« Condo of the Day: 32 Berkeley Place, #3 StreetLevel: Sweet-Tooth War on Court Street »
March 27, 2008
House of the Day: 265 Hicks Street (Curb Cut and All!)
Hicks and Joralemon is a great location, that's for sure, but this four-story house at 265 Hicks is definitely sub-par for the neighborhood. The victim of a stoop castration and a not-so-hot re-bricking of the facade, the building was also divided into eight units at some point. The listing doesn't provide any interior photos, suggesting that there ain't much to show (a likely scenario given the subdivision in to multiple units.) The good news? The property will be delivered vacant. The listing for the corner lot also promotes the fact that approvals are already in place for a curb cut. That's sure to endear the new owner to the neighbors!
265 Hicks Street [Douglas Elliman] GMAP P*Shark
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/4342
Comments
What do we expect an investment in property to return. I work off 5% net and look for some capital appreciation. Each of the apts here need to return over 2100 to get near that.
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 2:07 PM
i'd love to know what was going through the heads of the people who altered it so horribly. What were they thinking for crying out loud.
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 2:11 PM
8 Units makes it a commercial property. Very different beast, in terms of lending and taxes.
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 2:14 PM
This is a typical messed-up Brooklyn Heights fleabag boarding house turned into a fleabag rent control multiple dwelling.
The Heights is full of these chopped-up Third World style buildings that date back to when the area had the cheapest rentals of any white, non-ethnic neighborhood in the city. There are still a bunch of these dives in the neighborhood including some with their historic fake brickface facades from the 1950's. The backyard here is out of Dogpatch, USA.
Posted by: sam at March 27, 2008 2:24 PM
"The Heights is full of these chopped-up Third World style buildings that date back to when the area had the cheapest rentals of any white, non-ethnic neighborhood in the city."
I remember those days. I was a reporter at the Brooklyn Heights Press then. The very notion that "Brownstone Brooklyn" would ever be a desirable place to live would be positively laughable to most of NYC at that time. Where did all of the broke white WASPs move away to, anyway?
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 2:33 PM
yea, thats quite a backyard. All its missing is a beat-up Chevy Cutlass, some rusty razor wire and a bunch of tin cans with holes shot in 'em.
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 2:43 PM
its missing a beat-up Cutlass and some razor wire
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 2:55 PM
its missing a beat-up Cutlass and some razor wire
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 2:57 PM
At least 95% of the posts on this site are from people who're logged in as
"guest". This means that someone reading the comments on this site will be
reading almost everything in faded type. Now, I understand why the faded
type is used for "guests". However, in my opinion it's not worth it.
The faded type is clearly legible, but over the long haul it is more
fatigue-inducing than regular, darker type. So, Mr. B, do you really want to
condemn your readership to slogging through so much faded type?
Just a thought. Again, I do understand why the faded type was introduced. I
just don't think it's worth it. You're shooting yourself in the foot (and
inducing eyestrain in your readers) as things currently stand.
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 3:00 PM
At least 95% of the readers have no problem with the faded type.
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 3:16 PM
The listing does not state how many elderly and rent regulated tenants come with the building. Does anyone know? That is far more important than the condition of the interiors. The whole building will need to be redone from top to bottom anyway.
That side bay will look really nice once the asphalt siding is removed. Still, 4.1 million for a shell at best, or a shell plus cranky Brooklyn Heights renters at worst, is a tough nut to cover.
Posted by: sam at March 27, 2008 3:32 PM
Sam, see above, "The good news? The property will be delivered vacant."
Posted by: Biff Champion at March 27, 2008 3:38 PM
Why don't you register if you want to see your comment in the richest of black types?
Posted by: Putnamdenizen at March 27, 2008 3:45 PM
Thanks Biff,
My duh.
-didn't read the whole blurb.
So what do you think?
Offer 3.5?
Posted by: sam at March 27, 2008 4:50 PM
Sam, no problem, happens to me all the time ;-)
I think it has lots of potential for someone to fix it up and flip it, especially if they can get parking adding (notwithstanding the uncertainty of the housing/financial markets). Given that potential and the location, 3.5 seems like a good estimate.
Posted by: Biff Champion at March 27, 2008 4:57 PM
3.5 would mean 1800/month rental for each of the eight apartments (5% net return). Might be capable of doing that with a minimum of cleaning up. Also means starting costs of 440000 per apt to do a condo converstion or 880000 to double their size and do 4 floor throughs (which would be more appropriate to the area). With 4 car parking 100000 (to build the garage) and 150000 spent on each apt that is a cost base of 1050000 per apt.
3.5 looks like it is probably too good a deal... but if you could get it for that....
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 5:13 PM
This could be a fabulous project for someone with a) the money, and b) the nerve to ride out the current market woes. It's less expensive and potentially more fun to create new interiors when there isn't much to save. Frankly, while I love the detail in our 2-family brownstone, if you're trying to make modern apartments with functional floor plans it can be tough to work around a lot of detail. Great location + the potential for parking = lots of upside.
Posted by: guest at March 27, 2008 5:47 PM
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.