« The New York Times Does Gravesend House of the Day: 531 11th Street »

August 11, 2008

Co-op of the Day: 150 Joralemon Street, #7B

150-Joralemon-0808.jpg
We like the idea of getting a real two-bedroom in Brooklyn Heights for $500,000, but other than that, we can't find too much to get excited about with Apartment 7B at 150 Joralemon Street. There's nothing offensive about it either—it's just kind generic. And the maintenance of $1,315 also seems on the high side. It's priced well enough, though, that it should probably sell within 5% of the asking price, we'd think.
150 Joralemon Street, #7B [Dougas Elliman] GMAP P*Shark




Posted by Brownstoner at 12:38 PM | Comments (25)
Categories: Brooklyn Heights, Co-ops

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/5817

Comments

the brokers should update the listing -- it references a price of $530k.

Posted by: z at August 11, 2008 1:02 PM

Since we're commenting on the brokers, is Gregory the son of Madelaine???

BTW I think the granite is baltic brown.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 1:04 PM

The maintenance is high and the building entry is really ugly. They need to do someting about that weird entry. It is like entering a building through a loading dock. yech.

Posted by: sam at August 11, 2008 1:09 PM

blech

Posted by: gkw at August 11, 2008 1:15 PM

Sure, $500K is a good deal for a 2BR in Brooklyn Heights, but not for this place. I'm finding it difficult, no impossible to find any redeeming qualities in the apartment or the building. The former looks like a claustrophobe's jackpot and the latter reminds me of a methadone clinic. And $1,315 for monthly maintenance? Is this a joke?

Posted by: Fjorder at August 11, 2008 1:22 PM

OK price but the high CC kills it for me. Does anyone know if the building is being renovated?

Posted by: qis4quincy at August 11, 2008 1:31 PM

And the "Mehs" have it.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at August 11, 2008 1:50 PM

Not too much feeling the comprimised kithen layout neither.

Posted by: DOW8000SP800 at August 11, 2008 1:53 PM

I've been looking for 1 or 2-br's in Brooklyn Heights for a little while now. I've seen several sub-$500K listings in this building for 2-bedrooms, all look in fine shape, but like others mention, nothing really 'wow' about them. There is no doorman in the building, but the Super signs for packages. I spoke with someone who lives in the building and apparently they have raised common charges a few times recently, but for meaningless building work. CC's on a 1-br hover around $1,000, which is just as ridiculous.

Posted by: fishermb at August 11, 2008 1:54 PM

The maintenance charges should not be used for capital expenditures -- that should come from the reserve fund. Likely this building has a substantial underlying mortage -- listing does not say what percentage of the maintenance is deductible but is probably 50%+. If the financials for the cooperative are good, this is a good deal -- space (real 2 bedroom), light and a good location. You would not lose here.

Posted by: BH76 at August 11, 2008 2:01 PM

Here's another, as mentioned, for 499K. Slightly larger. High maintenance. And that looks like a lot of building to maintain. Choppy layouts, but much cheaper (in the short run) than most 2br coops in BH.

http://www.bhsbrooklyn.com/detail.asp?id=884297

Posted by: buttermilk channel at August 11, 2008 2:03 PM

Fishermb: thanks for the 411 on the bldg. That's ridiculous- raising CC for building work. No co-op that has solid financials would do something like that; that is why there are reserve accounts.

Posted by: Fjorder at August 11, 2008 2:05 PM

BH76 is correct. The reason I bought into the condo that I did back in 1997 on the UES was because the building had new windows, new roof, new boiler and had a huge reserve. Condo charges then were about $300 for an 800 sq ft 1 BR and were $564 when I sold in last year. I have since found out that the reserve has grown so much that they will add a roof terrace for the benefit of any unit owner (not renter). Its all in the condo/coop management folks...its either very good, good or bad.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 2:06 PM

Fishermb...there is no such thing as "meaningless building work" especially if it involves the roof, the boiler, etc.

Buyers need also beware of special capital charges. The brokers are always fast & loose with the facts. You need to see a history of the CCs and also whether or not there are any special capital charges currrently, in the past or planned for the future. When there is not enough of a reserve, its the special charges that kill you.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 2:10 PM

and find out when the last facade maintenance was done (mandatory in nyc), as well as any recent assessments. that's a tip-off that more surprises are in the works.

Posted by: buttermilk channel at August 11, 2008 2:15 PM

Fishermb...sorry, that sounds like I was jumping on you. It was more the phrase and what buyers may or may not know about such work.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 2:16 PM

btw... that is the son.

Posted by: buttermilk channel at August 11, 2008 2:16 PM

you think he still lives at home??

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at August 11, 2008 2:18 PM

you know, i think he may.

Posted by: buttermilk channel at August 11, 2008 2:25 PM

daveinbedstuy: no worries, I was actually quoting an owner in the building, not a broker, when saying that common charges were raised for "meaningless building work." I have no idea what the work is, or the percentage that was raised for cc's.

Posted by: fishermb at August 11, 2008 4:22 PM

"Not too much feeling the comprimised kithen layout neither."

WTF is a "comprimised kithen"?

Posted by: GHB at August 11, 2008 5:32 PM

DOWhat felt like he needed to get his spelling more in line between his two personas. Hence the "comprimised kithen" and the weird grammatical structure of the sentence in which it was contained.

Posted by: wasder at August 11, 2008 5:55 PM

Wow, tough crowd.

Agreed that the hardest thing to swallow about this apartment, apart from the hefty maintenance, is that odd little "comprimised" kitchen. And that you must enter to the side of it and pass through it. I'm trying to imagine a more practical kitchen arrangement...

Nope. Can't do it.

Posted by: Nokilissa at August 11, 2008 6:53 PM

Here's another in the same building with a better looking kitchen and perhaps a better layout at $499k:

- http://www.brownharrisstevens.com/detail.aspx?id=884297

As for this unit:

01/24/2008
Listed in StreetEasy with Elliman at $530,000
06/23/2008
Price decreased to $500,000

Posted by: SnarkSlope at August 11, 2008 8:32 PM

What are all you people talking about when you say capital projects should not be paid for through an increase in the maintenance? That happens all the time in apartment buildings large and small. Very often the reserve fund is not large enough to cover the cost of a needed project. Or it's done indirectly through an increase in the maintenance to cover the payments for a large loan rather than have to deplete the reserve fund entirely.

Yes, the larger the building, typically the larger the reserve fund. But that doesn't mean a reserve fund is always going to be enough to cover the cost of required maintenance. Nor does it mean that it can be built back up quickly after it is accessed for a project. So maintenances are increased. This is exactly why maintenances are unusually higher all over Brooklyn Heights as compared to other Brooklyn neighborhoods. The buildings are older there and as they were converted from rentals to coops/condos, capital improvement and general maintenaces projects were done over time. The cost was passed on to current and future owners through higher maintenances.

Also, it makes no sense to pay for an expensive project through a one time assessment. That means current owners wind up paying out of pocket for projects that will benefit future owners. The cost needs to be amoratized over time so that it's spread out through successive owners. Hence, the higher maintenance to cover the cost of a capital loan perhaps in this case.

Any owner that agrees to a one time assessment for a large scale capital improvement is foolish in my opinion. You're paying for someone else's future benefit.

Posted by: TheBrooklynSteve at August 12, 2008 11:03 AM

Post a comment

Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.

Latest Restaurant Additions