The Argyle Follows 4th Avenue Pricing Pattern

Argyle is too late - the Fourth Avenue boom is already losing steam. If this gets built, it will go rental.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 10:51 AM

i cant afford those so no it will not fly.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 10:54 AM

I think the prices are quite good for what looks to be an above average building.

They will grab some of the younger crowd from Manhattan looking to settle into something before the next recession, which looks to be fast approaching.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 10:54 AM

While $800 per foot will be a bit tough, they will ABSOLUTELY sell at 750 and below. The real question is how long can and will the sponsor try and hold out for top prices? It's a race and the developer who comes in last will be the one taking the $650 per foot offers.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 10:58 AM

Three or four years from now when this thing is finally finished, Manhattan condo prices will have dropped so much that none of those alleged couples will need to move out to Brooklyn.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:00 AM

its no jcondo, but not bad for south brooklyn

josephine

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:05 AM

I hope it flies to continue the building along 4th but I am curious what objective evidence do you (10:51) have to support the comment that 4th Ave construction is losing steam...it certainly doesnt seem that way to me but I wouldnt really know whats in (or not in) the pipeline for 3yrs from now.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:06 AM

Of course they'll sell. I live down the block, and I'm getting the hell out before they come for our building.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:06 AM

that's rational, 11:06.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:20 AM

First of all, "The Argyle", "It looks good on you". Are these people serious? Does Corcoran actually applaud themselves for coming up with this garbage? Did the developer actually say to himself "hmm, I think that's really clever". That is the worst thing I have ever seen.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:28 AM

The Argyle Park Slope is not in Park Slope

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:36 AM

Off course these will sell, you nay sayers need to wise up. This market in nyc is strong the naysers probably can't afford to live here anyway and don't want to get pushed out. I say move to Newark for a good deal

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:42 AM

The 13-month-long decline in home prices in 20 major U.S. cities accelerated in August, with prices dropping a record 0.7% in the month, according to the Case-Shiller price index released Tuesday by Standard & Poor's Corp... Here are the year-over-year nominal price changes for the 20 cities covered by the index: New York, down 3.8%

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:47 AM

7th street and 4th Ave is not Park Slope. Why is it being advertised as Park Slope? Are they selling now two years before it is built? I say wait 2 or 3 years and buy it at $400 -$500 per sq foot.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:05 PM

11:47 for what relevance are you offering that information?

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:07 PM

what neighborhood is it?

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:08 PM

It's Gowanus.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:11 PM

Even better. Gowanus is going to be one of the hottest new neighborhoods in Brooklyn.

Any idiot knows it's better to buy in an up and coming area if you want the chance to make more money in your investment.

These are a great deal considering what Gowanus will look like in 10-15 years.

In 2 years it will be completed...just in time for it to be a 5 minute walk from Whole Foods.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:15 PM

I like how the rendering shows a nice cafe with awning on the corner building, when in actuality it's a disgusting bodega that will stay that way for a long time.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:19 PM

12:05 hit the nail on the head. The Argyle is NOT in park slope, and I would never pay over $450 per sq foot for that area!!

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:20 PM

GOWANUS!!!!!!!!

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:20 PM

Tree lined 4th Avenue? Nice try.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:21 PM

I heard that place was horribly contaminated from the old auto parts place that was there for ever. Buy now PAY!!! later. Nothing wrong with a little pollution in the ground water.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:23 PM

Hey Dumbasses! Read this!

Defaults on Insured Home Mortgages Rise 22 Percent

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a3R2.tp.sTyc&refer=home

BTW There are some BAD things going on. Wall Street can't hide the losses any longer. BOOM!

The What

Someday this war is gonna end................

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:24 PM

I used to buy drugs in the building next door. Probably still can. Maybe the developer wants to offer the services to buyers?

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:25 PM

Gowanus is and will remain toxic. There isn't sufficient political will in this city to sufficiently clean it up. Caveat emptor.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:26 PM

Fuck The What.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:30 PM

For the person who wanted evidence of a 4th Ave slowdown: http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2007/10/glassy_4th_ave.php

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 12:31 PM

The City seems to think it's in Park Slope:

http://home2.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/parkslope/park1agr.shtml

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:04 PM

It's Gowanus! No! It's Park Slope! Most of you are schmucks!! If you base your buying decisions on what the area is referred to, then you have no vision and no idea what the hell you are doing so don't buy anywhere. Lincoln Center was one of Manhattan's worst neighborhoods for many years. Now look at it. Battery Park City didn't exist 25 years ago; it was part of the Hudson River. You have to look past what you think you know and see and try to imagine.
Bottom line: if people are wiling to pay $800 per foot to live on 7th and 4th Ave, then guess what? It's worth $800 per foot!!

Price = the point where supply meets demand. period.

Go rent in Bushwick if you don't see any value here.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:06 PM

12:31 - how is a listing for a development site with a price of over $225 a salable sq ft evidence of slowdown???

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:09 PM

Again, neighborhoods and their names do not have 'technical' boundaries and they are not 'technical' entities.
Don't be so rigid and anal - that you have to call one side of 4th avenue one neighborhood and the other side something else. You sound like know-it-alls and obsessive and real pain in the butt to live with.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:11 PM

i was wondering the same thing, 1:09.

some people will literally say ANYTHING to try to convince people that buying a home to live in is a good decision.

it's absurd.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:13 PM

i mean, convince people it is NOT a good decision.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:16 PM

there is NO SUCH NEIGHBORHOOD AS GOWANUS!!!

you people are nuts

go buy a brooklyn industries t-shirt

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:18 PM

Serious question.

Why does the idea of 4th Avenue becoming more residential--and just maybe a little cleaner and more attractive than an auto-garage strip--piss so many people off?

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:19 PM

i just wish it was cheaper

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:22 PM

I'll take a stab at that 1:19...

It's because there are a lot of bitter people in this city who would have liked to own a home and and have some assemblance of stability with regard to their finances.

As people saw lots of people making a ton of money on their investments over the past 7 years, the hatred has continued to build as they stood on the sidelines.

NOW...they see that people are starting to buy up properties along 4th Avenue...certainly a stretch that could use some TLC, but the prices are still rather high...you know...cause this is New York City.

So imagine all the hatred for being priced out of Park Slope, Carroll Gardens, Prospect Heights, Dumbo, etc.

And NOW they can't even afford 4th Avenue because they've thrown all their money into their landlords pockets, who is now so loaded he's buying up land on 4th Avenue and selling it to developers for millions of dollars.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:24 PM

12:31,

Your link is not evidence of a slowdown. In fact, the bottom of the post insinuates that the 4th Avenue takeoff might take longer, not that is has run its course.

This reminds me of Norman Oder, who often uses his own previous posts to "prove" his claims.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:26 PM

1.19;

I'm with you. Many of these 4th Ave posts have become so tedious, let by Brownstoner himself. Apparently Brownstoner believes that it's a disgrace that every development going up on 4th Ave isn't an architectural masterpiece. Hey Brownstoner: take a look at the multitude of glazed white brick buildings built in Manhattan during the 60's. While none of these will ever be considered a masterpiece, their presence has not impaired the development of that borough. Knock it off already about 4th Ave. If you don't like the developments, don't buy into them. Others will choose differently.

Benson

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:26 PM

i'll add on to 1:24

also hatred from browstone/touwnhouse owners who now have to live amongst and share their precious 321 school with people "beneath them" who will live in these "unsightly" buildings

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:28 PM

1:19 - because people

1. Are often scared of change

2. Are often envious of

a-things they can't afford
b-other people making a profit on an opportunity they missed

3. often just like to complain

4. are often short-sited and have limited understanding of economics

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:29 PM

actually, 12:19, i believe they're depicting that disgusting bodega as some sort of balducci's-style greengrocer. check the carefully arranged produce on display. also note that the green awning stretches to encompass the four story apt. building next door (which is for sale, incidentally).

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:40 PM

There is no reason to believe that in two years time, the bodega will be gone, and there WILL be some sortof nice Greengrocer there.

Are you all this stupid...really???

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:42 PM

1:42 -- Does the bodega owner own the building?

If not, hmmm... yuppies buying condos at $700/sf next door... new gigantic buildings going up for blocks and blocks around... hey, that lease is up, isn't it?... hmm think think think $ $ $...

Vaya con dios, senor bodegabodega!

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:47 PM

If the bodega owner goes out of buisness (even if his rent goes up then he is simply a bad merchant.
A massive increase in the numbers of immediate local residents (what 10-20x?) as well as probably an equal increase in median income should make the bodega a very profitable grocer...

unless

merchant is like many who will invest nothing in his store and will not improve the inventory or cleanliness to attract new customers and instead spend his days bemoaning change, rising rents and the good old days when it you could make a buck converting food stamps into cash, selling cheap beer and malt liquor and selling untaxed cigarettes

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 1:58 PM

I've noticed the for sale sign on the building next store. I imagine it must contain rent stabilized tenants who refuse to be bought out, otherwise wouldn't the Argyle developers have bought it as well, not to mention the shady bodega building on the corner? Seems the likely explanation for the weird L shape.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:13 PM

So, everybody complaining about the complainers, what would you suggest? We're all just supposed to praise the Argyle and go on and on about how great it is?

Sorry, no. It's ugly. Doesn't fit the neighborhood. (I don't care if you think the neighborhood is ugly or not.) And overpriced, in my opinion.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:18 PM

2:13: We went through that house (the blue one they painted to white, right?) when they had an open house. The owner is asking $2.2 million, developers wouldn't pay. Hence the paint.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:19 PM

You can all it Park Slope, but anyone who wants Park Slope ambience will not be intersted. Borderline neighborhoods like this are hardest hit in a downturn. you are most likely able to pick up something in one of these buidlings at a very deep discount! It will takwe the end of another r/e uptunr (11 year cycles?) before these are really mainstream.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:32 PM

"The owner is asking $2.2 million"

Did that include the payouts to get rid of the existing tenants?

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:45 PM

maybe whole foods will cram themselves into the bodega (since their current, toxic site will remain forever toxic....)!!

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:49 PM

2:18 -- You think it's ugly, fine. But "doesn't fit the neighborhood"? What would "fit" the present 4th Avenue? Something beautiful would stick out like a sore thumb.

What do you want?

I understand people who say they wouldn't want to live on 4th Avenue as it is... what I don't get are the people who wouldn't want to live there, and yet don't want it to change, either.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:52 PM

Whole Foods should have bought the Staples site.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:56 PM

2:52: I live there. I'd like to see buildings that are a little more in line with the current buildings, not some glass-and-metal monstrosity towering over everything. It sticks out like a sore thumb.

"Something beautiful" would be fine, but can you honestly say that building is beautiful? I can't.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 2:59 PM

A tire-change shop would be more in line with the current buildings. You want a nice tire-change shop?

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 3:06 PM

3:06: Bye bye! Have fun in your "beautiful" shiny overpriced glass condo.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 3:10 PM

3:10 -- good luck with the impending rent increase on your dumpy rental!

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 3:32 PM

2:52 - when 4th Ave is built to the current zoning none of these 12 story buildings will stick out.

The zoning was changed along 4th Ave (a non-residential 8 lane thoroughfare) to balance the need for more housing versus the desire to maintain the historical context of the surrounding (residential neighborhoods).

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 3:46 PM

And keep in mind that 4th Avenue is 1 freakin block to 5th avenue, which is just about the best place to eat/shop/drink in Brooklyn these days.

You are paying for proximity to a lot of really great stuff that Park Slope proper has to offer.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 3:52 PM

It seemed as though there was a major construction accident there last week. I'm surprised it wasn't reported anywhere.

Firetrucks and 2 ambulances. I saw one guy on a gurney, and another one gurney waiting.

It's just a matter of time before the inflatable rat comes to visit.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 3:53 PM

Sorry I meant to refer to 2:59's comment

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 3:53 PM

No rat - its a union job

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 3:54 PM

Overpriced. Who wants to look over cars speeding down 4th avenue?

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 4:53 PM

a tire change shop would be nice. the closest one is at 10th st. and 3rd ave. too damn far!

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 5:06 PM

I can't sleep. Too much noise from sharks being jumped.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 5:45 PM

"Your link is not evidence of a slowdown. In fact, the bottom of the post insinuates that the 4th Avenue takeoff might take longer"

Isn't that THE VERY DEFINITION of a slowdown?

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 6:06 PM

Get a job What

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 7:52 PM

Firstly there is a stop work order for undermining the existing property. The developer doesn't have a clue. has the worst marketing campaign. Who in their right mind, in this market, is going to put a down payment on a property that will probably take 3 years to close on that is asking prices that are at the top of the market???? Generally there is a real discount to buying pre-construction, what the hell is the point here? To earn less than 1% on your down payment while it sits in escrow forever?? Are they going to walk prospective buyers from their very ugly storefront sales office, 7 blocks all the way across 4th Ave to show them a site with the undermined foundations of the neighbors? There is sooo much product that is better priced in a better location that doesn't have a shitty marketing campaign. Corcoran has really shot themselves in the foot with this one, I would be ashamed!!

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 8:33 PM

their sales office looks quite nice actually.

you sound like one of the most bitter human beings on the planet, 8:33.

where is all the better priced, better quality product for people who want to be near/in park slope.

i'd love to see it.

it is so clear you are a non-corcoran broker...you might want to try to be a little less transparent next post...

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 9:13 PM

Still plenty of available units in Crest and Novo. Neither of them are finished either, but at least they've got a three year head start.

That said, I wouldn't buy in them either.

Posted by: guest at October 31, 2007 11:54 PM

wow. nothing but posts from desperate/bored brokers here. this place sucks. i had originally scheduled a tour, but skipped it once i figured out where the place was. not interested at any price. it is in gowanus and you have to cross a highway to get into PS. it is filthy and dangerous. that would all be ok if these were a true bargain, but they are priced for their "potential", which i think is overly optimistic. slowdown is already here. most of the closings in other 4th ave buildings happened with financing from before Aug/Sept. this is going to be ugly.

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 9:38 AM

building looks decent - better than boymeltrash. They will have no problem selling this. Could be better though

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 11:04 AM

They will have no problems? Who are you and what are you reading bob the broker?

Posted by: guest at November 1, 2007 9:37 PM