« DNBYOB (Do Not Bring Your Own Booze) House of the Day: 345 Hoyt Street »

March 16, 2009

Co-op of the Day: 315 Saint Johns Place

315-Saint-Johns-Place-0309.jpg
The listing for this co-op at 315 Saint Johns Place (just off Underhill) in Prospect Heights tries to position the property as the buyer getting a great deal because of the down market, but we're not really buying it. Sure it's nice to find a three-bedroom apartment near the park that's not seven figures, but this place can't be much more than 1,200 square feet according to our calculations, making the asking price of $799,000 hardly a steal. We might be more positively inclined if the apartment had some prewar charm but, while it's perfectly presentable, it's hardly dripping with detail. We suspect they've got another $100,000 to go on the price.
315 Saint Johns Place [Brown Harris Stevens] GMAP P*Shark




Posted by Brownstoner at 12:39 PM | Comments (29)
Categories: Co-ops, Prospect Heights

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8825

Comments

and the maintenance is steep as well.

Posted by: dutchman at March 16, 2009 12:42 PM

3 bedroom, 2 bath duplex with fireplace, private deck and washer and dryer in the apartment sounds pretty good. The place looks pristine.

Unsure about price, but looks like a nice home.

Posted by: 11217 at March 16, 2009 12:47 PM

Completely with you this time Mr. Brownstoner! Probably comes in closer to 1000 sq ft and that 1200+ maintenance is not going any where but up. But why claim it is a bargainer's paradise, when it isn't? Guess there isn't much more to say in it's favor. The bookcases, btw, look really cheap.

Posted by: househunt at March 16, 2009 12:49 PM

most expensive bookcase I've ever seen

Posted by: gemini10 at March 16, 2009 12:54 PM

Not a big fan of big co-op buildings, but I love the layout of this place. Regardless of what the actual square footage is, this place makes good use of the space--its a bona fide 3BR/2BA with a killer master setup.

Posted by: betterside at March 16, 2009 12:55 PM

Audrey Edwards needs to head back over there on a sunny day, though. Managed to make a killer view look downright icky.

Posted by: betterside at March 16, 2009 12:59 PM

I'm a modernist and don't really care if "details" abound. That said, I like the looks of this place - minus the clapboard bookcases. My only issue with the layout is that you have to go through the master to get to the outdoor space. Grilling with friends? Who wants a gaggle of folks carrying raw meat through their bedroom? Yuck.

Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at March 16, 2009 1:02 PM

I used to live up the street from this place... and I don't usually say positive things on here about overpriced real estate. BUT, this building had a guy who took great care keeping the place clean and nice. Washing the sidewalk regularly, picking up litter from the horrible cretins that call themselves teenagers.

(As a side note... is there ever hope for "Don't Litter" and "Respect your Neighborhood" to penetrate the self-involved, horribly disgusting psychology of the children in this city? Since their parents are just as bad if not worse... are we to forever live in a pile of wrapper and discarded food scraps?)

Posted by: tybur6 at March 16, 2009 1:02 PM

wall off dining room and use as den/guest room/office

use current living room as dining room

use upstairs master bed as living room

Posted by: wine lover at March 16, 2009 1:26 PM

Area (assuming plan drawn in correct proportions, which a couple of cross-checks seem to suggest it is) is 1,318 SF (measured, not "probably comes in" or "can't be much more").

Posted by: johnife at March 16, 2009 1:27 PM

I actually rented in one of these top-floor units a few years back. Not this one, but I think they layouts are pretty much the same. They are huge. Indeed, the apartment spoiled me for living elsewhere. That private roof-top deck is spacious, big enough for substantial parties -- and though I was a young, stupid, single guy, I didn't much mind people walking through my bedroom (hey, it forces you to clean up). And besides that there's a common courtyard. And when I lived there, I set up a weight bench in the basement alongside someone else's treadmill and stair-climber, so we had a defacto gym in the place.
I don't think the price is insane (compared to others I've seen). But that maintenance is insane.

Posted by: RaginCajun at March 16, 2009 1:38 PM

maybe priced a little high, but i'm sure they don't expect to sell for asking anyone. no one does now, right?

it seems like a good family sized apartment. how are they schools near here?

Posted by: funkymonkey at March 16, 2009 1:45 PM

The maintenance is too darn high for a part-time doorman. My bf's sister used to live in that building. It's not a bad building, but the price is a little, shall we say, ambitious.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 16, 2009 1:48 PM

Once again, the maintenance is less than $1 psf, which is not high. Haven't we been over this? You can't look at the number itself, you have to weigh the size of the apartment and Johnife just told us the place is over 1300 sf.

And it has a part time doorman and live in super, which is great.

I'm not arguing the price, but it's been said many times here than $1 psf for maintenance is not high.

Posted by: 11217 at March 16, 2009 1:48 PM

It's also been said many times here than $1 psf for maintenance is high.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 16, 2009 1:52 PM

It's high for me Snark, that's for sure...but for those out there who live in apartment buildings of this nature, I thought that the general consensus that $1 psf was about the norm.

Posted by: 11217 at March 16, 2009 1:54 PM

Well, maybe, all I can say is that my bf lives in a full-service building with 24 hour doormen and pays closer to .75 - .80/sf.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 16, 2009 1:58 PM

Sounds like a good deal.

Still haven't made it to the Ramen place yet...have you??

Posted by: 11217 at March 16, 2009 2:06 PM

$1 per square foot maintenance IS high - in absolute and affordability terms.

Posted by: the chicken at March 16, 2009 2:06 PM

Now that, chicken I agree with wholeheartedly.

Personally I'd never buy a place with a maintenance like that. I find it a waste for services I do not want or need.

Part of the reason I feel like I scored on my place is because the maintenance is just about the lowest I've ever seen on any apartment of it's kind/size (without a tax abatement situation).

Posted by: 11217 at March 16, 2009 2:10 PM

It's in the PS 9 school zone, which has been "up and coming" for many years and is not exactly a draw. Between that and the high maintenance, I think this place is going to see a price chop. That said, I love the fireplace and in-unit washer/dryer.

Posted by: Lesloaf at March 16, 2009 2:35 PM

I lived in a full service condo on the UES with 4 doormen, a super and about 6 handymen all on the payroll. The bnoiler, roof, tuckpointing and hallways were all done and there had been various special assessments over the years for them but the condo has a $400-500,000 reserve and the charges were $0.77 psf when I sold in 2007. Some of these places are just not well managed.

Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 16, 2009 2:50 PM

> "Still haven't made it to the Ramen place yet...have you??"

No, though we did decide to give Lobo another chance for brunch on Sunday. Still pretty tasty, but I think they've always done a better job with brunch than dinner.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 16, 2009 3:40 PM

Haven't ever been to Lobo, Snark. Will have to keep it on my radar.

Went to Olive Vine (the one on 7th and Lincoln) over the weekend, and it's still as delicious as ever. Love that place. Was glad to see it totally packed too.

Posted by: 11217 at March 16, 2009 3:46 PM

Have you tried Fatoosh on 5th (between 8th and 9th)?

It's not big on atmosphere, but the food is very tasty.

Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 16, 2009 3:53 PM

I JUST tried Fatoosh 2 weeks ago for the first time.

Indeed it was amazing. And the guys who work there are sexy.

Oh and I also tried Tacos Nuevo Mexico for the first time this weekend. The food was fantastic!

Posted by: 11217 at March 16, 2009 3:59 PM

For over $1 psf/month maintenance, I would expect full-time doorman, full-time super. This building must have a huge underlying mortage with a substantial part of the maintenance going to service it.

The problem is, too many co-ops do interest-only financing on their underlying mortages, and never pay them off. Thus, maintenance stays high forever. Typical short-term thinking.

Posted by: Dreadnought at March 16, 2009 8:53 PM

Dreadnought is right about interest-only financing. Our building was in that boat and we spent 50k 2 years ago to refi/pay down so we're actually making a dent in the principal.
I'd say the maint. is fair. Live-in super is better than ft doorman in my book.


I can tell you that 2 years ago when we were looking to buy we would have bid on this place. If you have kids that 2nd floor br would be a great sanctuary. This is one of the better co-ops I've seen listed. But I do think we're talking more like 699k in this market if PS 9 isn't really an option.

Posted by: Bolder at March 16, 2009 9:50 PM

Perhaps there should be a disclosure breakdown of maintenance payments into the true maintenance costs, servicing of interest costs on underlying mortgage and pay down of underlying mortgage?

I guess this is covered once you get down to the nitty gritty of the contract details but it's something that I would want to know before even considering making an offer.

Posted by: the chicken at March 17, 2009 6:23 AM

Post a comment

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

Latest Restaurant Additions