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 2:28 PM

isn't this right across from the cemetary? a little creepy, don't you think? almost as creepy looking as the broker!!

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 2:29 PM

7 of 13 units are in contract. Thats about 35% and this building has been on the market for about 8 mths now.
I think they will need some serious price cuts to get any inteerest if at all.25k will not do it.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 2:35 PM

7/13 = 53.8%

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 3:08 PM

Prices cannot go down in NYC, because of circumstances that are unique in the U.S. Just as in London, real estate only goes up.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aGUTrqoewzlM&refer=uk

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 3:24 PM

I agree with 3:24 - NY is exactly like London. Shortage of Housing always = high prices. Maybe not 10% annual increases in tough times, but never 10% declines for sure.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 4:32 PM

That broker looks like the bad guy in Heroes.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 5:27 PM

"never 10% declines for sure" in NY.

Um, you were obviously not alive or in New York between about 1987 and 1994. Prices in the City as a whole declined about 35% between 1989 and '94. See http://www.fanniemaefoundation.org/programs/jhr/pdf/jhr_1401_schwartz.pdf (chart at page 120). My house declined about 50% in value, probably due to its odd location. (It has now quintupled since that interim low.) And housing was a lot scarcer then, particularly given the current condo boom. I know lots of people who had to sell for losses because they had to move.

I have no idea what will happen now, of course, but neither do you. Whether we suffer even lower unemployment rates in marginal neighborhoods due to a recession may make the difference -- that would certainly adversely affect the crime rate, and property values, all over the city.

David

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 6:24 PM

David,

I admit that I was merely a grade schooler in the 80s so I did not see anything close to what you are talking about. I guess I see your point, but doesnt the population growth and future growth have any influence on the scarcety of housing?

Not sure how many people lived/worked in NY in the 80s and early 90s but isnt there alot more here now and growing?

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 6:34 PM

$150/Barrell Gas...

Its coming and guess what - cities will be the only refuge, if you cant take public transport to work - you are dead!

Think housing is scare now? Just wait a little longer. There is alot less oil out there then you think!

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 6:38 PM

$150/Barrell Gas...

Its coming and guess what - cities will be the only refuge, if you cant take public transport to work - you are dead!

Think housing is scare now? Just wait a little longer. There is alot less oil out there then you think!

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 6:38 PM

"The subway was about 15 mins away"

The F train stop at Reeves and Prospect Ave is less than a 1/2 mile from here so you it's more like a 5 minute walk. Unless it takes you 15 mins to walk a 1/2 mile, and if that's the case you may have other problems.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 6:57 PM

By the time I dress for walking 1/2 mile to the subway in the dead of winter, wade over the unshoveled streets and then wait for the subway, that 1/2 mile adds about 30 minutes onto my commute at the very minimum. Thanks, but I'd rather be in Red Hook or Greenpoint or, hell, St. George.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 8:05 PM

Um, David, crime in NYC is nothing like it was in 1987 or even 1994. The population is no longer decreasing. The city has changed.

And 8:05, Red Hook or Greenpoint or, hell, St. George, is not in District 15.

Will

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 9:23 PM

True, Greenpoint has better schools.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 10:43 PM

When Gas is $8/ gallon, NYC real estate will be double what it is today.

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 11:05 PM

SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!

Posted by: guest at September 14, 2007 11:21 PM

oh 8:05 don't be so dramatic. i live less than a minute away from that development and it takes me 6-8 minutes to walk to the subway. in snow it might take 10. you just have to know the shortcuts. my friends on the western edge of hell's kitchen have a longer walk to the 8th ave line.

Posted by: guest at September 15, 2007 12:39 AM

The location of this building is less than optimal. For those concerned with the walk to the subway, you might consider hoping the bus to the Church Avenue F stop. There you will get a seat on the train, which you probably won't get at the Ft. Hamilton stop.

For those worried about the bad old days, well, they're gone. Forecasters estimate the population of NYC will reach 9 million within two decades. That assures more interest in Windsor Terrace properties, which benefit from the quality of P.S. 154.

As you can tell, construction in the city is mainly aimed at owners. Increasing ownership among residents will drive away the people who cause the problems, thereby making the city a better place.

If the real estate ownership in NYC (33% owners) were equal to the US average (67% owners), the schools would improve and academic performance in city schools would more closely match that of suburban schools.

Posted by: guest at September 15, 2007 12:55 PM

12:55 - You make absolutely not one lick of sense. Not one.

Posted by: guest at September 15, 2007 1:03 PM

I think 12:55 makes the most sense than anyone else on this thread.

Posted by: guest at September 15, 2007 1:22 PM

12:55 is definitely the voice of reason on this thread. All the renters should be chased out of the city, shot into space, or maybe eaten.

Posted by: guest at September 15, 2007 4:19 PM

I think renters would taste great with a side fava beans.

Posted by: guest at September 15, 2007 7:14 PM

I, as a man, want to have hot sloppy sex with Andrew Booth.

Posted by: guest at September 16, 2007 1:52 AM

Andrew Donald Booth... British engineer, physicist and computer scientist who led the invention of the magnetic drum memory for computers and invented Booth's multiplication algorithm?

Posted by: guest at September 16, 2007 2:06 AM

uhm...ick 1:52...man or not, ick. he looks like the devil

Posted by: guest at September 16, 2007 7:48 AM

4:19, you wrote:

"12:55 is definitely the voice of reason on this thread. All the renters should be chased out of the city, shot into space, or maybe eaten."

The city and suburbs have well known characteristics. In suburbia, schools are good and crime is low. In NYC, good as things have been lately, most of the schools are questionable and crime exists.

What's defines the difference between city and suburb? The character of the residents.

If you identify the disruptive students in city schools and you identify the mischief-makers in the city at large, you will have to admit both live in residences they do not own.

People who live in homes they own are unlikely to engage in criminal acts and education will be held in high regard in those owner-occupied homes.

Posted by: guest at September 16, 2007 8:13 AM

Debating over whether Windsor Terrace is more desirable then Park Slope is like two people debating over chinese and italian food, or blondes and brunettes (to each their own). Both nabes have +/-'s and trade offs are made one way or the other. I lived in the north slope and preferred the R line given the proximity to my office, and the walk down to 4th ave wasn't pleasant coming or going (especially coming home given the incline). I now prefer WT given the cost of goods, and that I actually get a seat on the train in the morning whether walking 2-8 minutes..I happen to walk 1 minute as do many around here, and if had to do another 5 or 10 wouldn't find it that bad in comparison to my prior Park Slope trek. WT is still developing and as more people move in and developments bring a greater density, some of the commercial amenity is coming back. I hear talk about converting once commercial retail space (now apartments) back to retail down near Prospect and Reeve. Longer term I think this will work out and again bring in more folks from the surrounding nabes. The expressway cut in half or cut off a once thriving nabe and with the surge of new residents its coming back to life.

Posted by: guest at September 16, 2007 10:06 AM

"People who live in homes they own are unlikely to engage in criminal acts and education will be held in high regard in those owner-occupied homes."

I'd really like to see the studies you are citing here. Just because you would like to believe this over-simplified nonsense does not make it true.

Posted by: guest at September 16, 2007 10:46 AM

10:46, you wrote:

"I'd really like to see the studies you are citing here. Just because you would like to believe this over-simplified nonsense does not make it true."

I see. Every major city in the US has experienced the well known "white flight" as parents relocate to spare their families too much exposure to crime and bad schools.

Meanwhile, are you suggesting that crime and school performance are vary uniformly across all socio-economic segments of NY City's population?

If so, that conclusion comes from a study I'd like to see.

Posted by: guest at September 16, 2007 3:23 PM

"Every major city in the US has experienced the well known "white flight"..."

Ah, so the issue was never about owners versus renters at all. It was - as I suspected all along - about race.

Posted by: guest at September 16, 2007 11:42 PM

9:51, you wrote:

"Guest 3:23 and 8:13...read the book Freakanomics and then come back to your statements."

Freakanomics makes many interesting points, however. So what?

You wrote:

"Did you know your children are safer in the city than they are in suburbs?"

Your claim depends on your definition of "safer".

Children are rarely murdered in the suburbs. Children and young adults account for the bulk of murder victims in NY City and other urban areas.

You wrote:

"I'll put the best schools in the suburbs up against the best schools in New York City ANY DAY OF WEEK!"

There's lots of smart kids in NYC. Stuyvesant High School and Hunter High are proof enough. It's not comparisons of the best schools that matter.

The key issue is a comparison of all the schools and kids that accomodate the kids who are not at the top of the heap.

Average and below-average kids in the suburbs are in better hands.

Posted by: guest at September 17, 2007 12:24 AM

So mature and so convenient I bet most of you have hair in many unwantd places. Thats why YOU cant aford brownstones and even cemetary condos. Even Alan Greenspan knows that. Think about it.

Posted by: guest at September 17, 2007 7:39 AM

oh my goodness...i didn't realize that the reason i didn't live in a brownstone was because I have hair in unwanted places. now I know. thanks.
and as for our beloved alan greenspan...well he has hair on his knuckles and he does pretty well for himself!!!! duh

Posted by: guest at September 17, 2007 8:05 AM

8:54, you wrote:

"Identify a school district in the burbs and lets do a statistical study. I'll provide the links to data."

Okay. We'll use one I know well. Darien, CT. Zip code 06820.

You wrote:

"Your child is statistically more likely to die living in the suburbs."

Yeah. Sure. By one interpretation, your statement is pointless -- everyone will die. Thus every child will age and eventually die. His residence will have no effect on the outcome.

I will assume you meant that death would result from some misfortune.

The New York Times offerred the same silly claim a number of years ago. You will have no more luck proving this goofy point than the Times.

I wrote:

""Children are rarely murdered in the suburbs. Children and young adults account for the bulk of murder victims in NY City and other urban areas.""

You wrote:

"That's not factually true and I can back it up with statistics."

Oh. If my claim is not "factually true", then you are contending that my claim is "unfactually true", whatever that means. Your logic will show the same effects of torture as your word usage.

You wrote:

"As for average and below average kids being in better hands in the suburban schools, I have to assume that you know more than I do, as rarely does the apple fall far from the tree."

There is some truth to your statement. In other words, there are very few violent criminals born and bred in the suburbs because very few violent felon parents live and breed children in the suburbs.

Posted by: guest at September 17, 2007 5:09 PM

"there are very few violent criminals born and bred in the suburbs because very few violent felon parents live and breed children in the suburbs"

Yep, there are no violent felons in the suburbs... on ROCK CANDY MOUNTAIN!

Reality check on Aisle 9, please.

Posted by: guest at September 17, 2007 6:39 PM

kuroko, you wrote:

"Darien, CT Demographic breakdown:

Your numbers are close enough. Virtually no blacks. Almost no hispanics except in the case of those who are married to a white spouse. Some Asians in the community as a result of high educational and professional achievement.

You wrote:

"Good for you if you are raising your children in this wealthy and white bubble."

I was born in Manhattan and went to junior high school and high school in Darien.

You wrote:

"I left a community just like this to raise my son in a place with a much broader social experience."

Darien and other affluent towns like it do not breed prejudice. Life in these towns may do little to end bias and prejudice in other parts of the country and the world, but these towns are not sources of prejudice.

You wrote:

"When you want to compare apples to apples I'll respond further."

You're the guy who said you would prove that life in the city was "safer" than life in the suburbs. Now you're establishing conditions of equivalence. But your conditions cannot be met, and you know that.

The fact that the suburbs are substantially white is the defining characteristic of suburban towns and precisely why they are safer places to live than cities.

You wrote:

"I am assuming that you know it well because perhaps this is where your were raised."

Yes. But before living in Darien my family lived in two other similar suburban towns -- one on Long Island and the other outside Chicago.

You wrote:

"If so, is it a wonder that you have deep prejudices?"

In my life I have been shot at -- by hispanics; attacked and slashed with a knife by a black burglar in my own place; attacked on the street by a black gang; broken up an attack on a man being mugged by a gang of hispanics; and I have had many other adventures of a similar nature. All the fun occurred in cities. None of it in Darien, CT.

However, the father of one of my closest friends was murdered in his house in Darien by a black intruder. The killer is serving a life sentence in CT. He was from a neighboring city.

You asked:

"Curious to know if you actually live in the city."

I lived in Manhattan for a number of years, then moved to Windsor Terrace. Now I live on the other side of Prospect Park.

You asked:

"Have children?"

Two boys, both in public schools.

Posted by: guest at September 18, 2007 2:01 PM

kuroko, you wrote:

"We could debate for years about whether or not places like Darien breed racism or not."

If you are familiar with "Gentleman's Agreement" a novel by Laura Hobson made into a movie starring Gregory Peck, you would know that Darien was once considered a haven of anti-Semitism. However, to think Darien was alone in this sentiment one would have to ignore the fact that many many hotels, co-ops and apartment buildings in NY City were "restricted" -- in other words, no Jews allowed -- well into the 1970s, and there are still co-ops in NYC with boards unwilling to admit Jews. Darien is over it.

You wrote:

"Our experience is that for lack of diversity of backgrounds and circumstances, you inherently are more prejudice. Fear of the unknown."

Fear of the unknown? Are you kidding? We're talking about a town of people who have seen more of the world by the time they graduate from high school than most people see in a lifetime. Parents in Darien are well aware of the value of worldliness and getting outside the safety of the affluent enclave when it comes to college admissions. These kids are spending some time working -- often volunteering -- in poor neighborhoods in nearby cities like Bridgeport.

It's an admirable bunch that has graduated from Darien High over the last couple of decades. Plenty of DHS grads attend college in cities where they rub shoulders with pretty much everyone. There's always a few who are accepted to the military service academies or fund college with money from ROTC or simply enlist.

Of course there's a few who develop some prejudices against blacks and others. But, as the local crime statistics show, virtually no bias crimes are committed by Darien residents.

You wrote:

"Comparing apples to apples, I know that a community comprised of an equivalent demographic taken from New York City would compare to the achievement levels in Darien which are admittedly quite impressive (94% HS graduation rate). Perhaps the population that sends their children to Dalton (www.dalton.org)."

There are more blacks at Dalton than Darien High. In any case, if you want to slice the pie to match the 10028 zip code with 06820, well, okay.

You wrote:

"Cities are inherently more safe DESPITE increased crime levels for one reason: We don't drive."

Now you are making crime equal to car accidents. However, even on this count, you're claim fails. While it is true that suburban kids do manage to kill themselves driving irresponsibly after drinking, it is also true that city drivers nail pedestrian kids.

Furthermore, your claim that "We don't drive" is laughable. All those cars clogging every street in this city are not a product of my imagination. Queens Boulevard is known as the Avenue of Death in certain stretches. A Marine just back from Iraq was killed two days ago when he crashed his motorcycle on the Belt Parkway and was run over by his buddy who was following him.

About the time I moved out of Windsor Terrace the son of my neighbor was killed on E 19th just off the exit from the Prospect Expressway. He was walking along the street when a car nailed him.

You claimed:

"This fact significantly lowers mortality rates. That's why it is a safer place to raise your boys."

The claim is phony.

You wrote:

"Yes, NYC has more guns, but they have more swimming pools and cars."

NYC has more guns, it has plenty of public swimming pools and a huge number of cars, many of which are uninsured and driven by people who are unlicensed.

To my knowledge there were no drownings in pools in either NYC or Darien this year. However, there were a couple of drownings at city beaches.

And a good number of fatal accidents occurred at construction sites in NYC this year.

You wrote:

"I would also argue that by raising your children in a more complex and challenging social environment you will make them safer going forward by preparing them for anything/everything."

I happen to believe that living in Brooklyn, which, in my view, is the most diverse diverse place in the world, adds something to the lives of kids raised here. But the risk of dangerous encounters is very real in NYC, as I know from experience.

Posted by: guest at September 18, 2007 10:37 PM

how'd we get from joking about condos near a cemetary and a funny looking broker to this?

Posted by: guest at September 19, 2007 8:27 AM

I hate to distract everyone from this Darien v. Brooklyn pissing match, but I'm still a little shocked that people would consider being across from Green-wood Cemetary to be a negative.

Aside from the generic benefits of being across from a cemetary - you won't lose your views, and the neighbors sure are quiet - Green-wood is absolutely gorgeous. I'll admit that the McDonald side isn't as lush as the areas further west, and unfortunately the prettiest part is across 36th street from a bus depot, but it's still a lovely green view.

I just don't get the idea of cemetaries as creepy. Death is a fact of life, and the idea that we, or loved ones (or at least our earthly remains) could spend eternity in a pleasant green landscape is comforting to me. A lot has been written about how we as a society have eliminated death from view. People used to die at home, now it's in a hospital or nursing home. With infant mortality, infectious diseases, and the dangers of childbirth, death wasn't the near-exclusive province of the elderly. And of course landscaped cemetaries like Green-wood were very popular picnic spots in the early- and mid-nineteenth century, and were the inspiration for public parks like Central Park.

Obviously I'm all for living a long and healthy life, but to shun cemetaries is what I find 'creepy.'

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 2:11 PM