« Co-op of the Day: Another One at 24 Monroe Place Streetlevel: Olivino Part Deux Opens in Bed Stuy »

September 24, 2007

House of the Day: 1407 Dorchester Road

When we first highlighted it as an Open House Pick back in May, the modest-sized house at 1407 Dorchester Road in Ditmas Park West was asking an ambitious $1,100,000. Almost five months later, the owners have lowered their sights and are now asking $950,000. We think the house has a nice vibe to it but don't know this block well enough to hazard a guess whether this price will fly. (Okay, we'll hazard a guess that the price is still too high.) There was an open house yesterday. Did anyone stop by?
1407 Dorchester Road [Mary Kay Gallagher] GMAP P*Shark
Open House Picks 5/4/07 [Brownstoner]

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/2306

Comments

That strip of Dorchester has a lot of traffic as it connects Ocean Ave to Coney Island Ave. There aren't enough lights so for the most part the cars/trucks are going way too fast. The house itself is very sweet and I know it'll make a nice home but I think a price of $820k would be far more reasonable. The area is still pretty 'hot' but you'd have to fall in love with this particular house to pay current asking.

Compare it to two adjacent corner properties off Ditmas Ave: 494 E 16th recently sold for $930k & 500 E 16th St recently sold for $899k. Both of these are larger homes on corner properties with big side yards (494's side yard is downright massive). Given how much smaller this house is in every way, $950 is crazy.

Posted by: tag482 at September 24, 2007 1:52 PM

The house is small and needs updating. I think the price is very high.

Posted by: morningbelle1 at September 24, 2007 2:00 PM

If those house on 16th are even numbers then that means they back onto the subway tracks. That would explain lower prices.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 2:19 PM

how is moving to ditmas any different than moving to west chester or new jersey?

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 2:32 PM

Despite the victorians, Ditmas Park is not suburban. It does not have a suburban "feel." It is very much Brooklyn and has a Brooklyn vibe. That is the difference between it and Jersey/Westchester.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 2:57 PM

Even at 950,000, it still looks a bit rich to me. Lots of sheetrock and little original detail, 27-foot wide lot (like the brownstones one presumably moves to Ditmas to get away from, this place must be ALL staircase), "cozy" living room and the whole place needs TLC.
For the Jersey/Westchester poster, there are similarities, to be sure--trees, yards, garages to park your car in--but there's much more of an urban vibe in Victorian Flatbush (indeed, sometimes said vibe rattles your windows at night). You're minutes by subway from Manhattan and a short drive or bike ride from the Slope. Most significant, IMO, there's a remarkable sense of community in Victorian Flatbush, perhaps because we all have something in common--hulking 100-year-old framehouses, all in various stages of deterioration. I don't see that in the burbs and didn't seee it in the Slope, where I lived quite happily for many years.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 3:36 PM

Stoner & readers:

The wife, infant and I checked out this house two weekends ago. Its very overpriced for what you get. It needs A LOT of updating, its on a very small plot of land and it doesn't have parking.

I expect that the Ditmas Park houses need updating, but the lack of a driveway and rear yard really add insult to injury on the price. Also, the exterior needs some work, it looks as some of those shingles had damage. My estimate is that it will cost $150-300k to get this house in tip-top shape. That, Ms. Mary K. Gallagher, who doesn't price anything under $1,000,000, should be considered on the price.

OK, Ditmas is nothing like Jersey. First of all, your auto will have New York Plates, your public schools will be crappier, and your commute to Manhattan will be faster & less expensive. Its nothing at all like Jersey, 'cept for the fact that they have old, big houses. Thats where it stops.

You may as well say that anything that isn't a brownstone may as well be Jersey or Westchester....that is ignorant.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 3:51 PM

I saw this house a couple of months ago when it was priced at $990K by a different broker. The house is small, with a very small backyard and no driveway/garage. It also needs a lot of work. If memory serves, there was some unfinished plaster/drywall work in the dining room, the house needed to be insulated as the top floor was brutally hot compared to the rest of the house, and though the broker claimed the kitchen was recently renovated in a "french country" style, I think it could use another overhaul. In my opinion, it should be priced in the low $800s.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 3:52 PM

Haven't been inside, but I walk passed often. The houses on this block are smaller than others in the neighborhood at under 1800 sq ft, the comps that tag 482 mentioned have lots and houses almost twice as wide as this one. The houses on the block are also strangely angled on the lots. Maybe of the history enthusiasts here could impart some info on why? The siding is the asbestos/asphalt shingle variety that shows some wear. Dorchester is a through street with more traffic than others in the area.

Despite the downs, I agree with Brownstoner that this house and the neighboring houses have a nice vibe, and the front gardens are tidy and seem to get care.

Ditmas Park (West) is a matter of taste from other parts of Brooklyn, but the difference between Westchester and Jersey is that it is very much in New York City. This address is one block from Buses, Shops, and three or four from the subway. Consider taxes of under $3,000 when comparing to outside NY.

Posted by: 1910 at September 24, 2007 4:03 PM

"how is moving to ditmas any different than moving to west chester or new jersey?"

Get over yourself. How is moving to BROOKLYN any different than moving to Westchester or New Jersey?

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 4:22 PM

Hell, for that matter, how is moving to Manhattan any different than moving to Westchester or New Jersey?

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 4:25 PM

Touché, 4:25. Touché.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 4:30 PM

God, even $800K for an 1800-sq. ft. place in Ditmas Park that needs a lot of work and has no yard seems absurdly high.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 5:55 PM

I saw the house:
small
needs renovating
cute
nice curb appeal
Price
825 tops!

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 9:16 PM

I saw the house:
small
needs renovating
cute
nice curb appeal
Price
825 tops!

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 9:18 PM

um, 4:22. Brooklyn is 100x cooler place to live than westchester or jersey.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 9:24 PM

I think Brownstoner should open up a betting line like the OTB.

Posted by: guest at September 24, 2007 9:50 PM

"Brooklyn is 100x cooler place to live than westchester or jersey."

LOL. This may be the way things "seem" from your blighted perspective, 9:24pm, but I assure you it's now how they seem from my coop in Soho.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 7:00 AM

How mcuh do the brokers pay to get their listings touted on this website?

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 7:08 AM

Coop in Soho -

Just curious - what's your interest in this blog? I wonder what's in it for those without some stake here. What's the attraction?

Posted by: Erin Joslyn at September 25, 2007 8:15 AM

As for the house - I wouldn't be surprised if it got ask or close to it, although it does lack some of the more appealing amenities of Victorian Flatbush (a driveway, a somewhat more tranquil location). It's also smaller than most houses out here - but I don't think that's a disadvantage for the seller. Smaller homes tend to sell more quickly and for more per square foot. There's just a larger pool of potential buyers in that price rang. Given the limited turnover in housing stock... who knows. I like the idea of placing bets, though.

Posted by: Erin Joslyn at September 25, 2007 8:19 AM

Erin--
I think you're a bit hard on SoHo co-op. S/He's just killing time before picking up his Grande macchiotto skim latte at S'Bucks and heading around the corner for the big fall sale at J-Crew.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 8:43 AM

Soho Coop here.

I own some rental properties in Brooklyn. I rent them to many losers like 9:24, who lack the metal to 'make it' in Manhattan but who spare no opportunity to berate the 'less cool' neighborhoods in Bklyn.

That's my 'stake' here. It's the reason (and most certainly the only reason) I read this pathetic excuse for a real estate blog.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 9:33 AM

Still not sure exactly what sort of info/insight you're coming here for... This site isn't really aimed at tenant or landlord issues, for the most part. Are you originally from Brooklyn?

As for making it in Manhattan. Congratulations. But I'm sure you know, a lot of people in Brooklyn pay as much or more for their homes as they would for a co-op in Soho. Or have cashed out of Manhattan to buy a house here. Sometimes people really do choose Brooklyn.

Posted by: Erin Joslyn at September 25, 2007 9:48 AM

I know they do and I have no problem with that. I just don't like it when people play the 'cool' card in order to belittle other places, especially since virtually any place can be 'trumped' in that game. The Brooklyner says "Oh, I'm too cool to live in Jersey"; the Manhattanite says "Oh, I'm too cool to live in Brooklyn; the Parisian says, "Oh, I'm too cool to live in Manhattan"...and on and on it goes, like some pathetic merry-go-round.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 10:03 AM

hey, Soho. 9:24 here. I think you've sufficiently proven that you're the "loser" here by your ridiculous statements.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 11:39 AM

And yet, I'm in Soho. You're not.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 1:25 PM

Yes, but is Soho the epicenter of the universe? Of New York, or Manhattan, even? Perhaps for you it is, but maybe not for 9:24. Certainly not for me. Maybe 9:24 wants to be in Gramercy Park or the West Village. Maybe they want to be in Fort Green or Boerum Hill. Or maybe right where they are, wherever that is.

Posted by: Erin Joslyn at September 25, 2007 4:18 PM

Alas, you're a tool and I'm not. You really sound like a caricature of someone who lives there. You also spelled "mettle" wrong, btw. And to quote an old street sticker from the 70s--"Soho sucks, bring back the trucks."

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 4:46 PM

Lol. No 4:46, you're not a tool. You merely aspire to be a tool.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 4:56 PM

Who lives in SoHo anymore? It's a collection of frame shops, chain stores and restaurants that haven't changed their menu since they opened in 1993--a tatty remnant of its former hip self.
There might be a few places in 212 that could tempt me out of 718--LES(!), parts of the Village, Tribeca, NoLita--but freakin' SoHo?
Hilarious.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 5:01 PM

Sour grapes are a bitch, huh.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 5:06 PM

Umm, the ones growing in my backyard are quite sweet this time of year.
So here's the thing: I REALLY wouldn't want to live in SoHo (though, as I readily mentioned there are places in Manhattan that I'd consider).
And I'm REALLY glad you wouldn't want to live in Brooklyn.
Cheers.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 5:14 PM

Sure you wouldn't. Thanks for the laugh.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 5:15 PM

At least they dropped it to under a mil, so that takes another 10k of mansion tax off for a buyer. I'm curious I don't see discussion of that. Seems stupid for the state to add a 1% / 10k penalty for people buying a very average house in NYC if they pay just over rather than just under a million. When the tax was passed a million could buy a mansion in Brooklyn. Not any more. A 2% tax on the difference between $1 million and the purchase price would make more sense.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 5:51 PM

Good point, 5:51; buyers of average houses in NYC paying a surcharge so that upstaters in $600,000 McMansions can send their kids to better schools!

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 6:01 PM

I wish I had a McMansion upstate. I've spent the last seven years living in an $800,000 crawl space in Park Slope.

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 7:17 PM

I agree...anyone know where the mansion tax came from or why it still exists?

Posted by: guest at September 25, 2007 9:06 PM

Soho is the coolest! It is still 1968, isn't it?

Posted by: guest at September 26, 2007 1:50 AM

Maybe brownstoner can start a forum thing on the mansion tax.
Re: "where the mansion tax came from or why it still exists?"
Like any tax, once it's in the law it's hard to get rid of it because you'd have to cut spending, tax someone else, or increase deficits. Like the AMT it was intended to tax the rich, but not indexed for inflation and now hitting more regular folks. Became state law in '89. I found that there is bill to amend it:
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A08534
"It maintains the current baseline level
for the triggering of the Mansion Tax at $1 million dollars, but
increases the baseline to $1.75 million for New York City."
That would be an improvement and help everyone buying houses between $1 mil and $1.75 mil NYC. My opinion is it should be progressive (tax the amount over x million by y %) rather taxing the whole amount if it's over the threshold. I don't know Albany politics but I think if Shelly Silver wanted this amendment to pass he could make it happen.
That would be an improvement and help everyone buying houses between $1 mil and $1.75 mil NYC. My opinion is it should be progressive (tax the amount over x million by y %) rather taxing the whole amount if it's over the threshold. I don't know Albany politics but I think if Shelly Silver wanted this amendment to pass he could make it happen.

Posted by: guest at September 26, 2007 12:25 PM

Sounds good to me....

Price is down to $899,000 no need for a mansion tax now. http://marykayg.com/html/0500.html

Posted by: guest at September 28, 2007 2:22 PM

Still sitting at $899k.

Still evidently overpriced.

Posted by: guest at November 20, 2007 2:19 PM