House of the Day: 216 14th Street

Good comparison to yesterday's HOTD, no?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 1:53 PM

It's too high based on comps--I'll dig em'up and be back...

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 1:58 PM

Agree with 1.3. Maybe 1.25. They should price it right and get out of it. How much could they have spent on the reno? Up to but not more than 100k?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:01 PM

once union market opens (on 7th and 14th) in a couple weeks, the value goes up another 100K.

sorry...but that's a pretty major addition to this part of the neighborhood.

it will have officially arrived.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:09 PM

like the kitchen cabinets. anyone know who made them? custom? ikea?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:14 PM

"once union market opens (on 7th and 14th) in a couple weeks, the value goes up another 100K."

That's hysterical! Good one.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:16 PM

gosh, they could easily have spent more than 100K altho i don't really know.

i'd look at the basement too. i used to live bet. 4/5 and it floods like hell.

need really good pits, sump pumps and shelves to keep stuff off the ground.

what is the going psf price for that area?

if you rent out the apt, i'm assuming 800 sq. foot per floor, so that's 1600 sq feet of living space? it's condo sized at that amount.

i'd look at condo prices in better areas to compare this too.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:17 PM

Nice. Sigh.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:17 PM

no way this goes for 1.3. even though I personally don't dig the way the duplex is laid out, a young family looking for rental income and no reno will snap this up. there is a premium for move-in ready. 1.4 at least.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:17 PM

normally I would say that the days of flipping places for that kind of profit are over, but that is a damn nice renovation, and I can see the right buyer coming along and snatching this up.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:19 PM

Uh, this is on 4th Avenue. Veeery far from 7th. Veeery far from the park. Veeery far from $1.65M.

I'd pay, let's see, about $1,150,000 for this. The renovate-&-flip was a stupid decision here.

All you bulls can spout off as much as you want about how the RE market never goes down, but even the bulls have to admit that a 6-month 50%-appreciation flip-job on 4th & 14th is simply not in the cards. It probably would have worked in 2003, or 2004, or even 2005. But 2007 is simply a different market. Even if it's still a rising market, it's not the market this guy thinks it is.

Buyers being the lemmings that they are, they won't try to undercut the asking price too much. There will be a couple pricechops and then it will sell 5 months from now, for 1.3 or 1.4.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:25 PM

In that part of the Slope, no way!

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:36 PM

Lousy location and overpriced... you could take the same money and buy the 3BR on Montague St. that everyone was kvetching about a few days ago.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:38 PM

This appears to be a really nice renovation, great outdoor space and great detail throughout but I would be interested to see the size of the two small bedrooms on the top floor. They look tiny on the floor plan and with no pictures, I wonder if you could even fit a small bed in either of them? The location next to 4th Ave. isn't the best either. I think probably $1.3 to $1.4 tops.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:39 PM

There was a place that sold on 13th between 3rd and 4th for 1MM recently, and it was in very poor shape, but also brick like this one. There was a place on 12th between 4th and 4th that was brick and went for over 1MM recently with corcoran, and it was in poor shape. I still think 1.3 is a going rate kind of price for this place. Someone might pay more. Certainly not 1.6, though. This is for people who aren't wealthy enough to buy a house on their own, but hope that in a few years they can get rid of the renter when they're doing a little better. None of the 2-3MM houses in the slope make sense for rental income/occupier models anymore.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:40 PM

This is a nice renovation, Move in condition, someone will bite. too bad about the location...

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:41 PM

why is this more money than the flip job on President for 1.4mm?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:45 PM

2:38...most people if given the opportunity would buy a house instead of a 3 bedroom if they are the same price.

that's why the south slope has become so insanely popular. it's nice...these homes down here are what are keeping a lot of young families happy enough to stay in the city instead of defect to the suburbs.

brooklyn heights is nice. but it's also stuffy and a bit conservative.

some of the more liberal, funky and artsy mided people would much prefer a house like this than a stodgy 3 bedroom in the heights.

i know i know. rant away...

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:52 PM

$850K.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 2:52 PM

So it's a 1400 sq ft duplex with a deck and garden with a 700 sq ft rental which might get $2,500 per month. If you could maybe get $5,000 per month for the duplex then the return is $90,000 less say $8,000 in taxes, insurance and misc costs) = $82,000. At a 7% return that puts the value at just under $1.2m.

Why is it worth anymore than that?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:24 PM

Nice reno, but I think this overly optimistic price is due to the fact that they seriously overpaid when they bought at the top of the bubble market.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:26 PM

I smell a bidding war.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:35 PM

2.45 more money than President St because President st is such a narrow place, and a poorly done flip. This looks nice, is much wider and has a real back yard

3.24 More money because people will pay a premium to own on the basis that there could be future capital growth. A 30% premium seems almost cheap.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:35 PM

that is a nice house. I think even with the reno, its a bit steep given the location.

What is the public school? is it good enough to warrant that price?????

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:39 PM

I smell false hope.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:54 PM

question: in the history of this blog, has there every been a property featured where more than 50% of the poster did not think it was "way overpriced"?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:55 PM

Good luck trying to finance this. In this market, banks are going to be very skeptical of a house that went up $500,000 in 6 months.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:58 PM

PS 295 is very good under the radar school.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:58 PM

3:55

no.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 3:59 PM

3:55: no of course not.

But has the market changed just a BIT since June do you perhaps think (bear in mind they would have had to pull the trigger earlier than June, perhaps in spring, when everything was just awesome).

Typically if someone does a lot of work to a place I suppose they make almost double back because people will always pay a premium to avoid the hassle. But the market sentiment & therefore market has definitely fallen since spring. Going sideways in price wouldn't make any sense given all the crap that has happened and is still happening. I mean today Bush is having to spend time from harassing Iran to give an actual national SPEECH to reassure the hordes facing the possibility of foreclosure! Unprecedented, I think? Is the south south slope really totally immune? I don't see how.

I've no doubt there are still some greater fools who think the slope can at worst go sideways & would buy @ the prices of last spring, but to snag one of these dumb fish is getting harder by the month.

So if they paid 1.150m and put 150k into it, take off a conservative 10% for post june depreciation in sentiment and add back 300k of (optimistic) renovation value, and you get about, uh, maybe 1.3m?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 4:08 PM

sure, it's a house, but 1400 sq. feet in that location is not great. you can certainly do better in a condo, more space for that money in a way way better spot. whether you think of a condo as a "home" is dependent on the actual space. our condo is significantly larger, nicer, in a better area, and cheaper than this, plus we have better outdoor space.

need to look at several listings and evaluate.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 4:39 PM

you're also much more modest than this house, 4:39.

always a nice amenity.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 4:50 PM

This price stinks, for a so-so place in a marginal neighborhood. South Slope is the new Crown Heights for sellers with delusions of grandeur.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 5:11 PM

Comparing South Slope to Crown Heights is like apples and oranges.

It shows how little you know about both neighborhoods.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 5:46 PM

True. Most of the buildings are nicer in Crown Heights.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 6:22 PM

Not commenting on the neighborhoods themselves, commenting on seller's that are full of themselves (which the two might share in common).

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 6:25 PM

I'd pay $1.6 million for it ......

If I had money to throw away.

I'll give you $2.50 for it. Deal?

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 6:32 PM

Wow, I'm surprised that people are guessing $100,000 for the renovation. Did they see it before? The reason I ask is we have a 20-footer we'd like to renovate from a duplex, 2 rentals to a garden apartment and triplex, and this actually looks like a pretty good layout to me. But we are getting estimates of $800,000 - $1 million to do it. Hey, if I could get this quality of work for $300,000 I would be thrilled. And we already updated the electricity and plumbing, and 2 floors. So I'm not seeing where someone can spend $100,000 and get this.

I have no idea how much this should go for, and I don't like the location, but renovation costs seem to be through the roof these days and I think someone would be fortunate to get their renovation costs back once they sell, at least that's what I'm seeing. I only wish it weren't so.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 7:11 PM

I don't see anything wrong with the facade or the interior, but when it comes to the price - I don't think so. Of course the market couldn't care less what I think, so if someone wants to pay it, then there you go, it's worth it because all it takes is one interested buyer. As for what it was bought for or when - not relevant, really. A high asking price in a flip is a funny thing, if they negotiate down the buyer feels like they got a deal, and the seller still makes a big return. Well, we'll see how they do....

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 7:13 PM

This block is so far over I can't even picture it. It is in the outskirts of Park Slope but not even in the better fringe area.
I'm drawing a blank. I can't believe anyone would pay this price for living in that location. They would be the richest people ever to set foot on that block much less to live there.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 7:46 PM

8:50 - which is why we got out to the more refined and established Cobble Hill area (and plus it's so much closer to Manhattan)

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 9:24 PM

yeah, i like cobble hill as well.

park slope, cobble hill, ft. greene, brooklyn heights, carroll gardens...all really terrific neighborhoods. love em all.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 9:39 PM

I saw this house at an open house about a month ago (maybe longer, it's lingered a bit), when it was priced at about 1.879 - they've already lowered the price twice. The realtor explained the owners make a living by flipping houses. I will give them some credit - they did a nice job, and used the space well. But there are a few problems no renovation, no matter how nice, can disguise. Chief among them is that this is a really yucky block. Many of the houses seem to be aluminum siding teardowns and I suspect this will lead to a lot of future condo construction and who wants to live among that? Plus, it's really close to 4th Ave, which has a long way to go. Secondly, the house is only 35' deep. While the yard is nice, in my opinion, it's more worth it to have 5-15' more of house, and still have 50-60' garden. Also, while there are technically 4 bedrooms upstairs, the 2 smaller ones are *really* small. As for the school, it is PS 124, not one of the popular ones for folks seeking to live in PS (321, 39, and 107 are the main ones). If this house were priced at 1.3, possibly even 1.4, I might consider it - but even at that price, the location is a major downside. The reality in NYC is that even 1-2 blocks make a huge difference, and this just happens to be, sadly, one of the crappier south slope blocks. I agree with the poster who pointed out that the owners did not play this right since they bought at top of the bubble and were overly optimistic, and now buyers are getting pickier as there is more of a "wait and see" attitude with the market uncertainty. Maybe this will sell, but only because inventories are low.

Posted by: guest at December 6, 2007 10:26 PM

it will not sell

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 9:05 AM

So many posters on this blog (or is it just a few?) are completely oblivious to location. They look at pretty pictures of spruced up parlors and forget where the house is situated. The very very very first thing a buyer with options looks at is the location. This house has a very poor location. I don't care if the neighborhood is diverse or artsy, it is a lousy, declasse location.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 10:11 AM

people pay a million bucks for bed stuy and crown heights.

this area, while a little rough around the edges is WORLDS better than most of either of those neighborhoods. this is nicer than parts of clinton hill, in my opinion and homes have been going there for 2-3 million bucks.

for that reason, i don't find the price offensive.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 10:50 AM

A house and location like this is what Brooklyn is all about.

A nice old home, diverse neighbors, shops and restaurants out your doorstep and a little grit.

I think it's a fantastic house.

1.4 million will seal the deal.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 11:01 AM

I'm familiar with this block and I live several blocks north. The block isn't a total turnoff, in my opinion. It's a bit ragtag, but 5th Ave beyond 9th Street is slowly coming around. We're going to out grow our co-op soon and I keep my eye out for smallish houses in the south slope with rental income like this one. While it is nicely renovated, the school district and the 2 tiny bedrooms are real challenges. It also seems far outside the typical, and I'd expect it to be listed in the 1.3-4 range, as others have noted. For us, school district makes this much less appealing as we're zoned for 39 now and are looking forward to going there. That said, I'll probably pop into the open house just to see how "tiny" those 2 bedrooms really are.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 11:21 AM

wah, wah, wah. I wish things were cheaper. I can't believe these houses are so expensive. I can't affort them. I hate when people ask more then they deserve for property. Real estate markets try bilk people. wah, wah, wah

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 11:48 AM

In the current credit market one needs to have solid creds to get a mortgage. That leaves out a lot of folks who may have been willing to overpay to live on a so-so block as long as they paid no principal or whatever for twenty years.
I see a major price adjustment coming.
And in blocks like this one, forget it!
Solid people are looking for something kind of nice. you don't want your friends to be revolted by your block after you paid OVER A MILLION DOLLARS to live there.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 1:04 PM

so i guess no one in crown heights or bed stuy have company, 1:04??

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 1:11 PM

Why aren't developers building family-sized apartments? With all the new construction out there, I still don't see the places that everyone I know needs.This house and this discussion just makes me think of how much demand there is for family-sized dwellings in Brooklyn. Why is no one filling the niche and answering the call of the marketplace? It seems strange to me.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 2:46 PM

Most sane people with families move to the suburbs where the children will grow up surrounded by trees and lawns rather than used syringes and last night's vomit.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 2:59 PM

richard meier's on prospect park, 2:46.

nice family sized apartments.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 3:00 PM

2:59 -- Sane or insane, syringes or no, the demand is there in Brooklyn. (And some mommies and daddies become insane only after they move to the burbs. And this isn't so good for the kids.)

3:00 -- What are those three-bedrooms going for though?

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 3:14 PM

3 bedrooms at on prospect park are 3 million ish i think.

beyonce bought 4 floors.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 3:27 PM

OK, I stand corrected, any sane person who cannot afford a 3-million dollar 3-bedroom apartment moves to the suburbs and the perhaps when the kids are grown will downsize to a nice lux apartment in the city.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 4:05 PM

the suburbs are for losers.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 4:35 PM

But see what I mean? No one can really come up with an answer. The Brooklyn market really does fail families who can afford to pay 1 to 1.3(maybe 1.4 with a rental) for a home. That's a lot of dough, but it gets you nothing. Grumble, grumble,I know.

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 6:17 PM

Right, the suburbs are for loser as opposed to brookln which is reserved for the creme-de-la-creme. Do you even know how ludicrous you sound?

Posted by: guest at December 7, 2007 7:26 PM

"The Brooklyn market really does fail families who can afford to pay 1 to 1.3(maybe 1.4 with a rental) for a home."

Never heard of Kensington and Ditmas Park? Lots of large apartments for WAY under that price. Free-standing homes too.

Posted by: guest at December 8, 2007 12:25 PM

I am buying properties in PS for quit sometimes.
I was bidding on this one when it was listed for 925K, in May, than the market was hot and some greedy blind investors got this one for 200K above the asking price, now they will eat it. They put may be 100k into it. This house
ain't worth more than 1.1. I recently bought a better one in a much better location in Center Slope for 1.3M.

Posted by: guest at December 9, 2007 12:06 AM

looks like the seller lowered the price to 1.595 from 1.65, 55k less.

Posted by: guest at December 31, 2007 12:47 PM