« Cheap Today, Cheaper Tomorrow? LPC Approves Underground Garage at Riverside Apartments »

November 18, 2008

House of the Day: 318 1st Street

The owners of 318 1st Street, who paid $1,775,000 for their three-story brownstone in 2005, set about trying to sell their house back in February by listing it with Brown Harris Stevens for $2,250,000; in March, the price bumped up to $2,300,000. We tapped it as an Open House Pick in June when it's unclear who was listing the house (FSBO?). Now it's back on the market with Corcoran, asking $2,099,000. Despite some not-so-hot bathrooms and unimpressive kitchen, the house has a very nice vibe, including some lovely plaster details. At 2,670 square feet, though, it is relatively small as far as these things go. Thoughts?
318 1st Street [Corcoran] GMAP P*Shark
Open House Picks: 6/20/08 [Brownstoner]

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/7231

Comments

It will lose ~$200,000 or so and sell I think.

BTW, why do you think 2,670 square feet is relatively small as far as these things go?

Yes, it's an 18-footer but three floors of 18x45 (not counting the cellar) on an 18x100 lot is pretty standard for most of these houses.

Posted by: Mr Joist at November 18, 2008 1:25 PM

Yeah, bathrooms are pretty awful. Why did they cover up all the fireplaces except the one in the DR? And why did they leave that as an exposed brick in contrast to the rest of the design. These are questions to ponder.

As far as 2,670 sq. ft. being "relativelty small" for a one family; where the hell does that statement come from???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 1:26 PM

Feeling like a broken record here, but why do brokers/sellers assume they should make money now during a recession on properties purchased near the height of the bubble? I'd say they would be lucky to recoup what they paid three years ago.

Posted by: househunt at November 18, 2008 1:28 PM

Ans "splits" are not considered Central Air.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 1:30 PM

Many buyers are not going to want to spend $1.9M-$2.0M and still have to update kitchens and fugly bathrooms. An IKEA kitchen in a $2M brownstone? Bad move.

Posted by: Fjorder at November 18, 2008 1:32 PM

This house started as a FSBO way before BHS had it. I remember first seeing it on Craig's List a while back. Right now, pretty much every firm has it, even BP--who still has it listed at $2.3 million.

Posted by: BKLYN_73 at November 18, 2008 1:32 PM

househunt:

$1,775,000 purchase price + closing fees = ~$1,850,000.

$2,099,000 less broker's and other fees = ~$1,900,000.

It looks like they put some $ into the place as well (kitchen, etc.). This looks like a break-even or worse sale to me. Maybe a "motivated" seller, job loss, etc.

Posted by: Mr Joist at November 18, 2008 1:34 PM

HA!!!!! if you keep zooming in you can see the alleyway those kids were hanging out in!!! that house is right across the street from me! it gets a little blurry tho. does anyone know how to de-blur when you zoom in a lot on the map?

-r

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 18, 2008 1:39 PM

This place has been on the market for ages - I think I first saw a Craigs List ad by the owner over a year and a half ago if not even longer. Since then, it's been listed with just about every Brooklyn broker. Meanwhile, Brooklyn Properties just listed a house on the very same block, almost identical size, for 1,750,000. Granted, that other house needs work, but so does this one given the poor taste choices. I also strongly suspect the electrical/plumbing could use an update. I think this owner would be very lucky to break even at best, and sadly, I think he's likely to lose money. I suspect that, given how long it's been on the market (really, every buyer looking for such a property must have already seen it! and now buyer pool is shrinking...) it will really suffer from having mis-priced in the first place.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at November 18, 2008 1:42 PM

I just hate those skinny living rooms on the parlor floor - wall btw hallway and living room MUST be knocked out.

Posted by: gkw at November 18, 2008 1:46 PM

I don't think this is a small home generally, but on the smaller end for a brownstone.

The problem I have with it, and a reason I think it's sitting, is that the lay out is unappealing. If this is used as a 2 family home, then there are only two bedrooms. $2m, even with rental income, is a hefty sum for two bedrooms. Or, if a family with two kids uses it as a single family, where do you put the third bedroom? The ‘study’ downstairs is small with no closets. The ‘chamber’ has no closets or windows. For both you’d have to walk through the kitchen to get to a bathroom. On the parlor level, there are no bathrooms and the dining room has no closets and is attached to a second kitchen. You wouldn’t want to put a kid in that room, and parents will want at least a closet and bathroom in exchange for their hefty mortgage payment. It’s a beautiful home, but for $2m there are much better options.

Posted by: fawn at November 18, 2008 1:50 PM

I live in a house of a similar size. The hallway is a little narrow on the parlor floor but, unless you need to move furniture up and down the stairs every day, you can live with the wall, which is structural anyway.

Posted by: 11233 at November 18, 2008 1:52 PM

OK. back to back posts ....

If you have an issue with the size of this house, or the number of bedrooms, the number of closets, bathrooms and everything else, you really shouldn't be looking to buy a brownstone.

These houses were built as one families with a limited number of bedrooms, no closets, only one bathroom (which was installed later since you used to poop in the outhouse out back), one kitchen, lots of woodburning fireplaces and hallways made for normal sized people. Not the typical overweight American of today, but normal weight people.

If you want a McMansion, contact the streaming turd and he can sell you a lovely 70's ranch in Lodi.

You divas need to bring it back to earth.

Posted by: 11233 at November 18, 2008 1:58 PM

11233....what are you and "the Mrs." doing over Thanksgiving??

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 2:02 PM

The place is not very nice.. Kitchen and baths nothing extra and only two bedrooms---- 1.7 will take it..

Posted by: chris e at November 18, 2008 2:05 PM

11233 - I disagree that people looking at brownstones can't hope to have a better layout. Believe me, I've seen *many* brownstones by now and there is a wide range of layouts, even in brownstones of more modest dimensions, and there are lots of creative solutions in terms of storage, floorplan, etc. In my view, layout is key and can make a 2000 ft house feel just as spacious/useful as a much bigger house (and frankly, I don't see why a 2,670 ft house should be considered "small" - that's a lot of space in NYC!!). Wanting to have an efficient separation of space does not make one a "diva" - on the contrary, it often means people are trying to make the most out of limited space. Some of the houses I've liked best have been pretty modest size houses with a really well laid out owner's duplex (3 BR, 2 BA) of less than 1800 sf (sometimes as little as 1400 sf) and a garden rental.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at November 18, 2008 2:06 PM

"You divas need to bring it back to earth."

Hear hear! You diva sellers asking for $2m for this archaic house need to dial it down a notch!

Posted by: SnarkSlope at November 18, 2008 2:07 PM

OK, to everyone saying that the house isn't small, get over it. It is. Yes, there are many 3 story brownstones and many are only 16-19', but the standard is 4 story and 20' wide. If one of the narrower shorter houses is fine for you, great. Enjoy your house, but don't claim this isn't small. And if the broker wants to sell 3/4 of a house, they need to change the ask to 3/4 the price.

Posted by: ownhs at November 18, 2008 2:10 PM

quote:
lots of woodburning fireplaces and hallways made for normal sized people. Not the typical overweight American of today, but normal weight people.

that's ridiculous. i have lived in park slope for 5 months now and i have YET to see a fat person. (except for the mcdonalds on 4th ave but duh..)

-r

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 18, 2008 2:10 PM

rob...i like the "panic room" reference in the Forum post. LOL

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 2:14 PM

'recently restored and renovated' the kitchen and baths where done in 80's style. While you're in the bathroom, feel nostalgic about the era that brought us the over use of bland marble on the walls.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at November 18, 2008 2:16 PM

gkw - i have the wall between the hall & parlor and seriously debated knocking it out. i think it all depends on the look you are going for. the wall is more traditional and knocking it out gives a much more modern look. in most cases part of the wall is load bearing and you have to cover the beam with some material - wood or leave steel and go for the look. it does open up the space. we did remove the large parlor door though - and that does help. in this home they should open the door at a minimum to make the parlor more open - maybe the tenant area is not seperate so they need to keep them closed? also, you need a bathroom on the parlor floor.

so far as space,i think it's plenty of room for a 1 family. 18x45 is standard. most brownstones are between 16-20 ft wide, over 20 is considered very wide and under 16 very small.

Posted by: bkny at November 18, 2008 2:23 PM

Rob: There are alot of overweight people in Brooklyn. If you spent less time worrying about trying to meet poeple in luxury aprtments or dealing with tweens in your alleyway and spent it amongst the commoners, you would know better. Brooklyn is not Chelsea.

Posted by: 11233 at November 18, 2008 2:26 PM

oooooh burn

-r

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 18, 2008 2:30 PM

In my opinion houses of this size, in this location, needing a fair amount of work, should sell for 1.2 million max.

The Dow and the S&P are down to where they were ten years ago.

Real estate prices obviously take longer to adjust, but within six months to a year, I'll be prove right.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 2:34 PM

HUH? WTF does "Brooklyn is not Chelsea" mean????????? and not only is the house washed up so are the brokers trying to pimp this house at this point. can you say desperate?

Posted by: just me at November 18, 2008 2:35 PM

DIBS: The Mrs. and I are going Indian with the inlaws. YOu around that weekend?

Miss Muffet: Of course people can have varying layouts and many do it tastefully. But it seems like a lot of people here don't actually want a brownstone. Unless your brownstone has been stripped of all of its details, why would you buy something that does (and pay for the details that exist since the price considered the details that are still there) only to tear it down/out. Buy a shell and make it yours. This is not a shell. There needs to be some work on this, obviously, but if you want a loft buy a loft. This is not a loft.

I am honestly waiting for someone to say they would love to live in a brownstone but want one that is all on one level.

To paraphrase, you can put as much lipstick on that pig as you want, it is still a pig.

Posted by: 11233 at November 18, 2008 2:38 PM

just me: Rob used to live in Chelsea before he moved to park slope. Why do I have the feeling you couldn't afford this house no matter what the price.

Posted by: 11233 at November 18, 2008 2:43 PM

well that would be cool like living in a giant tall church when you think about it! a mini ferris wheel in the back a waterslide in the front. woo woo! i think once someone buys a brownstoner they can do whatever they want with it. tho if i ever had one, i think it'd want it more old school myself.

-rob

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 18, 2008 2:45 PM

Yes, in town that weekend with "The Mrs." up from Philadelphia!!!

"I am honestly waiting for someone to say they would love to live in a brownstone but want one that is all on one level." QOTD

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 2:50 PM

Bkny-

Our house is 17' wide an that wall had already been removed when we'd purchased it. The main beam was removed as well so I'm assuming (fingers crossed really) that they did something structurally internally to compensate for it. They then curved the wall edges up into an arch shape at each end so as to compensate for the break in the molding. Below is a link to the photo from the RE listing from back when we bought the house (this is NOT my furniture!)that shows it.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/30673694@N06/

It also helped that we had all our electronic equiptment built in under the stairs and orientated the main sofa on the wall opposite it for additional gained width.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at November 18, 2008 2:51 PM

11233: thanks for clarifying but who's the "you" in your you couldn't afford it comment...?

Posted by: just me at November 18, 2008 2:52 PM

i'm really not understanding all of the 'work' folks are talking about. i see a very nice, move in ready brownstone. i am not saying it is priced appropriately but it is no question in 'move in' condition. ok, so it doesn't have a subzero fridge or a viking stove and the bathroom is not to your taste. however the appliances and bathroom fixtures are new. that sink and toilet are new - i know b/c i have them. not in the same context (marble walls) but they are new.

if the price was lowered, would that make this 'move in' to most?

Posted by: bkny at November 18, 2008 2:54 PM

THL...Most, but not all, of those walls are NOT load bearing.

BTW How are the cats all getting along???

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 2:55 PM

11333, no i lived in chelsea 2 years ago. before moving to park slope i lived in harlem.

-rob

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 18, 2008 2:56 PM

I think you're correct bkny. It's just the prospect of spending additional money to re-do the kitchen and baths. I've got a big problem with a 5' X 7' standard master bath in an expensive house. Hell, my brownstone was only $800k and I still tripled the size of the bath and spent $40K on it to include a whirlpool, two sinks, a shower stall and lots of white Carrera marble. Anything close to this price deserves a lot better.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 3:02 PM

dave, jodie foster called you butthead in the security forum thread!

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 18, 2008 3:02 PM

THL--your back yard looks nice. Have you done anything else to it since this picture was taken?

Posted by: wasder at November 18, 2008 3:02 PM

It is a small house if you rent out a third of it to another family.
Why bother buying a house if you end up in a tight 2-bedroom apartment?

Posted by: sam at November 18, 2008 3:03 PM

'I am honestly waiting for someone to say they would love to live in a brownstone but want one that is all on one level."

Well, technically, a one story brownstone can be done.
Brownstone is a material, a sandstone. But somehow in NYC it denotes a style of house.

My biggest peeve, is when people refer to all and any type of townhouse as a brownstone regardless of what the facade is made out of.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at November 18, 2008 3:14 PM

TownhouseLady-i don't know where you lived but your house reminds me of the homes in prospect/lefferts garden. i have few friends in that area and all of their homes are about 16-17 wide and none of them have the wall in the hall - they were built that way. however all of the brownstones that i have been in in bed-stuy all have the wall unless it was removed.

Posted by: bkny at November 18, 2008 3:14 PM

PitBull...i think she was referring to you and PHFamily. I told her that was wrong to say that. LOL

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 3:14 PM

A year from now three million dollar houses will be two million dollars and two million dollar houses will be one million dollars.

I'd say it's worth waiting a year for prices to go down.

Unless I'm wrong, of course.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 3:16 PM

It's in PS 321. I think they'll get slightly less than $700 SF depending on the actual condition of the place. 18' is a bummer.

Posted by: FatLenny at November 18, 2008 3:20 PM

Thanks Wasder. That was another photo from the RE listing so what you see was all the last owners doing. We moved in this past January so haven't really done anything to it yet (bigger fish to fry with the roof and re-pointing). We have two things tentatively scheduled for next spring/summer. We want to remove/replace the old fence since as you can see it's all but falling down on it's own and we want to regrade the area right by the house. You can see just the littlest bit of bluestone at the bottom of the photo. That will come up as will the pavers and we'll probably do a step-up or two to a patio (again with pavers) with a french drain at the base. The pavers that are there now are all displaced b/c of the tree roots and the bluestone preceding that slopes slightly towards the house. Never had a flood in the basement but it does pool against the house when it's a torrential downpour and you can feel the wet seeping in the brick wall of the basement (all praise to the mighty dehumidifier!).

DIBS- That's certainly comforting to know. I had wondered and the inspector couldn't verify it without going into the ceiling. The cats, well the old boy cat J-Kun loves the new kitten he's facinated by her and she cuddles right up against him. The resident queen bee Cookie is still not happy, hasn't attacked her but she runs past the little one hissing if she thinks we aren't looking. Oh well, so long as there's no blood I chaulk it up to a win.

Bkny- I'm actually in Jersey City (I know, I know- boo, hiss! Frankly, I couldn't afford this where I'd want it in Bklyn) surprisingly about half the houses on our block still have the wall. Visually, I think it does make a big difference when you are in a "narrower" house like I am. What the previous owner stupidly did though is they added two big sweeping bottom steps onto the staircase that jut out into the room. We are going to have the stairs redone at some point and have those "big steps" removed. I want it to look more traditional.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at November 18, 2008 3:25 PM

$700/sq ft?

Very few townhouses, even ones directly facing the river in Brooklyn Heights, have sold for $700/sq ft even in pristine, high-end renovated condition. $600/sq. ft at the top of the market, but never $700/sq ft.

FatLenny, where in the world did you get that number from?

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 3:25 PM

"My biggest peeve, is when people refer to all and any type of townhouse as a brownstone regardless of what the facade is made out of."

I am with you here BRG. So many people call my brick federal style townhouse a brownstone that it drives me crazy.

Posted by: wasder at November 18, 2008 3:26 PM

IronBalls shows his stupidity yet again.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 3:31 PM

MissMuffet--did you happen to go to the open house for 141 Lincoln Place?

Posted by: nyc87 at November 18, 2008 3:32 PM

Ok Dave,

Show me how smart you are. I bet you can't find a townhouse within three blocks of 318 1st Street that sold for $700/sq ft or higher, even at the top of the market.

I'm not saying none have. I know a few tiny houses pristine houses have gone for more, but not many and that was at the height of the market.

And while you're at it, what's your return this year? You never answered my question.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 3:42 PM

jersey city rocks THL! my hometown! woo woo!

-rob

Posted by: PitbullNYC at November 18, 2008 3:45 PM

"Very few townhouses, even ones directly facing the river in Brooklyn Heights, have sold for $700/sq ft even in pristine, high-end renovated condition. $600/sq. ft at the top of the market, but never $700/sq ft.

FatLenny, where in the world did you get that number from?

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 3:25 PM"

You're such a douche that you can't even remember what you said.....homes in Brooklyn Heights go for way more than that...3 blocks from this, NO. Try and hold onto one thought at a time for however long it takes to process the information.

On your other question....-10% YTD through October....better than the average, better than most, better than you could do!!!!

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 3:49 PM

Dave, I clearly wrote "very few" even in Brooklyn Heights.

For somebody who supposedly is a professional investor, you can't read very well.

How's your year to date return again?

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 3:57 PM

THL--I put up some recommendations on the forum last week about the work I did on my house. It included a recommendation for the guy who did my repointing and roof if you are in need of a good recommendation. I need help figuring out how to make my backyard a both nice place for my kids to play and a place where I can plant a couple of nice plants and flowers. Thoughts?

Posted by: wasder at November 18, 2008 3:58 PM

If this house isn't move in ready than I shudder to think how my house would have been described when I bought 6 years ago. House doens't need to have the standard viking range etc. to be move in quality.

Posted by: Boerum Hill at November 18, 2008 4:00 PM

Many in BH, especially facing the river, go for more than that. Not very few.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 4:00 PM

Funny, Dave calls me an idiot and then can't back himself up at all.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 4:02 PM

whatever . . . you still can't back up your name calling with facts.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 4:05 PM

are you talking to yourself IB???
The majority of homes in BH sell for more than those numbers.

And I gave you the performance numbers. Learn to read.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 4:11 PM

That bedroom has Marie Antoinette delusions!

Posted by: Brenda from Flatbush at November 18, 2008 4:18 PM

It must have been nice to live at Versailles during those times with all that furniture and all those rooms; up until the point that their heads got lopped off.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at November 18, 2008 4:29 PM

The majority of townhouses in BH do not sell for $700/sq ft. and higher.

The only houses that sell for that much are pristine doll houses.

You still haven't found a single house within three blocks of this one that sold for $700/sq ft ever. I'll tell you what. Add on a couple extra blocks for fun.

Expecting this house, which clearly needs tons of updating, to sell for anything close is wild dreaming.

Times have changed yet Mr. 10% (yeah right) still thinks the real estate market is soaring upwards.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 4:36 PM

This one is for you, my friend :)

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/587-4th-St-Brooklyn-NY-11215/30587547_zpid

Posted by: bayridgegirl at November 18, 2008 4:52 PM

Thanks Wasder. We had both done this past spring. Next on list are the "little money" items since we're trying to hold on to our cash just in case, like regrading the back which will be a DIY job and some wood stripping and continuing to search for two sets (interior and exterior) of double entryway doors to replace the they pulled out in the 70's just so they could have the "convenience" of a screen door (grrrr!!).

As far as the backyard goes my neighbors have a jungle gym out back and below it is the rubberized stuff they use in playgrounds. I'm not sure how old your kids are. They have their plantings around the perimeter of the garden and potted stuff on the patio. I looked back at the picture of the back of your house and thought maybe you could do some sort of raised bed around the patio and then grass and plantings beyond that? I'd try to keep it simple so you don't have to go crazy with upkeep as I'm sure you have a bunch of projects you'll want to do inside.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at November 18, 2008 4:52 PM

And if all info is correct, that makes it $950 sq. ft.

If info is not correct, IB, please contact Zillow.com and rant.

Posted by: bayridgegirl at November 18, 2008 4:54 PM

"Tons of updating"

Tons, really? Tons?? I wish you'd post pics of your house b/c I think this one isn't half bad. Sure there are a few things that aren't quite my taste but tons? Hardly.

Posted by: TownhouseLady at November 18, 2008 4:55 PM

BRG,

Yup, that's gotta be a record in the Slope, especially since it's only 17 feet wide.

Maybe the buyer got a black market Picasso under the table along with the house.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 5:25 PM

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/536-1st-St-Brooklyn-NY-11215/30587311_zpid

536 1st Street, Brooklyn, NY

How this home stacks up
This home $ per sq ft: $898
Comps avg $ per sq ft: $785

Posted by: SnarkSlope at November 18, 2008 5:33 PM

THL--thanks. Yeah, simple is better for me as I like gardening but will not have tons of time. Kids are 2 1/2 and not quite yet in existence (due x-mas eve). A jungle gym/swing thing would definitely be a welcome addition but I still want a few stylish things too. Will have to wait until spring though. Good luck with your stuff. I too am now concentrating on the small stuff as we really spent all we can spend getting the major stuff done. Anyway, thanks for the thoughts.

Posted by: wasder at November 18, 2008 5:39 PM

"You still haven't found a single house within three blocks of this one that sold for $700/sq ft ever."

Here's one less than a block away:

- http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/285-1st-St-Brooklyn-NY-11215/30583387_zpid

285 1st St, Brooklyn
Sold 04/25/2008: $1,725,000
2,400 sqft
This home $ per sq ft: $749

Posted by: SnarkSlope at November 18, 2008 5:42 PM

I don't deny there are some, but very very few.

The 536 1st Street house didn't sell for over $700/sq ft.

Look at the detailed sales history section on Property Shark and you'll see the sale included a garage or some other attached property which would bring the price per square foot well below $700.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 5:54 PM

You are full of excuses today, IB.

Posted by: 11233 at November 18, 2008 6:00 PM

And 285 1st Street shows up on Property Shark as a coop, so I'm not sure if it's legit either.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 6:08 PM

"You are full of excuses today, IB."

Among other things. If you look around Zillow, it is hard to find a townhouse in Park Slope that sold in the last couple of years for less than $700/sf.

I'm not saying these prices are reasonable.

I'm not saying they will hold.

I'm just saying that these are the facts (IB's Kryptonite).

Here are two more quick ones that were past Open House picks:

303 13th St
Sold 05/23/2008: $1,765,000
This home $ per sq ft: $740

146 Sterling Pl
Sold 08/11/2008: $2,730,000
This home $ per sq ft: $861

Posted by: SnarkSlope at November 18, 2008 6:14 PM

FYI: Property Shark almost NEVER takes into account the garden level of a house when calculating square footage. Just look at how many stories it lists a house at, and you'll see the garden level is almost never included.

Posted by: nyc87 at November 18, 2008 7:08 PM

Both examples of dollhouse renovations I mentioned.

Let's see a Park Slope townhouse that sold for over $700/sq foot that HAS NOT yet been restored/renovated.

Posted by: IronBalls at November 18, 2008 7:12 PM

This is a cute, smallish, middle-class house. It should cost around a million dollars. But in Brooklyn, the realtors think it should cost much more because the owners will of course no want to occupy the whole thing but rather rent out the garden level. That income can boost what they can handle in monthly carrying charges, and since no one in Brooklyn really cares about quality of life, or elegance, or privacy, or convenience, it will make sense to those who think that they need to mortgage their lives to live like peasants in a sub-divided small house, because that is what our realtor told us we could afford.

Posted by: sam at November 18, 2008 8:21 PM

Interesting comparison to yesterdays HOTD on Washington

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2008/11/hotd_306_washin.php#comments

I think both are overpriced, but this make's the Washington Ave house look like a steal.

Posted by: cortnyc at November 18, 2008 8:24 PM

After this recession we will be lucky if anyone wants to buy anything in NYC. The bad neighborhoods are doomed. The good neighborhoods will need to suck it in and accept the fact that people are not making so much dough any more, they cannot pay crazy prices. I worry about NYC. I really do. It is like this is our apocalypse. The hype and the speculation is falling like a bad souffle. I don't see a lot of pouf any more in our financial sector. This is an old-fashioned crash folks. Some day you will tell your grandchildren you lived through it. If you do.

Posted by: Inigo at November 18, 2008 9:58 PM

According to the city's records, over the last 12 months, the average PSF price for all 1- and 2-family houses in Brooklyn Heights was $1,037. The lowest was $811.

Nice try, though.

Posted by: NorthHeights at November 18, 2008 11:06 PM

NorthHeights - can you please supply the source of your statistic? Many of us look to Property shark for stats - if you got this information there, can you provide a link? Also, keep in mind that in a classic bubble, the peak is just that - an irrational exuberance that pushes prices way beyond their rational value, so even if prices indeed were as high as you say over last 12 months, that could very simply be an indication of the degree of irrationality. So, in addition to providing the link to show your average PSF price of 1037, it would be even more helpful to show how that PSF grew over the last 5-10 years, since it's the speed and unprecedented steepness of the rise that, in the near future, will be demonstrated to have been so clearly irrational and unsustainable.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at November 19, 2008 9:45 AM

Go to the Department of Finance's "Rolling Sales Update" page (TinyURL included because the link is long):

http://tinyurl.com/2jacwn

They have data going back to 2003, combining sales data reported every time a deed is recorded together with the building info they keep on file for property tax purposes. If you download the excel files, you can easily calculate the PSF price.

I made no claim as to whether those prices are rationale or sustainable - I was simply refuting the claim that "very few" houses in Brooklyn Heights sell over a certain price PSF. The original poster didn't give any time period so I assume he meant now. The last 12 months is the best proxy for "now" that we have.

You could quibble with various parts of this methodology and it helps to follow the market closely to know what adjustments to make (DOF's square footage is not always accurate and is inconsistent as to whether garden floor space is included; sometimes townhouses classified by the city as walk-up rentals should be included because it's clear from subsequent renovation plans filed with DoB that the buyer intends to convert back to 1-/2-family). That said, I think my basic point is sound.

I always find it interesting to compare the historical data to what figures people here toss around as the "going rate" or "market" rates.

Posted by: NorthHeights at November 19, 2008 10:03 AM

Thanks NorthHeights. Just so I'm clear - I did download the Excel file but it looks like the PSF is not a column the city provides. Did you manually create the formula yourself for Brooklyn Heights townhouses and averaged them yourself? I don't have the time to do this now, but it's an interesting tool for the future.

Posted by: Miss Muffett at November 19, 2008 10:17 AM

Yes I did create a new column with the formula, but it was simply sales price divided by square footage, and then averaged. As I said, you have to take the final number ($1,037) with a healthy grain of salt, given the issues with the square footage data and the need to make some reasonable choices on which sales to include/exclude, but it's a start. Brooklyn Heights in particular is interesting to examine through this data, because there are usually only 15-20 townhouse sales per year so it's pretty easy to spot when adjustments to DoF's data need to be made to get closer to an apples-to-apples comparison. On the other hand, the sample size is probably smaller than optimal for stats purposes.

Posted by: NorthHeights at November 19, 2008 11:50 AM

I just saw 318 1st Street on Craigslist, and out of curiousity, I called the owner. I subsequently saw the house in person.

This house needs no work whatsoever unless wants to put in useless, trendy details. The house is charming, has
central air, the exterior is in very good shape, the price has just been reduced quite a bit. I'd be surprised if it doesn't sell quickly now.

Note: Some of you are really out of touch with what this house offers and the person who mentioned that Property Shark doesn't factor in the garden floor is probably correct. Moreover, the house also has a finished basement with bathroom.

At the current price, I think it should go quickly.

Posted by: labelladonna at January 15, 2009 2:40 PM

« Cheap Today, Cheaper Tomorrow? LPC Approves Underground Garage at Riverside Apartments »

November 18, 2008

House of the Day: 318 1st Street

Trackback Pings

Comments

Post a comment

Latest Restaurant Additions