House of the Day: 146 6th Avenue

The top floor windows are boarded up. Also, there are long-time tenants that come with the house.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:31 PM

Ugh - this is probably 1 million minimum ($200-250 psf is low-end esimate) to renovate, in a not very desirable school district, and unquantifiable headaches. Perhaps a developer will buy it, but are they going to be wary in this market with all the condos hitting the market?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:34 PM

Literally steps to Bergen Street 2/3 Train and Q train at 7th Avenue...

In my opinion, this the best of all Park Slope worlds. Near the train, near the park, near 5th Avenue, near it all.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:36 PM

I can't get that link to the listing to work...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:37 PM

Corcoran has a listing for a house of this ilk on Park Place on a nice block in Prospect Heights, for 1.4 million, and even that seems high given all the work. Granted, this bldg is a slightly better location (but not *that* much better, since it's the same school zone as the PH Corcoran listing, and the 2 homes are probably about same distance from park/subway) - but come on, how is this worth twice the cost of that other house? The owners are delusional.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:37 PM

I think this home is in a FAR better location that the one on Park Place.

That's like asking why there is a price difference from 95th and Park Avenue and 102nd and Lexington.

One is Upper East Side, one is East Harlem.

You've heard of location, location, location...no?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:42 PM

You can be sure this house is trashed, so indeed it's a different cup of fur. As for comment about PS vs. PH and comparing that to East Harlem vs. Upper East Side, I think many would beg to differ - the different between certain nice blocks of PH and north slope is just not *that* great to merit doubling the price of a listing. Sure, PS is probably more desirable, but not 1.4 million more desirable. Really, this is a house only a developer could love (or an individual with extremely deep pockets, and that kind of person would be smarter dealing with something that is not such a money pit/nightmare) - and even a developer would be wise to negotiate very hard given market uncertainty.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:54 PM

side windows - the best type of brownstone

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:54 PM

It is a great house, but it is not really in the best part of the neighborhood, and there seem to be major repair issues. Nonetheless, the real deal breaker would be old tenants that can't be budged. That is like buying into a lawsuit.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:54 PM

I wouldn't be so sure that this sale can go through. It's owned by a couple that has been separated, but unable to divorce for years because of it and other rental real estate. I wonder if one of them placed the for sale ad and not both.

The property is like most 5 stories in that it seems like a better deal than a 4 story, but isn't. 5 stories are actually worse because they were all broken up into floor throughs with crazy extra plumbing, lost detail, and extra wear and tear of rentals.

This is not in any way like the park place house which has been empty for years and was a one family - possibly with an illegal rental at some point long, long ago. I don't usually make this accusation, but I'd assume 1:37 is in some way connected to that house since they brought it up for no good reason.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 1:54 PM

1:37 here - I swear I am not connected to the Corcoran listing - in fact, I think *that* is overpriced (and let's face it, Corcoran usually overprices). The reason I brought it up was in the context of comps - not that PS and PH are true comps, but given that this house is not in a greatest part of PS, and PH house is on OK block, it's reasonable to compare them. So my point was just that the PH is asking far less, even though this PS house doesn't seem to offer any advantage and in fact, could be even MORE of a nightmare. Don't get me wrong - PH Corcoran listing seems like a nightmare too, not for faint of heart, and I think 1.4 is too much - but for Christ's sakes, asking 2.5 for this huge piece of junk?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:00 PM

this will get snatched up quickly.

great old house.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:01 PM

2:01, this is not a "great old house". It is a wreck on the inside, no detail at all, chopped up into tiny rooms that have been trashed. There are no windows upstairs, hence the wood planks. The facade is missing ALL its lintels and ornaments. It doesn't even have the garage that many of these corner houses have. It only makes sense for a developer who would gut it and make it spare, modern apartments (on a tight budget), but at this price and in this market, I don't think that developer would net a good profit. And... there's the tenants, all buddies of the owner. Good luck with that.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:08 PM

Ok now...this is not at all meant to be a neighborhood bash, but the folks trying to compare PH and PS are stretching just a tad.

Park Slope has been under the gentrification knife for about 40 years now. Prospect Heights...around 10-15. Yes, Prospect Heights has some lovely homes, has really come a LONG way in terms of crime, etc, but the ONLY reason that has happened so quickly is because it les directly across the street from Park Slope.

Please don't tell me that if Park Slope were not there, that people would pay 2 million dollars for a home in Prospect Heights. That's silly. People in PH have reaped the benefit of ridiculous price appreciation BECAUSE of its proximity to Park Slope.

In general though, Prospect Heights could still use a lof of work on its drug trade goings on, the schools, crime and general neighborhood beautification.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:10 PM

I certainly don't mean to hood-bash by comparing PS and PH. Sure, PH has a way to go before having the amenities and safety of PS - but it's getting there. Anyway, this argument is like beating a dead horse - the point is that this house is a wreck and the price is absurd. Prices are ridiculous now in general and due for a correction but this seems beyond the pale.
Plus, why are they even putting it on the market is they can't really sell due to pending divorce? Smells rotten all over.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:25 PM

Hey, I live (rent) 1/2 block from there!

I hope whoever buys the place fixes the broken slate sidewalk on the side (not sure if it is the property owner's responsibility, to be honest, but it is a nuisance).

Location is very convenient. Neighborhood is pretty good (but it is not center slope).

That's a pretty quiet corner. Most of 6th avenue is in that area. Most of the noise will come from locals (i.e., hanging out on the stoop, cleaning their cars and blasting their car stereos while doing so, double parking and honking). It is usually very quiet in bad weather and after 10:30.

I don't know what to say about the price. Depends what you are going to do with it and how much investment it will take to get it in good shape.

Just do me a favor and fix the sidewalk if you buy it!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:26 PM

"Neighborhood is pretty good (but it is not center slope)."

I'd argue that you are in the best part of Park Slope. Center Slope is bound by the F train only, where the North Slope has the 2/3 and Q. The better architecture tends to be in the North near the named streets as well...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:37 PM

z - your math leaves out all kinds of hidden costs, i.e. closing costs on such a big property etc. And 1 million is a very conservative estimate for renovation, since bare bones renovation is 200 psf, but if you're talking about trying to make high-end condos that will make a profit, you're going to have to spend significantly more. And all this at a time when financing is drying up, there is great uncertainty in the NYC real estate market, and the economy is weak. Not to mention that the guts of this bldg are a mess, there is a potential title dispute, and a lawsuit with entrenched tenants. I think even without all of these issues, 2 mil for this heap of junk would be optimistic.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:47 PM

Center Slope has the R train too.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:52 PM

This one is way out of my price range but did anyone check out the Corcoran listing on 12th St for $1.5 over the weekend? It looks like a sweet house though I'd love to hear from someone who's been inside.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:54 PM

Bold type guest = DaveinBedStuy

He got sick of people making fun of him and changed his name.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 2:58 PM

With all the folks calling many of the houses profiled on Brownstoner "heaps of junk" or "dumps" or "sh*tshows", can you please explain to the rest of us, why exactly you read this website.

This site is for people who LOVE brownstones and older homes. It used to be that people loved older homes in need of a renovation. Now I understand they were cheaper and that is an issue, especially in this case, but if you're going to call every house of the day a heap of junk, it really makes no sense to me why you even bother with this website?

It makes you look kinda crazy...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:00 PM

"I'd argue that you are in the best part of Park Slope. Center Slope is bound by the F train only, where the North Slope has the 2/3 and Q."

Oh, I agree with you. I looked at stuff in south slope, center slope, north slope, and prospect heights before moving, and north slope was my preferred spot primarily due to convenience: more subway/bus options, shopping on 5th, flatbush, and atlantic, close to park, not a bad walk to library/grand army, etc.

My comment about it not being "center slope" is an observation, not a criticism.

Center Slope is, frankly, whiter and richer and at least "feels" a little bit safer (which I guess is why prices are higher there despite being trapped on the F train).

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:02 PM

Many things are heaps of junk at $2.75m that would be gems in the rough at $750,000. Just because readers love brownstones doesn't mean they need to think they are worth prices that make no sense.

In any event, most brownstones remain potential beauties rather than actual ones. Most owners lack either money or taste or both to do a sensible job. So there is no contradiction between loving the potential and hating the reality.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:12 PM

2:54 - re: Corcoran listing on 12th St for 1.5 mil. The block is so-so, but the worst part is the adjacent bldg which looks like a fire hazard (rental property with decay in the back and scary cables hanging everywhere on the garden line). The owners of this house tried to do FSBO, and had several offers fall through before going to Corcoran. The house was renovated by Charrette, which as others have pointed out, does work that looks OK on the surfact but is kind of shoddy underneath. Plus, the owners paid 1.3 in 2006 and didn't do a stitch of work in the meantime, so to tack on an extra 200-250K in this market seems optimistic at best. They seem motivated to sell, so will probably have to accept less. They'll be lucky if they make any profit after brokers commission, but in my opinion, they'd still be doing just fine since they paid too much in the first place...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:17 PM

"In any event, most brownstones remain potential beauties rather than actual ones."

I'd argue that in the area in question, the exact opposite of what you say is true. On my block not far from here all but two homes on the block are very well maintained and lovely looking. There are still a couple with rent controlled tenants and major work to be done...they are the minority.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:19 PM

I agree with 3:12 that calling something a "heap of junk" makes sense when it's overpriced. I love brownstones plenty but am realistic enough to know that most of them are "diamonds in the rough" but you have to have enough money left over to polish the diamond - otherwise, it will just remain looking like a junky rock. Asking price has a lot to do with that - asking for that much money makes it economically pretty crazy to polish the diamond so to speak. There are much better options out there for an individual who can afford to pay 3.5-3.7 for a house (which is min this would cost after renovation) and a developer would be crazy to pay this much since it's nearly impossible to do the math to turn a profit. 2 million would *still* be a very high price for this house - 1.5-1.8 would be a lot more realistic. And jealously is not fueling these comments, just realism. I'm certainly not jealous of someone who throws money out the window.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:24 PM

I looked at the $1.4mil property at 215 Prospect Pl (in PH) this past weekend which is in similar "estate" condition -- what a project that'd be.

Huge roof leak that drained all the way down to the parlor floor, basically nonexistant kitchen/bath (they had a coal/wood fired oven for god's sake), major damage to the joists/peeling paint/BAD black mold, etc.

The folks I was on the top floor with were also EXTREMELY creeped out for some reason, just bad vibes for no apparent cause. Creepy.

At $1.4mil, it's absurd. At 500-600k less, it becomes a restoration project.

[shelltoe]

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:24 PM

The chicks in PH are more attractive than those in PS. Science proves this.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:43 PM

Unrenovated is one thing -- half the units in Brooklyn Heights are still under rent regulation. What is really appalling is the proportion of tastelessly destructive renovations.

Apparently, it is quite difficult to make brownstones work for modern lifestyles: most owners do a bad job. The listings are consistently full of stunningly beautiful houses (outside) that (inside) have been chopped up in bizarre ways, given kitchens that are neither usable nor attractive or had all the bathrooms fully updated bathrooms in 1970.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:46 PM

3:17 thanks for the additional info. I'm not familiar with Charrette, are they a restoration company? I also saw that on Property Shark that they paid $1.295 in 2006, so yeah I find it hard to swallow a 20% jump in value especially in that location. Maybe I'll check out the next open house anyway.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 3:53 PM

I used to live a few blocks north of this place. Sixth Ave. is the undiscovered country of Park Slope, it seems. No matter what the house is like inside, this is a can't-lose place to live.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:00 PM

3:53 - Charrette does a lot of local renovations - google them and you'll find their other projects. They have fans, but many detractors too. I wonder what they would pay to restore this HOTD? Actually, I don't think they'd touch it. Their strategy seems to be to buy very cheap places and fix them up, then jack up the price. Still, they are smart enough to know never to overpay for a total gut job. I think 4pm is just wrong saying this is "can't lose" place to live. You can lose if you overpay by hundreds of thousands of dollars. It's so ridiculous to say something is wonderful when it's only wonderful at the right price!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:16 PM

I heard the place already had two offers.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:30 PM

Ah yes, the famous "there's already an offer" comment. These are up there with "can't lose" and "New York is cheap compared to other cities" and other such broker balderdash.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:40 PM

I heard both offers were 350K and included a copy of the letter from the NY Times.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:44 PM

where did you hear that, 4:30? Please share...

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:47 PM

i live on the block and also heard they had a couple interested parties. not sure about the offer/s part, but i wouldn't be surprised. these corner mansions don't come around for sale all that often.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:53 PM

I heard there's already a bidding war for it from UWS people who are just dying to move to Brooklyn. I bet it goes for 50 million.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:55 PM

from a nosy neighbor

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 4:58 PM

Hey 4:55, That's ME!
And I'm bursting at the seams.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 6:51 PM

listen, the house is great!
but rent-regulated tenants or those protected because they are over 61, are a terrible hassle. you will need to buy them out. that's really expensive. this isn't florida where you can just evict renters. its the opposite, they can evict you.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 7:18 PM

I used to live down the block from this house, and when I last saw the inside, there were acres of plastic sheathing sealing off rooms torn down to the beams. It's a full gut job.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 7:36 PM

I love how everyone says "its overpriced", "it will never sell", "drop the price $100K and maybe I will consider"....yet all these listings sell and I am SURE owners are not accepting offers $100K under their asking price.
Also as soon as someone says "I heard their are offers"..everyone has to chime in and say that their aren't any offers etc.....what gives?!!

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 7:37 PM

"sellers are not accepting offers 100k under asking price" ? ? are you even living in the same country as the rest of us? or are you just mad?

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 7:55 PM

7:55, you're just delusional. Sellers are NOT accepting $100k off the asking price. And brokers aren't the ones who "overprice"--it's the owners. and the idiots who pay the prices. It's CAPITALISM AT WORK

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 8:38 PM

7:37 - have you looked at any closed sales recently? Sellers are indeed accepting offers 100K under ask, and sometimes well below that. Browse the recent archives on this blog and you will find evidence that you are just wrong. Also - many properties are simply hacking their prices by several 100K - I this happening increasingly to overpriced properties. Again - look on this list. While Brownstoner may be guilty of highlighting overpriced properties often on this blog, at least he (sometimes) also featured the subsequent price cuts that had to ensue - either because the sellers dropped their price, or because they caved in and accepted a much lower offer. But I don't think Brownstoner is showing this anywhere near as much as it's happening. In a few cases, some sellers just say the hell with it and take their place off the market (this happened to a huge brownstone on 5th St in PS that was asking 2.2 and lingered for months) but you have to be in a position where you can afford to do that - or, roll the dice and assume it's going to get better sometime soon - which is may not. Sure, real estate always go up in the long run, but let's not forget 1989-1995. The prewar condo building where I live lost much of its value then (it went condo in 1988) and it took nearly 10 years to climb back to its original value.

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 9:43 PM

corner house = no back yrd

Posted by: guest at June 2, 2008 10:40 PM

if you zoom the google map it does seem to have backyard.

Posted by: guest at June 3, 2008 9:47 AM

There is a small backyard.

Posted by: guest at June 3, 2008 6:20 PM

true but you dont need to zoom to see the size of the yards of the homes towards the middle.

spend wisely.

Posted by: guest at June 4, 2008 9:45 PM