« Co-op of the Day: 201 Clinton Avenue Streetlevel: Joe and Joe Pizza Shuts the Ovens »

October 16, 2008

House of the Day: 132 St. Marks Avenue

132-Saint-Marks-Avenue-1008.jpg
Someone went all out on the renovation at 132 St. Marks Avenue in Prospect Heights. The plaster and wood moldings have been restored to perfection and a large deck has been added off the parlor floor. The kitchen renovation doesn't quite work for us aesthetically, but it certainly wasn't a corner-cutting job. There are bound to be plenty of people who would love to own this house. The big question is whether they'll be willing to pay $2,485,000 for the privilege.
132 St. Marks Avenue [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark




Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/6716

Comments

looks beautiful, and it's in a great part of prospect heights. it should sell for over $2M, although how much more in this market is anyone's guess.

Posted by: z at October 16, 2008 1:25 PM

This is NICE! Not crazy about the kitchen/dining area set up, but that's just one negative versus lots of positives.

Posted by: Biff Champion at October 16, 2008 1:26 PM

z, I agree. I've been bearish on prices lately, but I would have to think this will break $2MM easily.

Posted by: Biff Champion at October 16, 2008 1:27 PM

gorgeous inside and out, love that garden, and great location. better than many others in its class/price. wonder if being a 1 family will help or hurt it.

Posted by: goldie at October 16, 2008 1:30 PM

Eons ago we looked at this house, which was then an SRO.....and too much work for us at the time. A nicely done traditionalist look in the renovation. But it was foolish not to make the garden level a rental apartment......

Posted by: bricktop at October 16, 2008 1:31 PM

bricktop, it wasn't "foolish" if the owners didn't want to be landlords. not everyone wants or needs a rental unit in their house.

Posted by: z at October 16, 2008 1:34 PM

I don't think anyone actually wants it do they? Its more a matter of necessity for some.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 16, 2008 1:38 PM

Drooling.
I'm not into white kitchens UNLESS they're custom made and hand painted.

I think it would have been better to have the bottom of the upper cabinets closed and the top glass, mullioned, to mimic the entry door. It would have lighten up the top portion of the room.

Marble countertops...Yummy!

Posted by: bayridgegirl at October 16, 2008 1:42 PM

This is gorgeous. Well done, wish I could swing it!

It should get very near it's price (less the standard Corcoran mark-up).

Posted by: TownhouseLady at October 16, 2008 1:47 PM

I'm going out to buy a lottery ticket right now...

Posted by: ProspectHeightsGuy at October 16, 2008 1:51 PM

I totally understand not wanting to be a landlord, but if you're not making the garden floor into an apartment why on earth would you destroy the parlor floor by shoving a kitchen into the rear parlor?? Now you a crammed and jammed and awkward parlor floor and 3 floors of bedrooms. That's stupid.

Posted by: shillstoner at October 16, 2008 1:53 PM

"I don't think anyone actually wants it do they? Its more a matter of necessity for some."

This is an interesting question. As someone who is renting their garden apt out I am pondering this sincerely. Even if I had plenty of money I still might want to have my mortgage reduced by almost half by the rental income on the garden apt. As long as there is a deck off the parlor to access the yard I don't see why one wouldn't want the income, unless you really don't need the money and you want/need 4 floors of living space. For me 3 floors was enough and I sure as hell appreciate the way the garden apt offsets my mortgage.

Posted by: wasder at October 16, 2008 1:57 PM

Actually, I like the kitchen on the parlor floor becuase lets face it the parlor floor is the lovliest place to hang out and everyone ends up wanting to be near the kitchen. This way you are always able to hang in the kitchen while enjoying the parlor floor. I personally love it. Then again, I personally, can't buy this place, sadly! The garden level does seem a little useless unless you have many kids or just use it as guest rooms (again, not so useful). I'd turn it into some kind of hang out lounge (again pretending I could buy this place).

Posted by: Delilah at October 16, 2008 1:58 PM

well the layout issues discussed here cuts to the heart of the problem of living in a brownstone.

if you put the kitchen downstairs, then, the room you spend a great deal of your time in is in a darker, lower level space. if you put the kitchen on the parlor level, then you have the forced cramped layout as you see above.

there is no way in brownstone to have a big kitchen, big dining area and big living area on the same floor - especially if you keep the wall and doors to the parlor as these folks did. maybe if you had a really wide building and took out all the walls??

when i lived in a brownstone, had the kitchen and TV/family room on the garden level, the living room and dining room on the parlor - then office and bedrooms upstairs. frankly, i hated it - spent all of my time in the lower level garden floor (it was dark, and can't really open your shades all the way or you are on display) and rarely used the parlor floor. also, had to run up and down 2 stories to my bedroom and my office.

i dunno, the layout difficulty of brownstones is a huge problem for me - one that large apts or lofts don't have. i now have 1000 sq ft of useable space per floor without the confining walls. one floor is divided into a fairly large and open kitchen with ajoining dining room that has room for a wall of built-ins and a table that can seat up to 10, down the hall there's a full bath ad then an office/guest room and finally, a large living room that leads to a deck and a private landscaped garden. also, have windows on 3 sides, so great light-another plus over browntones. (bedrooms on the 2nd level of our duplex). this big open, flowing layout is simply not possible in a brownstone.

Posted by: wine lover at October 16, 2008 2:07 PM

"The kitchen renovation doesn't quite work for us aesthetically"

Mr. 'Stoner, was there ever a kitchen reno that you actually liked? I mean, it doesn't even have recessed lighting!

Posted by: GHB at October 16, 2008 2:11 PM

I would also prefer the kitchen on the parlor level. In fact thinking about it, even if I could afford a whole brownstone as a one family house I think I would still rent out the garden. I wouldn't want the kitchen down there, I don't like how low the ceilings are in the bedrooms so I wouldn't want to sleep down there. Better to get some income off it and live on the upper three floors in my book.

Posted by: wasder at October 16, 2008 2:11 PM

Wasder, I understand your position, but when you say "unless you really don't need the money" - that need is what I am refering to as necessity.

Posted by: dittoburg at October 16, 2008 2:12 PM

I hear you ditto. I do think even if I was spectacularly wealthy I might rent out the garden. Not being spectacularly wealthy though this is a pointless argument....But your point is ultimately correct, whoever can afford a house this expensive is not going to be putting 15% down and trying to make the mortgage through rental income. Anyone rich enough to buy this house at this price is going to buy it outright.

Posted by: wasder at October 16, 2008 2:18 PM

This place is beautiful.

On the layout issue, we live in a brownstone, in the upper triplex over garden rental. It's a wide place (22.5 feet wide) so our kitchen and dining room in the back parlor area is spacious and nice (more of a galley type kitchen with a large counter/peninsula separating it from the dining room. Plenty of seating for 12 at the dining table etc for big gatherings.

That said, if I had the luxury of a 1 family of the same sort of size as our place, and unlimited funds to renovate/restore, I'd make the kichen on the ground floor where the original one was, in the back, with the formal dining room in the from. I would open up the back wall at the garden level so the kitchen would have a wall of windows and glass doors to the garden. That way you could have a nice, large, bright eat in kitchen, and up front a beautiful formal dining room with fireplace.

I personally don't care about having my living space (e.g. where I watch movies on TV and generally lie around) on the same level as where I prepare and eat meals. I'd put that on the parlor floor, probably in the back parlor as a library/den, with the front parlor as formal living and music/piano room.

But, poor me, I only have three floors to live on so we can't do this (sarcasm intended).

Posted by: 1842 at October 16, 2008 2:35 PM

I don't love the bookcase work or the kitchen work or the recessed lighting in the bedroom. I'm with brownstoner here. Pretty house, but not in love.

Posted by: Ringo at October 16, 2008 2:42 PM

I think this place is beautiful, and I don't think I'd want the kitchen on a different floor to the dining room, too much carrying of trays up and down stairs. Of course when the brownstone design was developed, most middle class families had a live in housekeeper and a maid to do all the fetching and carrying. I can think of lots of reasons why I wouldn't want to rent out a garden level apartment - the risk of getting a horrible tenant, the loss of privacy, but most of all I don't like the sounds that are coming from Albany. With the possibility/probability of a Democratic majority in both House and Senate, as well as a Democratic Governor, there are quite a few in the Democratic Party salivating at the thought of extending rent stabilization by raising the luxury threshold and extending the coverage to all rental units. Quite frankly, if I had a garden unit at the moment, I would not be renewing the tenant's lease until that situation became crystal clear. I don't think that single units in a two family house have ever been regulated and probably won't ever be, but some rent stabilization advocates are quite extreme and would like to extend their reach everywhere. Just a thought.

Posted by: bohuma at October 16, 2008 2:49 PM

I think there's an awful lot of nitpicking going on here today regarding this house. We haven't seen very many with architectural detail as grand as this. The kitchen is a very nice job and I think the whole thing is pretty top notch. All of the opinions about what should be on each floor are valid but they are all individual preferences.

I think you should all chill out and probably could use a drink or two. I know i do and I know where to get one in about 3 1/2 hours.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at October 16, 2008 2:52 PM

Maybe there's a lesson to be learned here, and that is, if you're going to restore a house with an eye toward a someday-big resale, you had better get it back to as original condition as possible. This house probably qualifies as ``move-in condition,'' or as near to it as most of us would deem possible, and yet there are still all sorts of complaints. I for one like the original design with the kitchen/dining room on the first, garden, level, and the two parlors as two parlors. And I don't like the design of the bookcases here. I wonder if the owners renovated it entirely to their own taste (``this is the house I'll die in'') or did they renovate to re-sell? Does anyone know?
Too, the longer I try and turn back the tide on more than 100 years of wear and tear and 50 years of minor architectural vandalism, the more I think that a house in truly move-in condition, one where I didn't have to think about odd pieces of cast-iron, missing curved doorbells, and mismatched knobbery, let alone the history of linoleum and the history of electricity on display, the more I think a house in ``move-in condition'' would cost, uhmmm, $4 million.

Posted by: cgguy at October 16, 2008 2:53 PM

That's a rather far fetched concern with respect to garden rentals in a 2 family, and in any event, I would imagine any change in law would have a phase in provision and/or a grandfather clause that would not serve to adjust existing leases.

Posted by: 1842 at October 16, 2008 2:53 PM

Very nice. This place will be an interesting bellwether of the market. I'm hoping it'll get 2.4. If not, I'll seriously have to re-appraise my place, which I seriously do not want to do.

I have an open question about 1- versus multi-family dwellings. Are 1-family's generally more valuable per square foot, all things being equal? I always figured that a multi-family would bring in more buyers and thus demand a higher price. What's the conventional wisdom?

Posted by: FatLenny at October 16, 2008 2:59 PM

I'm not a fan of fretwork, but the details in this house are pretty breath-taking. Agree that the cabinetry in the kitchen seems off but everything else? Tres magnifique.

Posted by: tiptoe at October 16, 2008 3:00 PM

I have kitchen/dining on the garden level and living/family on the parlor level. We spend all our time on the parlor level. The hour around cooking and eating we're downstairs, but the kitchen is lovely, has doors to the garden and enough room for a big table and a small couch--being there is a pleasure. 98% of the time we're on the parlor, which is big enough for a front living room and a rear family room with TV and toys. I personally hate the kitchen on the parlor level.

Posted by: shillstoner at October 16, 2008 3:30 PM

I have kitchen/dining on the garden level and living/family on the parlor level. We spend all our time on the parlor level. The hour around cooking and eating we're downstairs, but the kitchen is lovely, has doors to the garden and enough room for a big table and a small couch--being there is a pleasure. 98% of the time we're on the parlor, which is big enough for a front living room and a rear family room with TV and toys. I personally hate the kitchen on the parlor level.

Posted by: shillstoner at October 16, 2008 3:30 PM

That kitchen does not work. They need to show without the dining room table. It already is a deal breaker for me, especially at 2.5M

Posted by: boroughbred at October 16, 2008 3:34 PM

Wow, that is a good looking house. Good luck to them. it is definitely worth $2M plus, but almost $2.5M is too much in this market.

Posted by: PHfamily at October 16, 2008 4:05 PM

I think most of the people who read Brownstoner, most (but not all, to judge from some of the comments), love brownstones, the idea and history and layout of brownstones. We want them in as near to original condition as possible, and mourn their long, slow-motion destruction. If you want different designs, kitchens in parlors and all the rest of it, my advice is: Look elsewhere. Don't bother with brownstones.

Posted by: cgguy at October 16, 2008 4:07 PM

CGGuy -- Where should someone look if they want to have a garden rental, or simply liuke having their kitchen and dining on a sunnier floor? I used to be more of an originalist until I lived in house with the kitchen/dining on the parlor floor -- it was great! Even without a garden rental, I would like the idea of kitchen dining in the back, parlor in the front, and a family/media room downstairs wiith the other main room being an office.

More importantly, how come no one has noted that this house has a fabulous back lot that extends 20 feet east of the main lot -- it's almost suburbanly decadent. IMO the price will not be easy to compare to others close by because of that irregular yard.

Posted by: Boerumresident at October 16, 2008 5:03 PM

Yes, the garden looks magnificent! It looks like they almost have a double lot.

I also like how the upper floors don't have those tiny little bedrooms or bathrooms at the end; large bathrooms in the middle are wonderful. Especially on the third floor, I think the family room -- with the wall taken down along the hallway -- is brilliant.

The style of this house is a bit too ornate for my taste, but that's meaningless. It's a great renovation and if any house can sell at or close to ask in this environment, it's this one.

Sorry I can't join y'all for drinks at Union Hall tonight, as I have another engagement. Have fun!

Posted by: Park Sloper at October 16, 2008 5:22 PM

This house was on the Prospect Heights house tour back in 2002. The owners at that time (not the current owners) had done some incredible Venetian plaster walls. I've visited the house subsequently and those are still there -- though you can't discern them in Corco's pics. My memory is also that the garden floor was a rental and has since been reconfigured. The only problem with the kitchen-dining room seems easy enough to fix: remove that high wall on the back of the island. It's ugly and it makes the space feel cramped. Also not sure it was such a great idea to do away with the small side rooms on the upper floors. I've never felt the need for big bedrooms -- especially not for kids -- and those small rooms make very useful studies and/or single guest bedrooms. But overall this house has a gracious and spacious feel to it with very high end finishes. The garden is huge and south facing. As boerumresident points out, that should excite somebody. Hey, the way the stock market is going we're all gonna need to grow our own veggies soon.

Posted by: NeoGrec at October 16, 2008 5:26 PM

I attended a West Village Preservation lecture last night, and the architect who did this house presented it. I can't really tell what is going on with that double arch in the photo because there isn't enough visual context. But I can tell you one half is original and one half is new. He said there is some new product that lets you put little cooling/heating units in every room and doesn't require soffits. That's what that thing is near the ceiling in the kitchen. Personally, I just like everything old, old, old, but whatever.

Posted by: mopar at October 16, 2008 5:44 PM


The problem with the kitchen isn't the table, it's the counter. The kitchen would be dandy without that silly counter cutting it in half. Use the table as the counter, like they did in the old days. Duh.

Posted by: mopar at October 16, 2008 5:47 PM

How did they get that extra chuck of backyard? Did they buy part of another lot? I've never seen a backyard in that "L" shape!

Posted by: Mr Joist at October 16, 2008 6:25 PM

Nice home, that sells for close to 3 million in Hoboken. So I guess it may be worth it. Just not to hip on Prospect Heights. Is it nice their?

Posted by: HOBOKENROCKS at October 16, 2008 6:33 PM

this is a great block and a great area.

who knows how much it will sell for tho.

Posted by: Santa at October 16, 2008 8:22 PM

They did a great job with the renovation, though my one gripe is that sometimes these wide houses can still feel narrow as this parlor floor seems to. The backyard is amazing. Not sure how the price relates to comps, or how easy it even is to find a good comp for this house, since it seems unusual. Though I do know this broker has overreached in price a number of times recently (she was the one who had the PPW house listing discussed on this blog that started at 3.2mil and dropped to 2.6 ...)

Posted by: Miss Muffett at October 16, 2008 11:08 PM

mopar, agreed the table isn't the problem, but right now it seems to be the only solution, since that counter isn't going to move easily.

Posted by: boroughbred at October 17, 2008 9:25 AM

It's a shame about the kitchen. It would have been very successful if they had kept the stove, fridge, sink, and cupboards along one wall, nixed the island thing, and used the table as work space in the center. I had a kitchen exactly like this in a room of this size and age, and it was a pleasure to be in. This room isn't wide enough for this configuration. The architect must have known this. You need at least 3 feet of space on either side of the table and between the counters or in any hallway.

Posted by: mopar at October 17, 2008 11:44 AM

Mr Joist, Odd-shaped and over-sized backyards aren't as rare as you'd think. While we don't often get to see them in the flesh, if you talk to neighbors or look at current block and lot maps, you'll spot them. There's one on Prospect Pl btw Carlton and Vanderbilt with an L that goes across 3 other lots. That's a big yard! Sometimes they are the result of old alleys being incorporated into individual lots in an irregular fashion.

Posted by: NeoGrec at October 17, 2008 1:04 PM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions