« Co-op of the Day: 50 Sterling Place Streetlevel: Greenpoint Bar for Film Nerds »

October 9, 2008

House of the Day: 1380 Dean Street

1380-Dean-Street-Brooklyn-10080.jpg
We like the looks of this four-story limestone house at 1380 Dean Street in Crown Heights. It started out last January asking $829,000, according to StreetEasy, and has just been cut to $775,000. It's hard to make a guess about what something is "worth" while we're in the eye of the storm, but suffice it to say that this place presents an opportunity to live in a 3,000-square-foot house with nice original detail with mortgage payments that would be south of $4,000 a month. Then again, the way things are going, there's no rule of nature that says this won't be going for $600,000 six months from now.
1380 Dean Street [CitiHabitats] GMAP P*Shark




Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/6582

Comments

I looked at this house. It's a nice limestone on a great block where 4 other great houses are for sale. I've seen 4 out of the 5 of them (and put in a rejected offer on one). The kitchen is in BAD shape and small, but the rest of the house is in decent shape with a fair amount of detail. We would have seriously considered it, but we switched our search to Bed-Stuy.

Posted by: Susan Elkins at October 9, 2008 1:27 PM

I'm not terribly good with math, but $775,000 to $600,000 in 6 months??

Hasn't the national housing market only tanked about 16-17% over the last 12 months?

Seems a tad dramatic to me.

Posted by: 11217 at October 9, 2008 1:28 PM

at 600K, this would be mine. We wait and see.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at October 9, 2008 1:29 PM

The seller was reportedly motivated from the start. I imagine they didn't get offers.

Posted by: Susan Elkins at October 9, 2008 1:30 PM

if it comes with the matching purple curtains and seat cushions, it's a steal!

Posted by: z at October 9, 2008 1:31 PM

Amazing house. I am always astounded by the beautiful houses in this area.

It's kind of pointless commenting on the price.

Posted by: Aussie at October 9, 2008 1:35 PM

I like motivated sellers. Better than those darn apathetic ones. Or the ones with ennui.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 9, 2008 1:37 PM

The hanging plants and purple accents will move this one in a hurry. Hey, doesnt' the agent Satish Thakersey look like a professional wrestling manager? Regardless, I love the unassuming title of "Licensed Real Estate Salesperson". It seems like something they would flash on the screen every time he was shown on Survivor or the Amazing Race.

Posted by: Biff Champion at October 9, 2008 1:42 PM

$600,000...LMMMMFFFAAAOOO $450,000 maybe

Sorry, couldn't resist since he's still not allowed to post here!!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 9, 2008 1:46 PM

Who, me?

Posted by: PropJoe at October 9, 2008 2:08 PM

This house actually looks like a really good deal at this price. Is it one or two family?

Posted by: wasder at October 9, 2008 2:22 PM

I have a question: to afford mortgage payments in the $4000 range, what would you expect a household's annual income to be?

Posted by: cwbuecheler at October 9, 2008 2:28 PM

I just saw this quote in a Rauters article about debt, made me laugh:


"'I know for many of us saving is a foreign concept,' Lizbeth Sanchez, a manager at financial counseling service Balance told the crowd. 'It's not easy to save because the way our culture works, the person who dies with the most stuff wins, right?'

Posted by: dittoburg at October 9, 2008 2:29 PM

just based on my own mortgage, i would hazard a guess and say household income of 200k

Posted by: TD at October 9, 2008 2:31 PM

maybe less than 200k depending on taxes and down payment

Posted by: TD at October 9, 2008 2:35 PM


Thankfully we have a charismatic young lawyer named Obama with experience as a "community organizer" who'll likely be our next president.

When Obama raises taxes on families and businesses making over $250k in order to finance his promises of "change", millions of middle class workers accross this country will be fired as companies downsize to pay Obama's higher taxes.

The stock market will keep dropping until Obama's ousted Jimmy Carter style in four years. It's paramount for a president to inspire confidence during tough economic times, and clearly by the way the stock market is heading with Obama a near certainty come November, investors have zero economic confidence in the guy.

It's not surprising since he only managed to pay off his student loans two years ago at the age of 45. He also left Harvard law with seventeen unpaid illegal parking tickets in Cambridge on his record that he didn't bother to pay until he ran for Senate.

Unfortunately, this country looks to be in for one hell of a ride down!


Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 2:37 PM

I agree, but thats the only thing that Obama has proposed that I think is a mistake.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 9, 2008 2:44 PM

Well that post was completely off topic, and also completely contradictory to itself.

I'm not sure if you went to college or where, and what you now do for a living, but for most of us paying off college loans until age 45 and beyond is a reality. I'll be paying off a Bachelor's degree till I'm 40. If I went to grad school I'd have loans forever!

Obama went to expensive law schools and then became a community organizer. That's not exactly the fastest path to becoming debt-free.

What point are you trying to make with that comment?

Posted by: TD at October 9, 2008 2:47 PM

I looked at this place also. It is a one family with 6 bedrooms - 2 per floor stcked on top of one another. I think they all had sinks or something odd in the bedroom. Some nice details, but kind of an odd layout. The kitchen is a total nightmare - nothing salvageable, but it is a block with beautiful houses. We were not tempted because we wanted rental income and did not see an easy conversion into multiple units. It is a lot of house though. Price absolutely seems fair though.

Posted by: brooklynluv at October 9, 2008 2:49 PM

Make that 4 bedrooms...

Posted by: brooklynluv at October 9, 2008 2:49 PM

TD - I think the point he was trying to make was "I feel like railing on aimlessly about stuff not relevant to the topic at hand."

Also, thanks for the answer. That's interesting to me, as my fiancee and I combine for just above $200k, and we thought $4k/month in mortgage would be well out of our range. Maybe we're spending too much on luxuries. :)

Posted by: cwbuecheler at October 9, 2008 2:50 PM

Oh yes, of course it's Obama's fault that the market is falling. What's the matter, tired of blaming the carnage of the last seven years on Bill Clinton?

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 9, 2008 2:51 PM

we make just over 100k combined and our mortgage plus maintenance in a co-op are 2600. doesn't leave a ton of wiggle room, but it's not horrible. i'm sure you could make those payments work.

Posted by: TD at October 9, 2008 2:57 PM

CWB, did you take the mortgage interest deduction into account? Having said that, I'm not a fan of spending more than 25% of your income on mortgage or rent, there are too many other things to enjoy, buy, save for and give too.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 9, 2008 2:57 PM

That would be really nice, ditto, but for those of us making a modest income, that's near impossible in this city, even if you live in some of the farthest reaches of the borough.

For renting, I would favor keeping it closer to 25% but I think for buying that percentage can be higher

Posted by: TD at October 9, 2008 3:01 PM

dittoburg - there's a lot of things I haven't taken into account. I've only started thinking seriously about buying in the past couple of months, so I'm trying to get up to speed on a lot of things. For example, I have no idea how much mortgage interest one can deduct. :)

We won't truly be looking to move until next June at the earliest, but I want to start learning now. In the interim, we're saving money in anticipation of eventually needing a down-payment.

Posted by: cwbuecheler at October 9, 2008 3:07 PM

You really think the prospects of Obama as president is driving this market? That's some hole-in-the-sand thinking IronBalls.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 9, 2008 3:08 PM

head-in-the-sand or head up your....

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 9, 2008 3:09 PM

Ironballs, lay off the Fox News.

Posted by: FatLenny at October 9, 2008 3:14 PM

I don't think Obama is causing things to go down, and a bunch of the investment banks that had contributed a lot of cash to his campaign suggest otherwise. But not everything ferrous-spheres says is nonsense. I know for a fact that if he does apply soc sec taxes at incomes above 250, and assuming its get passed, my firm and others in our field will defintely cut staff to meet the increased payroll costs.

Of course, the rest of the economy could start going great because of his election, in which case it would offset that.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 9, 2008 3:16 PM

DIBS, that was not thinking al all on the part of IronBalls.

Posted by: Susan Elkins at October 9, 2008 3:18 PM

Maybe more like RustyBalls ditto!!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 9, 2008 3:20 PM

I'm guessing BBs.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 9, 2008 3:24 PM

Dittoburg, I'm interested in your comment about mortgage interest deduction. Just how exactly does all that stuff work? Can I really push my budget higher knowing that I can offset that at the end of the year? I have yet to figure this one out... I expect that its some simple thing I'm just missing...

Posted by: mksk at October 9, 2008 3:53 PM


How would the "rest of the economy start doing great because of Obama's election?"

Are you refering to the hundreds of thousands of union jobs in alternative energy that Obama promises to create out of thin air (I mean tax payer money)?

Obama will be a "feel good" president for Hollywood and Brooklyn liberals for six months. (Look what we did! Isn't he handsome!)

When it becomes evident that his socialist leaning, anti free market tenancies are seriously harmful to the growth of our economy, even Matt Damon will change his tune.

Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 4:14 PM

IronBalls, I hate to tell you, the whole free-market thing is about to be re-evaluated. It's not socialism that got us where we are, it's unfettered free markets. Something will have to be done about these derivatives. We didn't heed the warning in 1987, and now we're paying the piper. These assholes running these investment banks that we are now bailing out, they should be ashamed of themselves. In fact they should be locked up. Lehman Brothers survived the Great Depression but somehow they couldn't survive a minor housing downturn in which only 4% of mortgages are in foreclosure.

Posted by: denton at October 9, 2008 4:23 PM

"When it becomes evident that his socialist leaning, anti free market tenancies are seriously harmful to the growth of our economy, even Matt Damon will change his tune."

Yeah, the present administration is doing such a great job, that we can't afford to let that end! Let's keep spending $10 billion per week in Iraq while we're at it! Yep, those GOPers really know their way around the economy!

Posted by: East New York at October 9, 2008 4:23 PM


And of course I'm not blaming Obama for the current economic crisis. But I'm not blaming Bush, or Clinton either.

Blaming the president for Wall Street's problems shows a complete lack of any true understanding of how business in this country works. If you really want to blame one individual, blame Greenspan and he's not running for president.

Congress will pass tough new banking regulations no matter who is elected president, but Obama's efforts to redistribute earned weath will backfire in his face and keep this country in recession.

Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 4:30 PM

I believe the last nail in the coffin of the "Reagan Revolution" was driven in this week.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 9, 2008 4:30 PM

"When it becomes evident that his socialist leaning, anti free market tenancies are seriously harmful to the growth of our economy, even Matt Damon will change his tune."

Yeah, the present administration is doing such a great job, we can't AFFORD to let that end! Plus, I'm sure John ("The Economny is Strong") McCain has a solution that won't impact the middle class. Uh huh. Also, with McCain, we can keep the $10 billion-a-week war in Iraq going. I don't think that impacts the economy. Yep, the GOP is doing a heck of a job. Why change things?

Posted by: East New York at October 9, 2008 4:31 PM

I'm siding with ENY on this one but SnarkSlope come on. You can't blame Reagan for this.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 9, 2008 4:35 PM


Denton,

I agree completely regarding banking regulations.

My fear, based on what I've heard Obama say, is that he plans to regulate every other private industry and trade as well.

He promises to "keep jobs in America" and doesn't understand that in order to grow and compete, US corporations have to take advantage of the same cheap labor that Chinese companies do.

Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 4:38 PM

mksk: Pay $1000 in rent=you're out $1000/month.

Pay $1000 in mortgage at 6.5%, and initially, abt $860/mth will be deductible interest. If you are paying 35% overall tax on your income, your tax will go down (or income go up) 860x.35=300/mth. If you have a rental, it gets more complex, but you can claim (IRS-wise) you're running your rental at a loss even as you deposit your renter's checks.

In subsequent years, the interest/principal ratio gets smaller, so you deduct less and less as you pay off the mortgage. Of course, other house expenses may negate some of the savings.

Posted by: cmu at October 9, 2008 4:38 PM

MKSK - do you currently take the standard deduction or itemize? (remember, you can itemize your state and local taxes).

Posted by: dittoburg at October 9, 2008 4:41 PM

Isn't it $10 bazillion a month in Iraq? T

There is a silver lining though. The Marsh Arabs, a 5000yr old culture nearly destroyed by Saddam Hussein, (and their marshes & wildlife) are now staging a comeback. Quite expensive for us though.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 9, 2008 4:45 PM


ENY,

Come on, dude! The entire US Congress (Democrats and Republicans) is responsible for the war in Iraq.

Obama would have voted for the war too, if he had been a senator at the time.

Don't believe the New York Times. Think for yourself.

Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 4:45 PM


IB, you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. You say "millions of middle class workers accross this country will be fired as companies downsize to pay Obama's higher taxes" i.e., Obama's policies will hurt the economy.

Then you say "Blaming the president for Wall Street's problems shows a complete lack of any true understanding of how business in this country works." In other words, the policies of George ("Let's deregulate!") Bush had nothing to with this crisis.

Maybe Bush's policies aren't directly responsible to what's happening now, but they certainly enabled the present scenario.

You also say "Obama's efforts to redistribute earned wea[l]th will backfire in his face." Why don't you just say that you're wealthy and don't want to see your taxes increase? That's what this is about for you, isn't it? One more time: trickle-down, voodoo economics don't work.

Posted by: East New York at October 9, 2008 4:49 PM

Right East New York - exactly who does want to see their taxes increase?

tax increases for everyone else but me, thats what i say.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 9, 2008 4:51 PM

"Don't believe the New York Times. Think for yourself."

What makes you think I rely on the Times for my information? I work in the media. I read just about everything. You on the other hand sound like you're auditioning for a recurring guest feature on Fox News, "dude."

The entire Congress is responsible for the war in Iraq, but President Bush and his administration is entirely responsible for the U.S. remaining there and spending ridiculous amounts of $$.

Posted by: East New York at October 9, 2008 4:59 PM

OK Dave, if I can't blame Reagan directly, can I pin it on Greenspan, who was appointed by Reagan?

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 9, 2008 5:18 PM


The stock market is going to hell.

I'm pretty damn sure it's largely because of a lack of confidence, not the underlying fundamentals.

The only thing that's changed is that it's become obvious to the world that Obama will be our next president.


Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 5:24 PM

For the record, I've been all cash myself for the last year, so I'm not a complete idiot.

Folks that have nothing to do with the shit that's going on on Wall Street are going to start being laid off like crazy as businesses go under in the thousands.

We need a president that understands that a free market, low tax environment is what this country needs to get it back on its feet.

Obama with the help of the Democratic majority congress will be the hammer that nails The Great Depression II onto the pages of history.

Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 5:29 PM

I think that hammer will actually be named "Derivatives."

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 9, 2008 5:41 PM


It's pretty apparent that a "a free market, low tax environment" has bought the country to its knees, considering the GOP has been in the White House the last eight years.

By the way, I happen to agree that free markets are essential to global economic stability. And despite IB's FOX-style rants, I believe that Obama recgnizes this as well. But the election hasn't happened yet, so we will just have to wait and see.

Posted by: East New York at October 9, 2008 6:02 PM


ENY,

"A free market, low tax environment" is not what has brought this country to it's knees.

An insane housing bubble driven by a country convinced that every individual has a "right" to own a house coupled by excessive speculation by investors and bankers is what's bringing this country to it's knees.

But I fear Obama is just as confused as you are. It's not surprising given that he's a lawyer, with no business background.

I'm not defending McCain either. He's an old stooge himself, but at least he doesn't think using tax payer money he can spend his way to a better world.

Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 6:16 PM

Didn't watch the last debate, did you IB?

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 9, 2008 6:18 PM

"McCain ... doesn't think using tax payer money he can spend his way to a better world."

Actually, he seems to think he can:

===============

Barack Obama this afternoon condemned John McCain’s plan for the government to buy bad home mortgages as “McCain’s bailout” for risk-taking banks and lenders, and described his approach to the financial crisis as “risky” and “erratic,” ... Mr. Obama took new aim at Mr. McCain’s plan, which would allow millions of struggling Americans to refinance their mortgages with government help – yet leave taxpayers to cover the losses rather than the banks or other institutions that hold the mortgage."

===============

Posted by: SnarkSlope at October 9, 2008 6:24 PM

I hope obama is more like Abe Lincoln and less like Ronald Reagan. Only time will tell. It could go either way. I don't think Lincoln was seen as being charasmatic and handsome when he was elected. charasmatic and handsome politicians can often lead a country awry. Let us pray there is substance behind the glamor.

Posted by: Inigo at October 9, 2008 7:41 PM


SnarkSlope,

The root of the economic crisis is housing prices tanking nationwide.

Obama acts cool, but what has he suggested? First he takes credit for McCain's proposal, and the next day he claims it's too risky. Something has to be done. Do you have a better idea?

Posted by: IronBalls at October 9, 2008 7:55 PM

Indigo there is a ton of substance behind that "glamor". Remember the young glamorous guy named Bill Clinton? Remember what he did for this country that was all unravelled by the clown we have in the WhiteHouse now?

Iron Balls it is amazing to us that you are already blaming Obama for this mess even before he gets elected. Remember fool the past 8 years George Bush was President and his sidekick McCain agreed to >90% of his dumb policies. This is how we got into this disaster by over use of "laissez faire" economics that is clearly outdated given todays market complexities.
Your rants are really very pediatric and plain moronic i.e. it took Obama until age 45 to pay off his loans. Do you have any common sense? It is economically savy for most of us to you pay off grad school loans slowly sometimes over 30 years...we know this since we have the loans to prove it. Almost all the doctors and lawyers we know still have student loans to pay well into there 50s. For the miniscule amounts of people who can afford it and pay off school loans rapidly fine but for the overwhelming student population this is simply not possible or sound economic judgement.
Obama hasn't paid parking tickets so he shouldn't be running for office? Is that all the smear you can dig up now that your man McCain is proving to be irrelevant?
You reallly think the same policies of the past 8 years are gonna help this country? Get off Fox News for a little and smell the CHANGE coming your way.

Posted by: pierre de taille at October 9, 2008 9:45 PM


Pierre,

It's not Bush's fault that the economy is tanking any more than it is Obama's. I'm not blaming Obama. I'm just saying that his proposed tax increases will cost millions of jobs and delay the recovery of our economy for years.

I'm sure you know that Obama purchased the lot next door to his own house in Chicago from his biggest financial backer's wife for $300,000 less that she paid for the land just a few months earlier -- straight up corruption.

Obama's excuse is that he "didn't understand the home buying process." Now, just a few years later, he claims to be the most qualified expert to not only solve the housing crisis, but also to save our national from a major depression.

Sure, paying off his student loans at 45, and racking up 17 unpaid parking tickets at 30 isn't reason in itself not to vote for Obama, but the media makes him out to be a perfect person, when in reality he's quite flawed and not The One that you and the media hope he is.

Posted by: IronBalls at October 10, 2008 12:33 AM

Am I the only one who hates the way Brownstoner baits these posts and the general negative attitude that this site has to any community that is not Park Slope, the Heights, Fort Green or Clinton Hill? Mr. B.--I have news for you--if real estate is really going to crap like many are predicting--sure Bed Stuy and Crown Heights are going down but so is your beloved Clinton Hill. Mr. B, welcome back to the HOOD. For your own peace of mind, perhaps you should consider focusing this site to productive community building and actual useful DIY tips rather than to fead the negativeity and paranoia that is running rampant on this site. Might be a good business model......

Posted by: HomeSweetstuy at October 10, 2008 8:45 AM

brownstoner is a community, and clearlry a good business model. Get thee into the 21st century olde timer.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 10, 2008 8:57 AM

Says IB: "at least he doesn't think using tax payer money he can spend his way to a better world."

Say prominent conservatives:

In a sharply worded editorial on its Web site Thursday, the editors of The National Review -- an influential bastion of conservative thought -- derided the [McCain] plan as "creating a level of moral hazard that is unacceptable" and called it a "gift to lenders who abandoned any sense of prudence during the boom years."

"Prominent conservative blogger Michelle Malkin went one step further, calling the plan "rotten" and declaring on her blog, "We're Screwed '08."

Matt Lewis, a contributing writer for the conservative Web site Townhall.com, told CNN the plan only further riles conservatives upset with McCain's backing of the massive government bailout plan passed last week.

"Fundamentally, the problem is John McCain accepts a lot of liberal notions, unfortunately. There is somewhat of a populist streak," he said. "Most conservatives really did not like the bailout to begin with, and this was really kind of picking at the scab."

I'm not sure why you're so confused, IB. Face it - GOP has done a BAD job managing and shepherding our economy, and the effects are there for the world to see. Like McCain, you see your little boat sinking so you're desperately grasping for any life ring floating by. Best of luck to you.

Posted by: East New York at October 10, 2008 10:31 AM

Hey Ferrous balls NO ONE is saying Obama is perfect he is simply pretty close to it now given the garbage McCain is planning. The fact remains that most people see him as much better that the current president and ditto for McCain. You acknowledge yourself that your smear is petty and irrelevant; hopefully you will get your brain around the fact that this economic disaster rest squarely on Bush's silly policies. Like I said "laissez faire" is an outdated concept.

Posted by: pierre de taille at October 10, 2008 2:33 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions